« PreviousContinue »
and said that but for the proviso that case would, in his opinion, have WRIGHT, J., in allowing the appeal, said it was not until the 14th of governed the present case. In his judgment, however, as in his opinion, January, 1898, that the action had got into the county court, because it the narrower construction of the proviso was the true one, the trustees' was not until then that the writ had been issued and the order of the argument must prevail, and the Charity Commissioners were not entitled High Court remitting the action had been lodged in the county court. to require their sanction to be obtained to the presentation of the petition. From that date the action and all proceedings therein was to be treated as - COUNSEL, Vaughan Hawkins ; Ingle Joyce ; Grosvenor Woods, Q.O., and H. a county court action, but the sections relied on by the respond ent had Johnston; H. Greenwoad. SOLICITORS, Clabon ; The Solicitor to the Treasury; no retrospective application. Before the action got to the county court Andrew, Wood, f Purves, for J. W. Johnston, Stockport.
at all the appellant had been con stituted by an order of the High Court a [Reported by W. Scott THOMPSON, Barrister-at-Law.]
co-plaintiff, and long after then the action continued to be a High Court
action. If a similar application had been made by the defendant while HARROP v. OSSETT, MAYOR AND CORPORATION OF. Romer, J. the case remained in the High Court-i.e., before the 14th of January, the 22nd March.
application for security would have been refused, and Sharp's position as PRACTICE-Costs—ACTION AGAINST CORPORATION-PUBLIC AUTHORITIES elected to continue the action, although it was transferred to the county
a plaintiff, added by order of the High Court, was not altered because he PROTECTION Act, 1893 (56 & 57 Vict. c. 61), s. 1 (B).
court. This was an action to restrain the defendant corporation from using & DARLING, J., concurred. Appeal allowed with costs, but leave to appeal building at Storrs Hill, Ossett, as a hospital for small-pox patients and granted.-Counsel, Boydell Houghton ; Stamford Hutton. SOLICITORS, from receiving or treating in or at such building any person suffering Belfrage f. Co., for Reece & Harris, Birmingham; Morse & Simpson, for W. from small-pox. The action, which was brought by the owners of other H. Whitelock, Birmingham. land and houses at Storrs Hill, and was based on private nuisance to the
[Reported by Erskine REID, Barrister-at-Law.] plaintiffs, was dismissed with costs. By the Public Authorities Protection Act, 1893, section 1, where after the Act“ any action is commenced THOMAS v. ROBERTS, SMITH (Claimant). Div. Court. 22nd March.
against any person for any act done in pursuance or execution or BILL OF SALE-REGISTRATION_"TRUE Copy"-OMISSION OF DATE-intended execution of any public duty or authority, the follow
VALIDITY-BILLS OF SALE ACT, 1872, AMENDMENT Act, 1882 (45 & 46 ing provision shall have effect : (b) Wherever in any such action a judg
VIct. C. 43), s. 9. ment is obtained by the defendant, it shall carry costs to be taxed as between solicitor and client."
This was an appeal from a decision of Mr. FitzRoy Cowper, sitting as ROMBR, J., held that the above enactment applied, and that he had no deputy-judge at Marylebone County Court. The question, which arose discretion under the enactment, and must give the defendant corporation upon an interpleader issue, was whether a bill of sale was void if tho their costs as between solicitor and client. -- COUNSEL, Macmorran, Q.C., and registration copy omitted to state the date of the bill of sale. The 0. L. Clare; Cozens-Hardy, Q.C., and J. G. Wood. SOLICITORS, Chester, learned deputy-judge held that the bill of sale was invalid, and the Mayhew, Broome, & Griffiths, for Jansens & Co., Wakefield; Baker, Lees, & claimant under the bill of sale appealed. In support of the appeal Postlethwaite, for W. Brooke, Ossett.
counsel contended on the authority of Re Hewer, Ex parte Kahen (21 Reported by RALEGA B. PAILLPOTTA, Barrister-at-Law.)
Ch. D. 871), that a “true copy" was not necessarily an exact copy, and that the omission of the date from the registered copy did not per se invalidate the bill of sale, if good in other respects. It was an omission which would not mislead a person who searched the register for infor
mation. It was distinguishable from a clerical mistake. [WRIGHT, J., High Court-Queen's Bench Division. referred to Truck v. Southern Counties Deposit Bank (42 Ch. D. 471).] The HEMMING AND OTHERS v. DAVIES. Div. Court. 220d March.
bill of sale itself was correctly dated the 10th of November, 1897.
Counsel in support of the deputy-judge's decision appealed from relied PRACTICR-REMITTING CASE to County Court—TRANSFER OF Action, When upon Parsons v. Brand (25 Q. B.V.'110). The objection to the validity of
MADE-BANKRUPTCY OF PLAINTIFFS-TRUSTEE ADDED AS PLAINTIFF BY the bill of sale had been lodged under section 9 of the Bills of Sale Act, ORDER OF THE High COURT, BEFORE PROCEEDINGS IN COUNTY COURT WERE 1882, which enacted thr; a bill of sale made or given by way of security COMMENCED_APPLICATION FOR TRUSTEE TO GIVE SECURITY—County, for the payment of money by the grantor thereof shall be void unless COURT Act, 1888 (51 & 52 Vict. c. 43), ss. 65, 66, 94.
made in accordance with the form of the schedule annexed to that Act. This was an appeal by the plaintiff Sharp, a trustee in bankruptcy of The schedule required the date to be given, and the form of the registered the plaintiffs, Mesers. Hemming & Johnson, from an order of his Honour copy followed the schedule. An omission or irregularity in either of a Judge Harrington, sitting at the Birmingham County Court, ordering material fact rendered the bill of sale invalid. him to give security for the costs of the action. In May, 1887, the
WRIGHT, J., in giving judgment, said the appeal of the claimant must original plaintiffs, Messre. Hemming & Johnson, brought the action in the be allowed. On the main point argued-namely, whether the omission of High Court to recover on a specially-indoreed writ the sum of £57, balance the date in the registered copy invalidated the bill of sale, he was of due to them from the defendant Dávies for goods sold and delivered. On opinion that the omission wan not such an error as would mislead a the 5th of June certain items, amounting to something over £7, were
creditor searching the register. The date had been correctly given in the admitted by the defendant, bringing the balance claimed for by the bill of sale, and a person finding a blank in the registered copy could refer plaintiffs to just under £50, and leave to defend was given him, and an
to the affidavit and would there find, in this case, the date accurately order made remitting the action to the county court at Birmingham bill of sale had been raised during the hearing of the appeal relating to
entered. As, however, other objections against the validity of this under section 65 of the County Courts Act, 1888. On the 30th of August the plaintiffs, Hemming & Johnson, became bankrupt, and on the matters of fact the case must be remitted for the decision of the deputy7th of October Sharp was appointed trustee. On the 31st of December judge on these questions. The appellant, however, should have the costs Sharp applied ex parte under R. S. C., ord. 17, rr. 4, 5, to be added as a
of this appeal in any event. Those of the first trial to abide the result of plaintiff to the action of Hemming and Others v. Davies, and the application the second trial. It was an extremely technical objection which the was granted. Meanwhile, although the order directing that the action appellant came to that court to get rid of. should be beard in the county court had been obtained some six
DARLING, J., concurred. Appeal allowed.--COUNSEL, Turrell ; Frank months before, no steps under that order were in fact taken until the Mellor. SOLICITORS, T. Howard Snith; A. H. D, Monweiler. 14th of Jannary, 1898, when the writ and the order remitting the action
[Reported by ERSKINE REID, Barrister-at-Law.] were lodged in the county court. On the application of the defendant the county court judge on the 24th of January made au order for security for costs to be given by the trustee under section 94 of the County Court Act, 1888. From that order Sharp appealed. For the appellant it was
Bankruptcy Cases. argued that the action although remitted for trial as to the balance of the Re PIERS, Ex parte PIERS v. READ. C.A. No. 1. 4th and 18th claim to the county court, remained nevertheless a High Court action.
March. Certainly, it did not become in any sense a county court action until the writ was issued in the county court, and before that date Sharp became
BANKRUPTCY-Proof-AMENDMENT - SECURED CREDITOR - OMISSION by an order of the High Court a plaintiff in the action. The county court
VALUE SECURITY ARISING FROM INADVERTENCE-BANKRUPTCY Act, 1883 judge had no power to treat the trustee as an added party and no
(46 & 47 Vict. c. 52), SCHEDULE I., R. 10. jurisdiction to order him to give security. Section 94 of the County This was an appeal from Wright, J. (see 46 W. R. 207), who refused aa Court Act, 1888, enacted that the bankruptcy of the plaintiff in any application by C. P. Piers, the assignee of Turnbull, a secured creditor in action in the court which the trustee might maintain for the benefit of the bankruptcy, for leave to amend his proof by altering the valuation of the creditors sball not cause the action to abate if the trustee shall elect his security from nil to the full amount of the debt proved for. Turnbull to continue such action and to give security for the costs thereof; and in owing to false information as to the value of his security, had valued it cake the trustee did not elect to give such security within the time limited at nil, and had voted at a meeting of creditors in respect of the full by the order, the defendant might avail kimself of the bankruptcy ag a amount of his debt. He subsequently assigned his debt to O. P. Piers, defence to the action. The power of the county court judge to order who discovered that the security was equal to the whole amount of the security was not retrospective: Welply v. Buhl (3 Q. B. 8ő) and D'Errico debt, and he therefore applied for leave to amend his proof. Wright, J., v. Samuel and Another (1896, 1 Q. B. 163). Counsel in support of the relying upon the case of Ex parte Clarke, Re Burr, 40 W. R. 608, came to order appealed from submitted that the county court judge had power the conclusion that the omission to value the security did not arise from under the rules to make the order. Sections 65 and 66 provided that all “ inadvertence.' He beld that what " inadvertence means is the remitted actions and all proceedings therein shall be tried and taken in contrary to deliberate election, and he therefore refused the application. the county court as if the action bad been originali, commenced there. From this judgment Piers now appealed. The power to order security for costs must be treated as if the action had March 18. -"THE Court (A. L. Smith, Chitty, and COLLINS, L.JJ.), been begun in the first instance in the county court, and therefore section having taken time to consider their judgment, dismissed the appeal. 94 applied.
A. L. SMITH, L.J., read the following judgment: The question raised,
upon the appeal is whether Mr. Turnbull, who was a creditor of Sir Appeal from the judgment of the Divisional Court (Wright and Eustace Piers, a bankrupt, has omitted to value his security, and that Kennedy, JJ.) afirming the decision of the Brighton County Court Judge. such omission has arieen from inadvertence within the meaning of rule 10 The plaintiff, who was a solicitor and a creditor of the defendant, was of Schedule I. of the Bankruptcy Act, 1883. Wright, J., decided against informed by the defendant that he was unable to pay his debts, and was Mr. Turnbull's assignee, Mr. Piers, who appeals. Rule 10 is as follows: instructed by him to file his petition in bankruptcy. The plaintiff ".For the purpose of voting a secured creditor shall, unless he surrenders accordingly did so, and the defendant was adjudicated bankrupt. The his security, state in his proof the particulars of his security, the date plaintiff carried in his bill of costs incurred in connection with the filing when it was given, and the value at which he assesses it, and shall be of the petition, and received out of the assets part of the amount thereof entitled to vote only in respect of the balance (if any) due to him after under rule 125 of the Bankruptcy Rules, 1886, which provides for “the deducting the value of his security. If he votes in respect of his whole taxed costs of the petitioner" being paid out of the assets, and brought debt he shall be deemed to have surrendered his security, unlegs the court this action to recover the balance of the costs so incurred. These costs on application is satisfied that the omission to value the security has arisen were incurred prior to the date of the receiving order; and the bankrupt from inadvertence." Sir Eustace Piers was adjudicated a bankrupt upon had not obtained his discharge. The county court judge held that the the 1st of October, 1890, and Mr. Turnbull, upon the 3rd of October, defendant had, by informing the plaintiff that he was unable to pay his 1891, sent in his proof against the estate, which, so far as material, was debts, committed an act of bankruptcy under section 4, sub-section 1 (), as follows: "The said Sir Eustace Piers was at the date of the receiving of the Bankruptcy Act, 1883; and he held that the plaintiff could not order--viz., the 1st of October, 1890-and still is justly and truly indebted recover. The Divisional Court affirmed this judgment. The plaintiff to Thomas Turnbull in the sum of £494 53. for professional services appealed. rendered, work done, and fees payable by the said Thomas Turnbull as
The Court (A. L. SMITH, CHITTY, and COLLINS, L.JJ.) dismissed the solicitor for and on behalf of the above-named bankrupt at his request, appeal. for which sum 1 say that I have not received any manner of satisfaction or security whatsoever, eave and except a charge upon certain debertures
A. L. SMITH, L.J., said that the question was whether this debt for which is considered worthless." "Having thus sent in his proof, Mr. costs incurred after notice of the act of bankruptcy, and before the Turnbull in March, 1892, voted at a meeting of creditors in respect of his receiving order, was a debt provable in bankruptcy. If so, the plaintiff whole debt of £494 58. Mr. Turnbull's assignee in the year of 1897 for could not recover by reason of section 9, sub-section 1, of the Bankruptcy the first time contended that when Mr. Turnbull sent in his proof upon certain exceptions, to which the debtor was subject at the date of the
Act, 1883. Section 37, sub-section 3, made all debts and liabilities, with the 3rd of October, 1891, he omitted to value his security, and that this arose from inadvertence. Now, pausing here, can it be truly said that receiving order provable in bankruptcy. This debt came within that Mr. Turnbull, when he sent in his proof upon the 3rd of October, 1891, category, and was therefore provable in bankruptcy. Sub-section 2 of omitted to value his security? It seems to me that he did not, for he then that section, however, created a personal incapacity to prove where the deliberately elected to assess the value of his security as being worthless, person, seeking to prove had notice of an available act of bankruptcy and to prove against the estate of Sir Eustace Piers in respect of his when the debt was contracted. This debt was contracted after notice of whole debt, and having done so proceeded to vote at a meeting of
an available act of bankruptcy, and therefore, though the debt was propcreditors as being a creditor against the estate for the whole amount of able in bankruptcy, the plaintiff could not prove it. The debt being his debt. It appears to me that he then omitted nothing. He assessed provable, section 9, sub-section 1, prevented the plaintiff from suing
for it. the value of his security at what he then believed to be its value-i.e., as worthless. Assessing the value of a security as worthless is equally
CHITTY and COLLINS, L.JJ., concurred, pointing out that the distincan assessment as if the assessment bad been of some value. This, in my tion was drawn in section 37 between the character of the debt and the opinion, suffices to determine the present case against the appellant. personal capacity of the person seeking to prove.-Counsel, Firminger and But, assuming that Mr. Turnbull had omitted to value his security, E. Bowen, Rowlands ; E. T. Holloway. Solicitors, C. R. Sawyer d' Ellis ; which I think he had not, did he do so by inadvertence? What is said R. Hewlelt, for 4. Mirams, Brighton. is this—that Mr. Turnbull was induced in October, 1891, to assess the
[Reported by W. F. BARBY, Barrister-at-Law.] value of his security as being worthless by information which led him to believe that it was so, but that by reason of a litigation which has taken place in subsequent years it has been found out that his security is not worthless, and in 1897 the appellant sought to amend the proof by valuing his security at £494 and to adhere thereto rather than to prove
LAW SOCIETIES. as he did against the estate for his debt. The finding out by subsequent events that in October, 1891, Mr. Turnbull was in error in electing to
THE SELDEN SOCIETY. worthless his security is not, in my opinion,
The annual general meeting of the members of the Selden Society “ inadvertence" within the meaning of the rule. This word points to was held on Wednesday in the Council Room, Lincoln's Inn Hall. The forgetfulness or accident, and not, as Vaughan Williams, J., well puts it chair was taken by the Master of the Rolls, and among those present in Ex parte Clarke (40 W. R. 608), to the case of a creditor having the choice before him of what he will do and balancing the advantage and Justice Wills, Sir F. Pollock, Mr Farwell, Q.C., Mr. Lawrence, Q C.,
were Mr. Justice Romer, Mr. Justice Stirling, Mr. Justice Byrne, Mr. deliberately electing to prove and abandon his security. I agree with Mr. Seward Brice, Q.O., Mr. Chadwyck-Healey, Q.C., Professor West. Wright, J., that the word " inadvertence” in this rule means the lake, Q.C., Mr. Cyprian Williams, Mr. Stuart Moore, Mr. Marsden, Mr. opposite of deliberate election, and that it does not cover a deliberate F. K. Munton, Mr. Turner, and Mr. B. Fossett Lock (hon. secretary). election, though based upon false grounds. What Mr. Turnbull did in
We printed the annual report, ante, p. 348, from which it appeared October, 1891, did not arise either from forgetfulness or accident, that there was a elight increase in the number of members, which was though it may have been a mistake. But this is not the word in the 265 in 1897, as compared with 256 in 1896. rule, and when I see that in rule 13, Schedule II., the Legislature has used the words “mistaken estimate," it shews me that it meant by the adoption of the report and accounts.
Professor WESTLAKE, Q.O., moved, and Mr. Justice Byrne seconded, “ inadvertence something other than a mistake. If North, J., in the
The Master of the Rolls was elected president, Sir F. Pollock a vicecase of Re Lister & Co. (40 W.R. 589 ; 1892, 2 Ch. 417) intended to hold president, and Mr. Scargill-Bird, Mr. Justice Stirling, Mr. Justice Wills, that the words “ inadvertence" and " mistake" were convertible terms I Mr. Chadwyck-Healey, Q.C., Mr. C. I. Elton, Q.C., and Judge cannot agree with him. In my judgment the appellant fails to shew Meadows White were elected to fill vacancies on the council. that Mr. Turnbull has either omitted to value his security, or that he did The MASTER of the Rolls said that the society was this year in a dis80 by inadvertence, and the appellant must establish both to bring tinctly better position than in the past year. Its influence was, however, bimself within the rule. I cay nothing about the length of time which not so extended as it ought to be, and the value of its publications was not has elapsed nor the other circumstances of this case, for the appellant appreciated so largely as it would be if they were better known. They does not, in my judgment, bring himself within the rule. . I agree with might possibly improve their position if they were to appoint a small sub. the judge of the court below, and the appeal must be dismissed with committee to consider what steps could be taken to widen their sphere of costs.
influence and to gain fresh subscribers. He could not help thinking that CHITTY, L.J., also read a judgment to the same effect.
unless they exerted themselves in some such way the progress of the COLLINS, L J.-I also agree that upon the facts of this case Tumbull society, if any, would be very slow. In the matter of the Year-books cannot be said to have omitted to value his security through inad- something had been done. A small sub-committee had been appointed vertence. As regards, however, the words “omission to value the to confer with the Oxford authorities to see whether some co-operative security” in rule 10 of Schedule I., I am far from satisfied that the
measures could not be adopted. There were so many gaps in the Year. Legielature did not intend them to cover both the case where there is books that to fill them up would be a very formidable business. The a valuation of a security at nil and the case where there is an omission society could hardly hope to undertake such a task unless they could get to place any value on the security: I cannot think it was intended that external help. He hoped that that assistance would be shortly obtained totally different results should follow. In my opinion the word "value" and the Year-books made of real value, not only to lawyers, but to in the schedules is used as denoting a positive value. It is not necessary, historians. however, for us to decide this point now, as the case clearly does not
Mr. LINDSAY suggested that printing the Year-books was really the work come within the provision as to inadvertence. Appeal dismissed.
of the Treasury. COUNSEL, McIntyre; Cozens-Hardy, Q.O., and Nepean. SOLICITORS, W. The Master of the Rolls was not at all sanguine that they could get Eley; T. Edwards.
the Treasury to take the matter up. From what he knew of their habits (Reported by E. G. STILLWELL, Barrister-at-Law.]
he thought they were more likely to help the society if it undertook the
work. BUCKWELL v. NORMAN. C. A. No. 1. 17th March.
On the motion of Mr. Justice Wills, seconded by Mr. CRACKANTHONPB, BANKRUPTCY-PROVABLE Debt-Debt CONTRACTED AFTER NOTICE OF ActQ.C., a vote of thanks was passed to Lord Herschell for his services as
ON BANKRUPTCY-LIABILITY OF BANKRUPT-BANKRUPTCY Act, 1883 (46 & president during the past three years. 47 Viot. c. 52), s. 9, SUB-SECTION 1 ; s. 37, SUB-SECTIONS 2, 3.
Votes of thanks were also passed to the officers and president.
president of the Birmingham Law Society had referred in not undeserved LAW STUDENTS' JOURNAL.
terms to the reputation of the English bench. He would content himself
with saying in regard to the bench of the present day that while it did BIRMINGHAM LAW STUDENTS' SOCIETY.
not claim to be always right, it endeavoured to discharge its duty fairly THE LORD CHIEF JUSTICE ON LEGAL EDUCATION.
between man and man, without fear and without favour, and regardless
of popular feeling, on whatever side that popular feeling was displayed. The annual dinner of the Birmingham Law Students' Society was held He hoped he might be allowed to make a reference to a subject cognate on Saturday night, the chair being occupied by Lord Justice Rigby, to that dealt with by the president. Lord Justice Rigby reminded them president for the year. His lordship was supported by the Lord Mayor that the objects of the society were advancement in the knowledge of law (Councillor Beale), the two judges now conducting the Birmingham and in the practice of advocacy. Cognate to that subject was the subject Assizes, Lord Chief Justice Russell and Mr. Justice Kennedy, Mr. A. of education in the legal profession, and as that was a subject very close McBean (Mayor of Wolverhampton), Mr. I. Bradley (city coroner), Mr. to his heart he hoped they would forgive him if he said a word upon it. Jelf, Q.O., Mr. Harris, Q.C., Mr. Amphlett, Q.O., Mr. Registrar Parry, He would address himself to the branch of the profession represented by Mr. T. H. Russell (president of the Birmingham Law Society), Mr. J. J. the young men present who were in the position of articled clerks. Parfitt, Mr. H. A. Pearson, Mr. T. Norris Foster, Mr. 8. s. Dorsett, Mr. There was nothing more remarkable in connection with that branch of B. Grimley, Mr. G. T. Edwards, Dr. Showell Rogers, Mr. F. S. Pearson, the profession than the great advance which had been made in the last Mr. C. B, Smith, Mr. Perie (marshal to the Lord Chief Justice), Mr. half-century in what he might call the status in public estimation and in Kennedy (marshal to Mr. Justice Kennedy), Mr. E. V. Hiley, Mr. A. H. the morale of that branch of the profession. He thought it was remark. Coley, Mr. L. J. Sharp (official receiver), Mr. M. Butcher, Mr. C. H. able the amount of good which had been effected by the profession itself Saunders, Mr. H. F. Sbarp, Mr. S. M. Slater, Mr. A. H. McBean (hon. by its various organizations and law societies in the great centres of sec.), &c., the company numbering altogether over a hundred.
population throughout the country. Those societies had raised the tone The SECRETARY announced apologies for absence from a number of of the members of the profession individually and collectively, and had gentlemen, among them the Recorder of Birmingham (Mr. J. S. Dugdale, exercised a disciplinary force over the individual members which had QC.), Mr. Registrar. Glaisser. (vice-president of the society), Judge worked enormous good. But while he noted that remarkable advance, Whitehorne, Sir Richard Harington, Mr. Buzzard, Q.C., Mr. A. L. he was by no meaus clear that the movement had not been Crockford (Mayor of þutton Coldfield), Mr. T. M. Colmore (stipendiary retrograde in reference
to the general legal education of the magistrate), the town clerk of Birmingham (Mr. E. O. Smith), and the members of that branch of the profession. At the present moment, in clerk of the peace (Mr. O. E. Mathews).
some of the great towns-for example, Liverpool, Manchester, and to a Lord Justice Rigby, in his presidential address, expressed the great might call the liberal education of articled clerks. He did not think they
limited exteut in Birmingham-something was done towards what he sympathy which the senior members of the profession had in the progress did enough. In London at one time the Incorporated Law Society had a of the junior members. He was not one of those who held that there ever could be a fusion of the two branches of the profession. There was a
number of lecturers, who had classes more or less considerably attended, difference in the duties of a solicitor and the duties of a barrister which All that was done away with, and absolutely the education which led up
and periodical examinations in relation to the teaching of those classes. was absolutely ineffaceable. pleasure, that the Inps of Court and the Incorporated Law Society had to the final examination of those who desired to become solicitors of the done a great deal towards making it possible for any member of either Supreme Court was, as regarded London, and in the main the rest of branch to pass with the slightest inconvenience to the other. He
the country, carried on by a system of cramming, and not by a system of exhorted the students of the law to aim at high ideals, considering not his own branch of the profession, he could not say that things were much
liberal and enlightened study, instruction, and education. As regarded only how they should turn their profession to lucrative account, but having regard to the interests of their profession, the interests of their better, and he desired to utter a word or two of deliberate warning on the clients, and the interests of the country, which 'to a great extent were subject which could not be long neglected without entailing very serious committed to them. A considerable number of years ago it was a fashion consequences to the profession. There were certain exclusive privileges to speak in a depreciatory manner of English law as distinguished from given to members of the bar. They had rights of exclusive audience in other systems of law; but that was all changed now, and they all realized the Supreme Courts, and they had rights of pre-audience in many other that the English system had practically no competitor, except in those courts. There were various important offices throughout the country, systems which directly derived their origin from the Roman law.
some judicial, some quasi-judicial, and some administrative, which were
He Although from time to time we wisely allowed ourselves to be taught by almost exclusively considered to belong to members of the Bar. the great masters of Roman law, yet our attitude in the main was a stub. wanted to know what right could the profession of the Bar urge for the born and sturdy resistance to that law, and he ventured to say it was a
maintenance of those exclusive rights and privileges unless they were able wice and a most bappy resistance. The result was that our law, with all its to shew special and peculiar learning and fitness for the discharge of the defects--and he did not deny its great and serious defects — had really regard to legal education in London? He was not saying before them
What was the position with been a home product of the English nation. Teutonic ancestors that sense of freedom, that principle of equality among of Court. Those Inns in bygone days had done great things, but in the
It had derived from its what he had not said face to face with the representatives of the Inns men, which would always make it in that respect the superior of the matter of legal education they were lagging far behind the needs of the Roman law as that had been translated into modern life. The common law had shewn it was capable of answering accurately and completely the day. They had means by which the great cause of legal education on a wants of nations in very difficult and very different positions in the world. done instead was to appoint a limited number of readers and teachers to
broad, liberal, and enlightened basis might be carried on, and what was Turning to the objects of the society, his lordship said he saw they pro- / deliver a certain number of lectures, at which attendance was registered, vided for the argument of moot points and for trials, which were excellent followed by an examination which he had demonstrated could, in the means of preparing students for the practice of advocacy. The real secret of advocacy was that they should know what they ought to argue abont not exceeding six months, and that, forsooth, was supposed to be adequate
case of the cramıning of a man of average ability, be mastered in a period and for. Eloquence was not advocacy, and if not kept in restraint was even injurious to advocacy. They had had great instances, and ha need preparation for the pursuit of a profession which involved, as their presinot go beyond his next-door neighbour (the Lord Chief Justice), of They had not got the opportunity or the means, so long as education was
dent had said, not only great opportunities, but also grave responsibilities. eloquence made to subserve the purpose of advocacy and not to obscure or lead away from it, and in that case they got the combination of unrivalled considered fit to be dealt with in that random fashion, of creating a body means of persuasion.
of men of the professorial class, of whom they had now and then illus
trations such as the late Sir Henry Maine-men whose interest it would The PRESIDENT then proposed "The Birmingham Law Students' be to cultivate the law as a thing to be taught by them, and taught on Society, to which Mr. A. H. McBean replied. He said that the society scientific and broad and enlightened principles. But with the law student now had a membership, of 316, of whom 250 were honorary and 66 for the bar, as with the law student for admission on the roll of solicitors student members. The honorary members were gentlemen of the Bar and of the Supreme Court, the same system of cramming to a great extent solicitors of Supreme Court. A mock trial was held in November last, prevailed. The promised Teaching University for London offered an and had a record attendance of the public, between 900 and 1,000 persons opportunity which he hoped the Inns of Court would avail themselves of, being present, and during the past six months of active work twelve of remedying this state of things by creating a faculty or school of law ordinary meetings were held, with an average attendance of twenty-one in connection with that university. That there was need of such a members.
faculty, not confined merely to Euglish law, but open to other systems Mr. H. A. Pearson, in a humourous speech, proposed "The City and also, a moment's consideration of the extent and the responsibilities of Corporation,” which was acknowledged by the LORD Mayor.
this great empire would at once remind them. From the central governing Mr. A: H. COLEX proposed " The Bench and the Bar.” He said they point of London we sent out to the world--to our Crown colonies and in were satisfied that the great traditions of the past were maintained in the large measure to the colonies that had rights of self-government conceded bench and the bar of the present. It had happened in the history of to them--men who had to teach those who had to administer the law, and this country that the bench had stood between the subject and the Crown, not our own system of law, but, it might be, the French system modified and the bench and the bar bad ever been foremost in defending the by the English law, it might be Mohammedan, Dutch, Portugese, or liberties of the people of this country. They were proud to notice the Spanish law, influenced and modified in part by English law, and to some administration of justice in the land. Whatever stormy political seas extent altered under its influence. He said, then, that the present state of her Majesty's judges had crossed, when they had arrived secure in the education for the profession of the law, notwithstanding that something haven of the bench all party passion passed away; There was no was, he was grateful to acknowledge, done in both the universities, was deflection to the right hand or to the left, but they administered perfect not up to the needs of the profession, or creditable to those who ought to justice to all classes of the Queen's subjects.
shew an active and lively interest in this great public object. Proceeding The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE, in reply, said the Lord Mayor had referred to to support the advice given to the students of the Birmingham society the fact that that was the first visit which he had made in a judicial by the president, the Lord Chief Justice said that in preparing to argue capacity to the city. He hoped it would not be the last. The vice- a case the first thing was to ascertain with exact precision the facts that
had to be dealt with, and the next thing to see what was the principle
GENERAL. involved in the question arising upon those facts. He would further say
Mr. Justice Byrne will be the Easter Vacation Judge. that in his judgment the first, the highest, the most essential quality for successful advocacy was not gifts of speech, nor a knowledge of case
The death is announced of Sir William Lambert Dobson, Chief Justice law – but the judicial faculty - the faculty capable of judging of Tasmania. He was the eldest son of Mr. John Dobson, solicitor and his own case, and trying to put himself in the position of his adversary, notary public, of Gateshead, Durham, and afterwards of Hobart,
Tasmania. and judging his case too, and from a consideration of both endeavouring to arrive at what was a strong point of bis own case, what was the central At the annual meeting of the Equity and Law Life Assurance Society fact, or set of central facts, on which the case ought in his judgment to held on the 15th inst., the Hon. Mr. Justice Grantham was elected a turn. Though gifts of speech, and even at times gifts of eloquence, had, director of the society in the room of the Rt. Hon. Sir Edward Kay, when fitly applied, great and important value, they sunk into insignifi- deceased. cance compared with the importance of realizing a clear conception of
It is stated that the late Mr. Frederick Waymouth Gibbs, Q.C., C.B., what was the point in dispute, and conveying that clear conception with by his will, has bequeathed to the trustees of Lincoln's-inn, of which with perspicacity to the tribunal before whom the practitioner appeared: society he was a bencher, the service of plate presented to him by the He had heard men with great elegance of language and great facility of Queen and the silver vase presented to him by the Prince of Wales on his speech deliver themselves of-nothing. But he had never known any man who had anything worth saying who had not at his command ceasing to be tutor to his Royal Highness. sufficiently powerful and clear language adequately to convey that which The following are the arrangements made by the judges (Bruce and was worth conveying. He did not deprecate the cultivation of speech, Big Fam, JJ.) for holding the ensuing Spring Assizes on the Northern but he did desire to impress upon them not to put it in the first rank, and Circuit : The Commission day at Manchester will be on Monday, the 18th to realize that it was the cultivation of the mind, not the cultivation of of April, and the trial of special jury causes will be proceeded with before the tongue, which was the great gain to be gathered from practice in such Bruce, J., the following morning, while Bigham, J., will try the prisoners, societies as theirs.
The Commission day at Liverpool will be Monday, the 2nd of May, and Mr. Justice KENNEDY, who next replied, said he did not take quite such a
special jury causes will be tried the following morning. gloomy view of legal education as the weighty words of the Lord Chief On Monday last the Lord Chancellor moved in the House of Lords the Justice possibly ought to have impressed him with, though he fully second reading of the Special Juries Bill, and explained that it was endorsed all that could be said in favour of great improvement. As a intended to remove a certain inconvenience which had been found to arise recently-appointed member of the Council of Legal Education he could when the same set of special jurors were required to be in attendance for only ask that there should be much co-operation from all branches of the the trial of the whole of the special jury cases to be heard at assizes. profession. He believed there was no desire to do anything except to get The object of the Bill was to enlarge the power of the sheriff so as to at the best of what could be got, and that the most profitable form of enable him to summon a greater number than forty-eight special jurydiscussion was that which spoke out unfalteringly, whether it be praise or men, who should be divided into two sets for the trial of the special jury blame, with regard to the syetem under discussion. After humorously cases down for hearing at the assizes. The Bill was read a second time. expressing a hope that the cause list at the present assizes might in future be doubled in length, his lordship said he believed it was a great thing Justice Å. L. Smith said he would mention a matter which he had men
During the hearing of an appeal ou the 17th iust , says the Times, Lord to have causes and criminal cases tried in the places where the parties tioned before, but he repeated it, because he desired that it should be resided. He wanted to see the circuits in the country maintained, and known. Where the consideration of a case depended on documents which even strengthened, so that the provinces might feel that from time to it was necessary for the court to follow, three copies of such documents time the bench was brought to the homes of the people, endeavouring to ought to be provided for the use of the members of the court. He did not the best of their lights to show that English justice permeated every
mean that they wanted budgets of all the documents relating to a case; corner of the realm.
he only spoke of really material documents. Copies of such documents Mr. JELF, Q.C., responding for the bar, entered a plea for the main- must be supplied for the judges, because the court simply could not get tenance of a high moral standard among legal practitioners. In these on without them, and it was inconvenient for counsel to have to hand up days of slumps and booms, of cycle syndicates and secret commissions, their copies. He was only speaking of this court. In his opinion the it seemed to bim-and he said it with real sorrow and regret-that the costs of three copies of really material documents ought to be allowed on commercial integrity and morality of this country was going through a taxation. very dangerous crisis, and he believed he should have the sanction of my lords and all present in saying that the great legal profession, in both Law," delivered by Sir F'. Pollock on Saturday evening, at the Working
In the course of a lecture on “Ancient Ideals of Justice in English branches of it, from the Lord Chancellor down to the humblert solicitor's Men's College, he said that under all the changes of procedure which bat clerk, had means and opportunities, which possibly no other body of men bad, of discouraging by word, by deed, by example, by abstention taken place iu our system of law there were fundamental ideas of in every possible way, the elightest deviation from the 'right, and the justice, and these were national ideas. We were so familiar with them honest, and the true path. He earnestly entreated the young men before
as to be led into supposing that they belonged to what was called natura! him to bear in mind the opportunity they had of ringing out the false justice, and such as must obtain in any civilized country. That, howand ringing in the true.
ever, was not the case, as an examination of foreign systems of law would
shew. The first principle of common law justice was that the procedure Mr. H. F. SHARP, who proposed “The Birmingham Law Society," of the court should be public. There might have to be exceptions for expressed the indebtedness of the students' society to the parent body. reasons of policy or morality, but if any judge desired to exclude the Mr. T. H. RUSSELL replied.
public he had to show reason for doing so. The second principle was The remaining toast was the health of the President, briefly proposed that the proceedings in a law suit were taken by the parties themselves by Mr. J.J. PARPITT, and responded to by Lord Justice Rigby.
and not by the court. The parties proceeded at their own risk, and it was not the duty of the court to help them. Even the Court of Chancery, which came from another system, no sooner began to be worked by English judges for the ordinary affairs of English people than the Eoglish
principle crept into it and prevailed, and a suit in Chancery became as LEGAL NEWS.
much a game between the parties, the court seeing fair play, as an action
in the common law courts, although the rules were more complicated. OBITUARY.
The third principle was that the judges alone were authorized to interpret
the law. The death is announced, on the 21st inst., of Mr. EDWARD SAMUEL Bøll, officer bad any business to interfere with that function. These three
What the judges declared to be law was law, and no executive a member of the firm of Carter & Bell, solicitors, of 6, Idol-lane, London: principles were now peculiar to the English-speaking world, and if one Mr. Bell, who was the elder son of the late Rev. Dr. S. Bell, M.A., of went back far enough in history one would find that they were part of Lancaster, where he was educated, came to London in 1848, and was articled with Messrs. Smith, Stenning, & Croft, of Basinghall-street. He
the ancient body of customs which our Germanic ancestors brought from was admitted a solicitor in Michaelmas term, 1854, and after being with the Continent of Europe. Messrs. Wilson, Bristows, & Co , for some years, in 1860 he entered into partnership with the late Mr. Richard Gardner Mathews (formerly of the firm of Hill & Mathews) and Mr. William Carter, then constituting the
COURT PAPERS. firm of Mathews, Carter, & Bell. Mr. Bell has long had a considerable connection amongst the produce and allied trades in the City of London,
SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE. where he was well known and much respected.
ROTA OF REGISTRARS IN ATTENDANCE ON
Mr. Justice Date.
Leach Mr. W. H. WALPOLE, solicitor, has been appointed Registrar of the
Beal Ipswich District Probate Registry, Registrar of the Ipswich County Friday, April
Pugh Court and District, and Registrar of the High Court of Justice.
Layie Mr. Philip J. RUTLAND, solicitor, of 69, Chancery-lane, and High
Byene. Wycombe, the president of the Berks, Bucks, and Oxfordshire Incorpor- Monday, March
Mr. Pemberton Mr. King
Mr. Jackson ated Law Society, and one of the successful candidates in the Moderate Tuesday,
Carrington interest in the recent London County Council Election, has been added
Jackson to the Commission of the Peace for the Borough of High Wycombe, of Friday, April...
Jackson which he is ex-mayor.
Lench Beal Leach
friars, solors for petners. Notice of appearing must reach the above-named not later THE PROPERTY MART.
than 6 o'clock in the afternoon of March 29 SALES OF ENSUING WEEK,
NEW CYCLE COMPANY, LIMITED-Creditors are required, on or before May 17, to send
their names and addresses, and the particulars of their debts or claims, to Mr. C. H. March 31.-Messrs. Stimson & Sons, at the Mart, at 2 p.m., Freehold Ground-rents of Weatherley, 14, George-street, Mansion House. Ashurst & Co, Throgmoi con-avenue, over £1,000 per annum, secured upon very important properties in Euston-road. solors to the liquidators Solicitors, Messrs. Tyrrell Lewis, Lewis, & Broadbent, of London
North EUROPEAN CYCLE EXPORT COMPANY, LIMITED-By an order made by Wright, J., dated March_9, it was ordered that the voluntary winding-up of the company be
continued. Langhams, 174, Blackfriars-road, solors for the petors.
ROXBURGHE Press, LIMITED-Creditors are required, on or before April 22, to send their WARNING TO INTENDING HOUSE PURCHASERS AND LESSEES.—Before pur
names and addresses, and the particulars of their debts or claims, to Mr. Flaxman
Haydon, 16, Union ct, Old Broad st. Wetherfield & Co, Gresham bldgs, Guildhall, solors chasing or renting a house, have the Sanitary Arrangements thoroughly for the liquidator. Examined, Tested, and Reported Upon by an Expert from Messrs. Carter SIMULTANEOUS COLOUR PRINTING SYNDICATE, LIMITED-Petn for winding up, presented Bros., 65, Victoria-street, Westminster. Fee quoted on receipt of full March 17, directed to be heard March 30 John Fenn, solor for petnrs Notice of particulars. (Established 21 years.)-[Apvt.]
appearing must reach the above-named not later than 6 o'clock in the afternoon of
March 29 WARRINGTON CARRIAGE CO, LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION)-Creditors are required, on or before May 4, to send their names and addresses, and the particulars of their debts or
claims, to John Alfred Satterfield Hassal, 6, Lord st, Liverpool
FRIENDLY SOCIETY DISSOLVED.
DERBY TONTINE SOCIETY, West Derby rd, Liverpool. March 9
LIMITED IN CHANCEBY.
CREDITORS' NOTICES. Huntriss chbrs, Scarborough. Birdsall & Cross, Scarborough, solors for liquidator
UNDER ESTATES IN CHANCERY. SHIP" NEWFIELD" Co, LIMITED-Creditors are required, on or before April 30, to send their names and addresses, and the particulars of their debts or claims, to George
LAST DAY OF CLAIM.
London Gazette.-TUESDAY, March 1.
Miles, William, Grosmont, Monmouth, Innkeeper April 2 Blennerhansett v Miles,
Stirling, J Nesbitt, Abergavenny
Ridings, BETTQ, Lytham, Lancaster April 1 Ridings v Heaton, Registrar, Manchester
Hall, Manchester BEESTON PNEUMATIC TYRE Co, LIMITED-Petn for winding up, presented March 10,
London Gazette.-FRIDAY, March 4. directed to be heard on March 30. Morley & Co, 53, Gresham House, Ola Broad st, solors for petner Notice of appearing must reach the above-named not later than 6
Falls, WILLIAM COULTHABD, Montpelier st, Brompton, M.D. April 6 Maitland v Falls, o'clock in the afternoon of March 29
Romer, J Rivington & Son, Fenchurch bldgs CENTRAL DE KAAP GOLD MINES, LIMITED-Creditors are required, on or before May 5,
London Gazette.-TUESDAY, March 8. to send their names and addresses, and the particulars of their debts and claims, to Thomas, John BITHELL, Golftyn, Flint, Fisherman April 5 Jones v Thomas, Kekewich, Frederick Hawdon, Dashwood House. Voules & Co, Eastcheap bldgs, solors for
Douglas, Chester liquidator DOWLING & Sox, LIMITED-Petn for winding up, presented March (18, directed to be
London Gazelle.-Friday, March 11. heard March 30. John F. Hortin, 161, Edgware rd, solor for petner. Notice of
Mills, FREDERICK, Norwich, Licensed Victualler April 13 Cooke v Mills, Romer, appearing must reach the above-named not later than 6 o'clock in the afternoon of March 29
Sadd & Bracey, Norwich
London Gazette.-TUESDAY, March 15.
TERRY, COURTENAY FORBEs, Shrublands, Hersham, Captain April 20 Inman v Terry,
Kekewicb, J Winckworth, Abingdon st, Westminster GOLDEN GLEAM GOLD MINING Co, LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION)-Creditors are required, on or before May 3, to send their names and addresses, and the particulars of their debts
London Gazette.-FRIDAY, March 18. or claims, to R Ú Preston and J Horlick, Worcester House, Walbrook. Campion & Simmons, solors to liquidators
LANGLEY, ELIZA, Reading, Bookseller April 18 Johnson v Langley, Kekewich, J
Collins, Reading KABOONGA, LIMITED-Creditors are required, on or before April 23, to send their names
and addresses, and the particulars of their debts or claims, to John Richard Phillips, 70 McNulty, John, Liverpool, Licensed Victualler April 20 Walker v McNulty, Registrar, and 71, Bishopsgate st. Snell & Co, 1 and 2, George st, Mansion House, solors for the Liverpool Lynskey, Liverpool
liquidator LIVERPOOL AND GENERAL ASSURANCE CO, LIMITED-Creditors are required, on or before
London Gazette-TUESDAY, March 22. April 30, to send their names and addresses, and the particulars of their debts or claims, DAVIES, ELIZABETH CATHERINE, Bishop, Burton, York April 26 Davies v Kelly, Registo Robert John Berry, 7, Sweeting st, Liverpool
trar, Liverpool Quinn, Liverpool METROPOLITAN AND PROVINCIAL STORES, LIMITED-Petn for winding up, presented March DAVIES, Rev John HUGH, Bishop Burton, York April 26 Davies v Scott, Registrar, 17, directed to be heard on Wednesday, March 30. Francis & Johnson, 26, Austin
Liverpool Quinn, Liverpool
BANKRUPTCY NOTICES. HAYWARD, GEORGE, Portsea, Baker Portsmouth Pet ROLLASON, W H, Hatton gån, Tin plate Worker High
Court Ord Feb 19
Hiatt, Rachel, Birmingham, Grocer Dudley Pet March SAYLE, GEORGE WILLIAM, Wadhurst, Sussex, Grocer Tun-
bridge Wells Pet March 2 Ord March 16 HIGGINS, CHARLES GEORGE, Nottingham, Musician Not STOTT-MILNE, John, and ROBERT STOTT-MILNE, Bredbury, ARMITAGE, ALFRED ROBERTS, Leeds Leeds Pet March 14 tingham Pet March 16 Ord March 16
nr Stockport, Colliery Proprietors Stockport Pet Ord March 14
HOBSON, Joseph, Wakefield, Grocer Wakefield Pet March 1 Ord March 16 ATKINSON, Thomas, Halifax, Auctioneer Halifax Pet March 16 Ord March 16
SUGGITT, WILLIAM, Thornaby on Tees, Labourer StockMarch 16 Ord March 16
Houghton, FREDERICK GEORGE, Bolton, Tobacconist ton on Tees Pet March 15 Ord March 15
Tallis, Isaac, Claverdon, Warwicks, Builder Warwick
Pet March 9 Ord March 14 BELLIXDER, JOSEPH, Leeds, Tailor Leeds Pet March 15 Pet March 16 Ord March 16
Toulin, MONTAGUE, Buckingham, Licensed Victualler Ord March 15
JACKSON, EGERTON, Headingley, Leeds Leeds Pet March BEXXBTT, HENRY, Weston under Penyard, Farmer Here 15 Ord March 15
Banbury Pet March 14 Ord March 14 ford Pet March 16 Ord March 16 Jones, Ernest LEOLINE, Newport, Mon, Draper New
UTTLEY, FRED, and FRANK AINLEY, Sowerby Bridge,
Yorks, Hosiery Manufacturers Bishop, WALTER, Batley, York, Fishmonger Dewsbury
Pet March port, Mon Pet Feb 28 Ord March 14 Pet March 15 Ord March 16
15 Ord March 15 Joy, Edwin, Paddock Wood, Kent, Baker Tunbridge WALKER, DAVID, Padiham, Lancs, Joiner Burnley COLES, WILLIAN HENRY, York, Labourer York Pet Wells Pet March 14 Ord March 14
Pet March 14 Ord March 14
March 14 Ord March 14
Pet DANIEL, WILLIAM, Neath Neath Pet March 15 Ord Kext, ARTHUR, Bedford, Wheelwright Bedford
WALKER, THOMAS HENRY, Blackheath, Butcher GreenMarch 15 March 15 Ord March 15
wich Pet Feb 15 Ord March 15 DAVIES, CHABLES EDWARD, Gravesend, General Merchant Lesieur, GUSTAVE ALFRED, Maida Vale mansions, Egg WAL9H, ANDREW, Lytham, Lancs, Commission Agent High Court Pet March 14 Ord March 14
Preston Pet March 16 Ord March 16 Davies, David MORGAN, Penarth, Glam, Clothier Cardiff LESLIE, WALTER ANTHONY, Brighton Brighton Pet March
WALTERS, BENJAMIN Thomas, Carmarthen, Draper CarPet March 14 Ord March 14 14 Ord March 14
marthen Pet March 14 Ord March 14 DAVIES, GEORGE, Neath, Clothier Neath Pet March 3 Lowson, PETER, Barrow on Humber Gt Grimsby Pet
Newport WAITE, ELIZA, Newport, I of W, Baker
March 14 Ord March 14
WOODCOCK, CHARLES HENRY, Sheffield, Grocer Sheffield
Pet March 15 Ord March 15
Court Pet Feb 10 Ord March 16
Amended notices substituted for those published in the DUNSMORE, ROBERT, Keighley, Yorks, Parman Bradford NICHOLS, JAMES, Skewen, Glam, Boot Dealer Neath Pet
London Gazette of March 15 : Pet March 15 Ord March 15
March 15 Ord March 15 EDSER, HARVEY, Abinger, Surrey, Butcher Croydon Pet OLDMAN, John William, Chislehurst Hill, Kent, Builder SMEDLEY, NATHAN MARSDEN, Sale, Chester, Builder Man
Croydon Pet March 15 Ord March 16
chester Pet Aug 19 Ord March 11
Salford EGGLESTONE, JOHN, Bishop Auckland, Durham, Mason PARKINS, JOHN ASHLEY, Old Trafford, Lancs Salford Pet
WHITEHEAD, ARTHUR, Manchester, Cloth Raiser
Pet Feb 26 Ord March 11
March 14 Ord March 14
Ord March 16
ADJUDICATION ANNULLED AND RECEIVING
ORDER RESCINDED. Gougu, THOMAS, Wolverhampton, Painter Wolverhamp Pocock, ALBERT, Pontypool, Furniture Dealer Newport, ton Pet March 14 Ord March 14
Mon Pet March 15 Ord March 15
Moody, CHARLES BOUCHEK, Vidal rd, Brixton High Court HALEY, FREDERICK, Ossett, York, Labourer Dewsbury ROGERS, HENRY, Talysarn, Carnarvons, Labourer Bangor Rec Ord June 26, 1895 Adjud July 10, 1895 Resc & Pet March 14 Ord March 14 Pet March 16 Ord March 15
Annul March 11, 1898