Ball, William Edmund, LL.D., 541 Barr, Frederick Horatio, 351 Becke, C. C., 351 Bremner, Carlton Howard, 427 Broughton, Robert John Porcher, 185 Cautherley, Charles, 232 Cokayne, George Edward, 351 Cooke, Charles Wallwyn Redcliffe, 116 Crispe, Thomas Edward, K.C., 283 Dicey, Edward, C.B., 257 Good, Henry, 333 Gowling, John, 409 Grey, Arthur, J.P., D.L., 283 Howlett, James Warnes, 393 Ludlow, John Malcolm Forbes, C.B., 566 McIlroy, Robert, K.C., 427 Mackay, Æneas, J. G., K.C., LL.D., 157 Martini, Maître Charles, 208 Mellor, J. W., K.C., 566 Moore-Bayley, John, 427 Mothersole, Hartley. B.N.. 409 New, Leonard, 566 Organ, Thomas Arthur, 232 Paterson, Duncan Wilkie, S.S.C., 333 Pelletiere, Sir Charles Alphonse Pantaleon, 25 Pickersgill, E. H., 566 Plunkett, Hyacinth, K.C., 116 Powles, Louis Diston, 47 Russell, Charles Barrett, 541 Samuell, Charles Simpson, 185 Simey, Ralph, 208 Skene, William Baillie, 157 Sparks, James, 374 Stockton, Oliver James, 351 Swan, Harold Cook, 157 Walker, Right Hon. Sir Samuel, 374 Warren, Reginald Augustus, 495 Willis, His Honour Judge, 393 Action for statements imputing drunkenness Amendment of money Bills by the Lords, 221 Cabinet, the, and the House of Lords, 196 Citing the opinion of law officers, 17 Death of a member of the House of Commons Demonstrations by members of the House of ་་ Employment of members of the Judicial Bench English and Irish criminal law systems, 246 Former creation of peers to secure a majority, Freedom of speech in Parliament, 322 PARLIAMENTARY SUMMARY. Impartiality of the Speaker, 345 Interference by members of the Bar in any Issue of writs for election of members where Judge Willis, the late, in the House of Judicial appointments by Lords Chancellors, 36 Loreborn, Lord, advancement of, to an Magistrates, appointment of, by the Lord Right of peers to sit and vote, 221 Chancellor, 196 Management of business in the House of Number of Chambers and members and dura. Members of the House of Commons, proposal 85 Rights to particular seats in both Houses of Second readings of Bills, 274 Stewardship of the Chiltern Hundreds, &c., 246 Union of judicial and legislative functions, 84 Supremacy of the House of Commons, 53 Vows by members of the House of Lords never Writ of summons to the House of Lords, 323 Chamier, Edward Maynard des Champs, 24 Cluer, Albert Rowland, 282 Cohen, Arthur Seville, 305 Colclough, T. A., 135 Coles, J. P. Campion, 249 Collins, Hon. Stephen Ogle Henn, 224 Cox, Hugh Bertram, C.B., 43 Cracroft, Robert Weston, 282 Crowte, Frederick, 555 David, Cyrus P., 90, 305 Donnison and Son, 249 Dorion, Charles E., K.C., 115 Duffield. Arthur Stewart, M.A., 135 Ebden, Leonard Powney, 282 Edge, Right Hon. Sir John, K.C.. 224 Elgood, Edgar J., 584 Eves, Arthur Edward, 224 Fisher, A. A., 90 Judd, Joseph C., K.C., 282 Langelier, Sir Francis Xavier, 24 Lawrie, Allan James, 536 Lemieux, Hon. F. Xavier, 115 Llewellyn-Jones, F., B.A., LL.B., 350 Lodder, George Frederick, 555 Lorimer, J. Campbell, K.C., 469 Mackenzie, W. Lyon, 469 Martin, George Maynard, 249 Martin, John Stuart, 332 Matthews, Herbert Ambrose, 183 Neish, Edward B., 469 O'Connor, Charles Andrew, K.('., 469 O'Halloran, J. W., 249 Ottley, John Bickersteth, 224 Parker, James Kenyon, 305 Pickersgill, Edward Hare, M.P.. 282 Pollard, Emmanuel Elliott Scipio, 305 Pollock, Ernest Murray, K.C., M.P., 584 Purcell, Gilbert Kenelm Treffry, 363 Rhodes, C. T., 332 Richards, Mr Justice Henry George, 24 Roberts, His Honour Judge Bryn, 249 Sandford, Herbert E., 135 Savill, E. W. J., 115 Shepherd, T. D., 43 Sidney, Thomas Stafford, 332 Granger, His Honour Judge Thomas Colpitts, Smyly, Sir Philip Crampton, 350 Steel, Graham Strang, 509 Stephens, John, 24 Stockton, Arthur, 408 Tebbs, Henry Nelson, 62 Thomson, Bernard, 509 Tobin, Alfred Aspinall, K.C., M.P., SO Tudor, Daniel Thomas, K.C., 363 Williams, Seymour, 249 Worsfold, Dr. T. Cato, M.A., 24 Wortley, Stamp William, LL.B., 43 THE JOURNAL OF THE LAW AND THE LAWYERS: FROM MAY то OCTOBER] VOLUME CXXXI. Sir FRANCIS GORE, Solicitor to the Inland Revenue, ON INCOME TAX. To Readers and Correspondents. All communications must be authenticated by the name and address of the writer, not necessarily for publication, but as a guarantee of good faith. Anonymous communications are invariably rejected. All come unications intended for the Editorial Department should, in order to prevent delay, be addressed to the "EDITOR OF THE LAW TIMES." Any contributions that may be sent on approval will be carefully considered by the Editor: but no responsibility whatever can be accepted in respect thereof, although, if unsuitable, every effort will be made to return them, provided that a stamped addressed wrapper is inclosed for that purpose. Vol. CXXXI.-No. 3553, Third Sheet. 1911. SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE. COURT OF APPEAL. 331 BALL. WILLIAM HUNT AND SONS LIMITED.- Employer and workman -Injury by accident-Compensation Disfigurement as distinct from "incapacity for work" HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. CHANCERY DIVISION. Re ROBINS N: MCLAREN PUBLIC TRUSTEE-Limitation of actionsPayment by trustee to wrong person -Mistake of fact.. ANDREWS v. ABERTILLERY URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL-Local government - Electric lighting-Statutory undertakers- Urban district council 335 Re ODDY.-Trust-Public Trustee Right of appeal from-Need not be served with notice of appelPublic Trustee Act 1906, s. 10. 13... 338 GARWOOD v. GARWOOD.-Partnership -Covenant-Charge on partner's sbare- Gains and profits"-Construction-Dissolution by death...... 341 KING'S BENCH DIVISION TURNER . MIDLAND RAILWAY COMPANY.-Limitation of action-Compensation under Lands Clauses Act-Property injuriously affected 347 RAILWAY AND CANAL COMMISSION COURT. LONDON AND NORTH-WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY . SOUTH-EASTERN RAILWAY COMPANY LONDON, CHATHAM, AND DOVER RAILWAY COMPANY, AND SOUTH-EASTERN AND CHATHAM RAILWAY COMPANIES' MANAGING COMMITTEE,-Railways -Rates-Undue preference... 349 LEADING ARTICLES, &c. 3 4 4 5 TO READERS AND CORRESPONDENTS ... 13 The Law and the Lawyers. ON Monday last Mr. ASQUITH dealt collectively, in his statement to the House of Commons, with the various questions that had been addressed to him with reference to the appoint. ment of justices, and he made it abundantly clear that he does not intend in any way to interfere with Lord LOREBURN in his discharge of this important and difficult duty. Before the present Lord Chancellor succeeded to that office there is no doubt that considerable dissatisfaction existed, and not without cause, with regard to with regard to the appointment of justices of the peace. Particular political considerations weighed far too heavily, and the present Lord Chancellor set to work to discover some method whereby these appointments might be made irrespective of political or religious opinions and the best men locally might be secured. For this purpose the Royal Commission, which issued its report. in July last, was appointed, and their recommendation tha local advisory committees should be formed in order to assist the Lord Chancellor in his selection has been adopted, and during the last nine months twenty-two of these committees have been appointed in England, five in Wales, and nine in Scotland, and Mr. ASQUITH states that by August next it is expected that committees will be established in all the Counties. As these committees will be free to communicate with the Lord Chancellor direct if their recommendations are not accepted by the Lords-Lieutenant, and as every effort is to be made to see that they are of a representative character, their names being available for local publication, it is difficult to see what scheme could have been better devised for obtaining recruits for the local Benches. Lord LOREBURN is to be congratulated upon having sternly resisted all political pressure to equalise the politics of the magisterial Bench, and we, in common with the rest of the Profession, are fully satisfied that in making these inferior judicial appointments, as in the case of his appointments to the High Court and County Court Benches, he has striven to obtain the best men possible for the posts. This ideal has not always been adhered to in the past, but it is merely stating an obvious fact that, if the high standard of our judiciary, whether in the High Court, County Court, or petty sessions, is to be maintained, the appointments must be made entirely free from any political or denominational considerations, and that the sole qualification for judicial office must be the fitness of the candidate himself. If high character and competency are considered as the only reasons for preferment, the composition of our judiciary will be beyond criticism, STUDENTS of Lord CROMER's work on Egypt will remember his comments on some of the very peculiar difficulties which arise out of the system of the mixed tribunals, and it will be found that some of the problems relating to the status of English companies in Egypt-a subject much discussed at the present time-are closely intertwined with these same difficulties. Conflicts of jurisdiction such as have arisen before in relation to criminal cases have been to a large extent met by legislation, and the instances of friction between mixed tribunals and consulates, native courts, Mehkemehs, and Patriarchates brought to light have not been without effect. It is now suggested that legislation should settle conflicts of jurisdiction in civil and commercial cases also, and that some commission should decide which court is to be deemed competent to determine a disputed matter. It is admitted, however, that the auguries for any such legislation at the present time are far from favourable. difficulties arising out of company law are unusually great, and to some extent are caused by the different views entertained by British and continental jurists as to the status of a company. We look mainly to incorporation as determining nationality, but for this purpose a strong body of foreign legal opinion inclines to weighing a number of circumstances, and in Egypt we find a tertium quid in arts. 46 and 47 of the Code of Commerce. Under this, joint stock companies formed in Egypt are Egyptian and, if there formed, they must be formed in consonance with Egyptian law, and a mere formality of foreign incorporation will not affect their Egyptian nationality. The question what is a "foreign company" is therefore a thorny one, and upon it conflict arises between the mixed tribunals and the British Consular Court. The THE two sides argue briefly on these lines: The British Consular Court holds that companies are like persons and have a personal status, to be affected only by their own courts, and, where British companies are concerned, English incorporation confers English nationality, and, further, that 66 by the capitulations a company validly formed in a country enjoying the benefits of Turkish capitulations cannot be declared null and void in Egypt. The mixed tribunals take the view that British incorporation is not conclusive in Egypt when British companies' interests collide with those of foreigners or Egyptians, and that in such cases the mixed law is applicable. It is easy to see the importance and the difficulty of the whole matter. The answer to the question what is a foreign company must turn on a consideration of principles, and at once a difference of opinion arises as to the basic criterion. Some would look to the place where the articles were drawn up; others to the nationality of the founders, the place where the shares were issued, or the seat of its working, or its sphere of activity, and further circumstances weigh with other schools of thought. With the development of joint stock enterprise in Egypt these doubts and difficulties will become more and more exigent, and some solution, even if only by way of a modus vivendi, is earnestly to be desired at an early date. THAT a sentence of two months' imprisonment should be passed for nonpayment of rates will doubtless come as a shock to the community at large, but committal to prison for this period was imposed by the Nailsworth Petty Sessions on the Rev. S. J. FORD for refusing to pay an education rate of 18. 9d., although he offered to pay £1 14s. 3d., being the amount of the poor rate included in the same demand. We are quite aware that this committal would be in respect of the whole rate demanded, but, at the same time, although no doubt the defendant had on previous occasions refused to pay the education rate, we say without fear of contradiction that the sentence passed was clearly excessive. Imprisonment for nonpayment of rates is in the nature of civil process, and, as the HOME SECRETARY pointed out, he was advised that he had no power to annul the sentence-which he described as "stupid and vindictive "-as the perogative of the Crown does not cover cases of civil debt. We understand that Mr. FORD has been released owing to the money having been paid, but this case affords a good concrete example as to the law relating to imprisonment for debt. It will strike the layman as curious that justices should have power to pass a sentence of this description, whereas the term of imprisonment which can be inflicted by judges exercising jurisdiction under sect. 5 of the Debtors Act 1869 is limited to forty-two days. MASTERS AND SERVANTS. SOME of the most elementary questions of law which occur almost every day, and on which a lawyer may at any unguarded moment be asked his opinion, are the most difficult to answer. Among these we must place questions between masters and servants. Custom or actual judicial decisions have, however, determined some of them. For instance, "by a long and well-established custom, it is settled that, in the absence of any agreement to the contrary, the hiring of domestic and menial servants is for a year and subject to determination on a month's-i e, a calendar month's -notice by either master or servant, or on payment of a month's wages by the employer": (MacDonell's Law of Master and Servant, 2nd edit., p. 138). It has been urged that a further custom should now be recognised—namely, that the contract of service can be determined on either side at the end of the first calendar month by notice given at or before the expiration of the first fortnight. The first month, according to this point of view, is a trial month in which the parties can find out if they suit each other. In Mouli v. Halliday (77 L. T. Rep. 794; (1898) 1 Q. B. 125) the question as to the existence of this custom came before a Divisional Court, on appeal from a County Court judge who had held that no such custom as alleged existed and that the custom was unreasonable. Mr. Justice Hawkins thought that the alleged custom was reasonable, but as the County Court judge had held that there was no such custom, and he was the sole judge on questions of fact, the court could not interfere with his decision. |