« PreviousContinue »
The magistrate decided that the service of any summons, even if Section 14 is as follows: “Be it further enacted, by the authority aforeanonymously addressed - i.e., "To the owner" – was a notice, the said, that it shall be lawful to all and every the justices of the peace in service of wbich was provided for by the Summary Jurisdiction every shire, mayors, sheriffs, bailiffs, and other head officers within every Acts and must be served under section 1 of 11 & 12_Vict. c. 43, city, town, and borough within this realm, from time to time, as well personally or at the last known place of abode. Le was also within liberties as without, as need and case shall require, to come, of opinion that even if a summons addressed “To the Owner" in a case enter, and resort into all and every houses, places, and alleys where such where the owner could not be found was not provided for by the Summary games shall be suspected to be holden, exercised, used, or occupied, conJurisdiction Acts there should be evidence before him that reasonable trary to the form of this statute ; (2) and as well the keepers of the same, diligence had been exercised by the complainant to discover the owner of also the persons there haunting, resorting, and playing, to take, arrest, and the property, and in the present case he was not satisfied that the valua- imprison, and them so taken and arrested to keep in prison, unto such tion list or rate had been examined or the rate collector interrogated or time as the keepers and maintainers of the said plays and games have other obvious means taken to discover who the owner was. Section 188 (i.) found sureties to the king's use, to be bound by recognizance or otherof the Act is as follows : “Any notice, order or other document required wise, no longer to use, keep, or occupy any such house, play, game, alley, or authorized to be served under this Act, the service of which is not pro or place; (3) and also that the persons there so found, be in like case vided for by the Summary Jurisdiction Acts, the Land Clauses Acts, or bound by themselves, or else with sureties, by the discretions of the the Companies Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845, may be served by deliver- justices, mayors, sheriffs, bailiffs, or other head officers, no more to play, ing a copy thereof at, or by sending a copy thereof by post to the usual or haunt, or exercise from thenceforth, in, at, or to any of the said places, or last known residence in the United Kingdom of the person to whom it is at any of the said games.” Section 3 of the Gaming Act, 1847, gave the addressed, or by delivering the same to some person on the premises, or if justices, &c., power to issue their warrant tɔ the police to enter suspected no person be found on the premises, then by fixing a copy thereof on some houses and arrest the keepers of the same and persons found thereon. conspicuous part of the building."
The appellant, with eighty-eight other persons, was, on the 5th of May, The Court (WRIGHT and KENNEDY, JJ.) discharged the rule
1897, arrested by the police on premises known as the Frascati Club at 32, WRIGHT, J., thought that in this case there bad not been sufficient care Gerard-street, Soho, under a warrant issued by the magistrate in purtaken to ascertain who the owner was to entitle the London County suance of section 11 of the Betting Houses Act, 1853. All the persons Council to act under the section. In his opinion, before a magistrate arrested were brought before the magistrate on the 12th of May. Four of could hold that such a service as this was valid, the complainant must them were charged with keeping a house for the purpose of betting with prove (a) that he had made all the inquiries he could, (5) his failure to persons resorting thereto contrary to section 1 of the Betting Houses Act, ascertain who the owner was, and (c) that the premises were empty. The ibree of whom were convicted, the remaining person being discharged. The application against the decision of the magistrate therefore failed. appellant with the eighty-four other persons applied to be discharged.
KENNEDY, J., concurred.-Counsel, Sutlon ; Horace Avory. SOLICITORS, It was proved that the premises were used by the keepers thereof for the Herries, Wilkinson, $ Rakes ; W. A. Blaxland.
purpose of betting with persons resorting thereto. The appellant was [Reported by ERSKINE REID, Barrister-at-Law.1
arrested at 3 30 p.m., and it was proved that betting had taken place just
prior to that time. The magistrate refused to discharge the appellant, GALLAGHER v. RUDD. Div. Court. 2nd Nov.
but ordered him to be bound in his own recognizance in £20 “no more to
play, haunt, or exercise from thenceforth" at any gaming house pursuant LICENSING ACTS-JUSTICES/LICENCE TO RETAIL INTOXICATING LIQUORS AT
to section 14 of 33 Hen. 8, c. 9. On bebalf of the appellant it was BARS OF THEATRE-LIQUOR SUPPLIED
contended that there was no evidence that the appellant “used or EMPLOYÉES AND BONA FIDE" SPECTATORS ONLY - LICENSING ACT, 1874
exercised any unlawful game on the premises nor that he was a person (35 & 36 Vict. c 94), 8. 9.
“there haunting, resorting, and playing” within section 14 of 33 Hen. This was an appeal by Mr. Gallagher against a conviction by the justices 8, c 9, because there was no evidence of the length of time he had of Durham, for that he, on the 23rd of January last, at the borough of been on the premises nor whether he had been there befors nor of what Stockton-on-Tees at 11.20 p.m., did sell intoxicating liquors at the he was doing there on the occasion when he was arrested. It was further Theatre Royal at an hour when the premises ought to have been closed. contended that although a betting house was declared to be a gaming The facts set out in the special case were these : The appellant was house by section 2 of the Betting Houses Act, yet betting on horse-races manager of the Theatre Royal at Stockton under a licence pursuant to was not a game
an unlawful game
ni within 33 Hen. 8, c. 9, or 6 & 7 Vict. c. 68. On the 11th of October, 1896, the appellant was
unlawful game ” within 2 Geo. 2, c. 28, 8. 9, and that under those granted a theatre excise license under 5 & 6 'Will. 4, to sell intoxicating statutes only players of unlawful games were liable to be treated in the liquors by retail at that theatre. On the night in question the per manner in which the appellant had been treated. formance concluded at the theatre at 10.55, but the appellant kept one of The Court (LINDLEY, M.R., and Chitty, L.J.) dismissed the appeal. the bars open for the cale of liquors until 11.20 pm., at which time two LINDLEY, M. R., said that the object of the Legielature in enacting section police officers entered the theatre by a door at the back, the public 2 of the Betting Houses Act was to put persons found in a betting house entrance being closed-and found between thirty and forty persons in the in the same position as persons found in a gaming housc. Section 11 bar. All the persons in the bar were either persons who were employed gave the magistrate power to issue a warrant for the arrest of persons in the performance or had been bona fide attending the performance as found in a betting house. The form of warrant to be used was in the spectators. The justices convicted the appellant, and fined him a nominal schedule to the Gaming Act, 1847, and followed the words of 33 Hen. 8, penalty of 33. 6d. with costs. The question for the decision of the c. 9, s. 14, directing the person to whom it was addressed to enter the Divisional Court was whether, on these facts, the appellant was guilty of suspected premises and arrest as well the keepers thereof as also the an offence under section 9 of the Licensing Act, 1874. For the respon. persons there haunting, resorting, and playing.' From this concatenadent it was contended that theatres came within the same provisions as tion of sections it was clear that a betting house was to be treated as a ordinary public-houses so far as the sale of intoxicating liquors were common gaming house, and where persons were arrested in it they were concerned. The closing hour was 11 p.m., and any sale of liquor after to be treated as if they had been arrested in a common gaming house. that hour was a contrarention of the Act, and that, therefore, the convic- Any other construction of these sections would give the go-by to the tion in this case ought to stand.
express words of the sections. The Court (WRIGHT and KENNEDY, JJ.) dismiseed the appeal. There Chitty, L.J., concurred.- COUNSEL, Purcell ; Danckwerts. SOLICITORS, was not an absolute exemption from the provisions of the Licensing Acts Pattinson & Brewer ; Wontner f: Son. in favour of theatres. These places, where they had a licence, were placed
(Reported by C. G. WILBRAHAM, Barrister-at-Law.] on the same footing as ordinary public-houses. The justices, therefore, had properly convicted the appellant.—Counsel, Luck ; Simey. SOLICITORS, Hack & Morris, for Thomas $ Malkin, Stockton-on-Tees ; Crump g Sprott, for Archer f Parkin, Stockton-on-Tees.
Re CLARK, Ex parte CLARK. C. A. No, I, 29th Oct.
BANKRUPTCY-JUDGMENT DEBTOR-FOREIGN SUBJECT-SUMMONS TO COMMIT GAMING-BETTING HOUSR-Person Found THEREON-RECOGNIZANCE - JURISDICTION OF COURT TO MAKE RECEIVING ORDER-DEBTORS ACT, 1869
BETTING Houses Act, 1853 (16 & 17 Vict. c. 119), s. 1, 3, 11 ; 33 Hen. (32 & 33 Vict. c. 62), s. 5-BANKRUPTCY Act, 1883 (46 & 47 Vict. c. 52), 8, c. 9, s. 14.
s. 103, SUB-SECTION 5. Tbis was a case stated by a metropolitan police magistrate, the question This was an appeal by the debtor against a receiving order made at in which had reference to the power of magistrates in dealing with persons chambers by Day, J., upon a judgment summons on the following found upon and arrested in a betting house. The Betting Houses Act, grounds : (1) That the appellant was not subject to the jurisdiction of the 1853, provides (section 2) that a house used for the purpose of betting Court of Bankruptcy ; (2) that the judge had no jurisdiction to make the shall be taken and deemed to be a gaming house within the meaning of said order; (3) that the order was made without the appellant having any the Gaming Act, 8 & 9 Vict. c. 109, and section 11 gives justices power by opportunity of giving evidence in answer and opposition to the application warrant to order the arrest of persons keeping the same or who shall be of the judgment creditor; and (4) that no evidence was given before the found thereon. The form of warrant prescribed is the same as that given judge which could justify the making of the receiving order. The facts in the schedule of the Gaming Act, 1847. That form of warrant directs of the case were as follows: The execution creditor, Schulze, had, in May, the person to whom it is addressed to enter the suspected house and to 1897, recovered judgment in this country on a bill of exchange against arrest as well the keepers of the house as also persons “there haunting, the appellant, a Chilian subject. In July, 1897, the debt not having been resorting, and playing.” The latter words were taken from 33 Hen. 8, c. satisfied, the appellant, who was temporarily in this country on business, 9, an Act giving powers to justices and others to deal with houses used was served with a judgment summons asking for a committal. Upon the for unlawful gaming, powers which section 3 of the Gaming Act, 1847, hearing Day, J., who was satisfied that the appellant had means, made a was intended to extend. The former Act prohibits the using and main receiving order against him under section 103, sub-section 5, of the Banktaining of any common house, alley, or place for unlawful games. / ruptcy Act, 1883. That section provides that " Where, under section five
the Debtors Act, 1869, application is made by a judgment creditor to a draft of the proposed Order is, six months before the Order is made, court having bankruptcy jurisdiction for the committal of a judgment debtor, to be sent to the Council of the County to which it is to apply; the court may, if it thinks fit, decline to commit, and in lieu thereof, with and such order shall not be made if within three months after the the consent of the judgment creditor, and on payment by him of the pre- receipt of the draft the County Council shall, at a special meeting at scribed fee, make a receiving order against the debtor. In such case the which two-thirds of the members shall be present, resolve that comjudgment debtor shall be deemed to have committed an act of bankruptcy pulsory registration is not desirable in their County. The first Order at the time the order is made.” From that order the debtor appealed. On is not to affect more than one County. No further Order is to be made his behalf it was contended that, even though an order might have been till the expiration of three years from the making of the first Order, made under section 5 of the Debtors Act, 1869, by which section power is and not then except at the special request, as to any County, of the County given to any court to commit judgment debtors having the means to pay Council, to be expressed by resolution at a meeting at which iwo-thirds of the debt for not more than six weeks or until payment of the sum due, the members shall be present. If the Couccil of the first proposed area nevertheless the learned judge had no jurisdiction to make the order under object to compulsory registration, it can, it appears, be proposed for another section 103 of the Act of 1883, as the conditions precedent contained in area. Every proposed Order has to be laid before both Houses of section 6, sub-section 1 (d) of that Act, and which apply to the making of Parliament within the specified time, and it is to be void if disapproved of a receiving order under section 103, as well as to an order under section by Parliament. Penalties are imposed on unqualified persons who charge 7, had not been complied with. Sub-section 1 (d) provides that “A for preparing documents for the registry. It will be seen that the Act is creditor shall not be entitled to present a bankruptcy petition against a thus very different from all preceding Bills, and compulsion is reduced to 4 debtor unless (a) the debtor is domiciled in England, or, within a year minimum. In fact, the Act may be described as tentative and experimental before the date of the presentation of the petition, has ordinarily resided only, and it will be very easy to alter, amend, or improve it as experience of or had a dwelling-house or place of business in England.", If those its working may suggest. It is a great thing to have got rid (if only, for conditions did not exist a receiving order could not be made under section a time suflicient to enable experience to come in) of the unceasing discussions 7, and it followed that such an order could not be made under section 103. and differences in which we have been for so many years engaged. It is The power to make such an order is confined to the same class of cases as understood that the first experiment will be made in the Administrative an order on a petition under section 6. It was further contended that County of London or part thereof. there was no evidence of means.
THE COURT (A. L. SMITH, RIGBY, and Collins, L.JJ.), without calling upon counsel for the respondent, dismissed the appeal.
INCORPORATED LEEDS LAW SOCIETY. A. L. SMITH, L.J., in giving judgment, expressed his opinion that, as regards means, it was clear that Day, J., was satisfied that the appellant The follɔwing are extracts from the report of the committee :had means to pay the debt, or a part thereof, and that being so, the Members.—The present number of members of the society is 126, and of learned judge had jurisdiction to make a receiving order against him library subscribers - under Rules 3 and 4-nine. Three members have under section 103. It was contended that the appellant did not come resigned duriog the year, and six new members of the society have been within sub-section 5 of that section, upon the ground that a bankruptcy elected. petition could not be presented against him, because a petition could only be presented against a debtor wbo was domiciled in England or who,
County Court Rules.- In the month of February several new County Court within a year before the date of the presentation of the petition, had ordi" rules, proposed by a committee of County Court judges, approved by the full narily resided or had a dwelling-house or place of business in England. committee of judges, and signed by the Lord Chancellor, were issued to come The court had to construe section 103, and, in his opinion, the right con
into force on the 25th of March following. These rules effected serious changes struction was that when the judge has jurisdiction to commit a debtor in the practice of issuing summonses for service out of the district. They reunder section 5 of the Debtors Act, 1869, he has jurisdiction to make a
quired the plaintiff not only to briog himself within Section 74 of the County receiving order against him, under section 103 of the Act of 1883, if he Court Act, 1888, but they added to his statutory obligations the necessity of think fit, in lieu of making a committal order. In his opinion the learned showing that there was a “ balance of convenience” in favour of leave being judge at chambers had evidence before him that the appellant had means given him, and they also require him, wherever the defendant resided more of paying, at any rate something, and therefore he had jurisdiction to than twenty miles from the court to which he was summoned, to deposit in make the receiving order now appealed from.
court a sum sufficient to cover the defendant's travelling expenses and RIGBY and COLLINS, L.JJ., delivered judgments to the same effect. attendance. Your committee considered that these alterations were uncalled Appeal dismissed.--Counsel, Muir Mackenzie ; Reed, Q.C., and Hansell. for, and that they would cause great inconvenience to plaintiffs in the recovery SOLICITORS, Harwood & Stephenson ; F. W. 8 H, Hilbery.
of their just and undisputed debts. They accordingly concurred with the
Associated Provincial Law Societies in representations to the Lord Chancellor (Reported by E. G. STILLWELL, Barrister-at-Law.]
on the probable effect of the rules. In consequence of the criticism from this and other quarters which the new rules provoked, they were suspended, and a'fresh draft modifying the rules objected to was issued in the month of May.
The new rules, although less open to serious objection than the original ones, LAW SOCIETIES.
were by no means satisfactory, and the forms of affidavits, especially, given
in the schedule were unnecessarily long and confusing. Official attention LAW ASSOCIATION.
has been called to these points by addressing a memorandum to the Rule At a meeting of the directors, held at the Hall of the Incorporated Law Committee, before whoin the new rules will come for sanction and approval. Society, on Thursday, the 28th inst., the following being present-Mr. | The new set of rules, issued in draft in May, have not yet been confirmed, Sidney Smith (chairman), and Messrs. O. Burt, S. J. Daw, À. C. Nisbet, and your committee are therefore not in a position to report to what extent R. H. Peacock, J. Vallance, and Arthur Carpenter (secretary)-a sum of the criticism to which they have been subjected has borne fruit. £805 was distributed in grants of relief, and the ordinary general business Land Transfer Bill.— This Bill, in a somewhat modified form, but contain: was transacted.
ing the obnoxious compulsory clauses, was again introduced last Session in
the House of Lords by the Lord Chancellor, and passed through that House SUSSEX LAW SOCIETY.
with little, if any, discussion. Negotiations passing, it is understood,
between the Lord Chancellor and the Incorporated Law Society of the The following are extracted from the secretaries' report :
United Kingdom resulted in that Society consenting not only not to oppose Members - The Society now numbers 62 members, of whom 43 practise but actually to approve the Bill if certain amendments were accepted by the in Brighton and 19 in the country.
Lord Chancellor, and for the same reasons the Associated Provincial Law County Court Rules, 1897.- The Committee has duriog the year had under Societies determined not to oppose the Bill. The compulsory powers, howconsideration the County Court Rules of March, 1897, which it was con ever, were to remain, but their operation was to be limited to some comparasidered imposed in some cases unnecessary obligations and expenses upon tively small area, and then only if the County Council of such area did not plaintiffs, and resolutions were sent to the Rule Committee calling attention object. The position of matters was not considered satisfactory. by the to the matter, and giving statistics of the Brighton County Court in support Committee of this Society, and more especially as a strong suspicion was of the Committee's representations. Attention had previously been called to entertained that the first area to be selected would probably be the the matter in the Brighton Court by Mr. Buckwell, a member of our West Riding, or some other portion of the county of York, and they Society, and representations made by a number of Law Societies in London consequently determined to seek the opinion of the profession of the and the country. The rules bave since been rescinded, and new ones are county through the committees of the various law societies. Nearly under consideration, which, it is hoped, may to some extent remove the every society in Yorkshire responded to the invitation to meet in objections felt.
Leeds and consider the matter, which was very fully and freely discussed. It The Land Transfer Act, 1897.-Solicitors will, no doubt, consider the chief is not necessary to report in detail the various stages of the opposition which event of the legal year to be the passing of the Land Transfer Act, 1897. was determined on at these meetings, and it is, perhaps, sufficient to say that This Act has been passed practically by the unanimous agreement of all those in the result it was determined to seek an amendment of the Bill providing who have for so many years past taken prominent part in the snpport of, or that the first area should be Middlesex ; but ultimately the sub-committee opposition to the different Land Bills which have been introduced by suco appointed by the Yorkshire Law Societies, in consequence of information cessive Governments. The opposition of the Incorporated Law Society and received and what transpired in the House of Commons, were deputed to take the Associated Provincial Law Societies, and also of the country societies such action with regard to the Bill as they thought proper. The fight main. generally, to the last Bill was almost at the last moment withdrawn in view tained by the Yorkshire Law Societies was short but sharp, leading at one of the fact that the Lord Chancellor accepted nearly all the amendments and time to the reasonable expectation that the Bill would not and could not suggestions proposed by Solicitors. The Act comes into operation on the pass into law this Session, but ultimately, after considerable trouble and 1st of January next. Ky it a real representative is established, and registra- negotiation, it passed through the House of Commons and has now been placed tion of title upon sale of land may, by Order in Council, be made com- in the Statute Book in a form which will enable it to have at least a fair trial pulsory in any County, or part of a County, defined in such Order after a without, it is hoped and expected, having any effect in Yorkshire until it day fixed by ihe Order, and such Order may be revoked or varied; but a has been proved to be a success in some other part of the country. It may
be noted, however, that the first area in which the Bill is to receive its trial, INNER TEMPLE.--George Frederick Assinder, Maurice Mills Baker, Harry is not defined by the Statute, and on this point reliance is placed entirely on Barnston, George Arthur Harwin Branson, Herbert Benjamin Cohen, John the promises made on behalf of the Government, the result being that it is Bede Dalley, Nigel George Davidson, Jobn Dove, Thomas Clarke Pilling expected the County of London, exclusive of the City, will be ihe first area Gibbons, Frederic Graham, Hon. Hubert George Lyulph Howard, Harold to which the benefits (f the Bill will be offered. It will be interesting to see John Henry Irish, Herbert Jenner-Fust III., John Felix Kershaw, Walling. if the offer is declined, and, if so, whore such offer will be next made. The ford Mendelson, Samuel Henry Ramsden, Edward Cleland Richardson, remarks of the Chairman of the West Riding County Council, ss recently George Ridehalgh, John Slingsby Roberts, Frank Shackleford, Arthur reported in the local press, are, however, somewhat significant, but in the Stiebel, Richard Trevithick Gilbertstone Tangye, and Beroard Kedington interests of property owners, it is hoped that more attention will be given by Rodwell Wilkinson. the Council to the probable result of the operations and the effect of the MIDDLE Temple.—Lewis Forsyth Allen, Douglass Horace Boggs-Rolfe, measure than probably has been given hitherto. Before leaving this subject, Frederick Reinhardt Cronje, Thomas Holland, Frank Noel Keen, and your committee desire to call attention to the justifiable fears that the measure Samuel Joyce Thomas. is only another instance of the desire on the part of successive Governments to extend the range of officialism at the expense of private labour, based on
Gray's INN.- Cornelis Adriaan Bergsma, William Stanley Varenne the lines of commercial competition, and without any sufficient apparent Alfred Leach, Isardas Cadharom, and Charles Purchas.
Cullerne, William Bede Dalley, Dahyabhai Pitamberdas Derasari, Robert benefit to the persons mostly interested. Resignation of Mr. Marshall.—The Committee report with great regret the
The total number examined was 114, and the number who passed was 52. resignation by Mr. Marsball of the office of Honorary Secretary, which he has of the 62 candidates who failed, 18 were ordered not to be admitted for filled with so much benefit to the Society for a period of over twenty-five years.
examination again until the Easter Examination, 1898, and two until the At an extraordinary meeting of the members, held on Thursday, the 19th of Trinity Examination, 1898. August last, the following resolution on the subject was passed :
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW AND LEGAL HISTORY. That the resiydation hy Mr. Marshall of his position as Hon. Secretary of the Society, be and is hereby accepted, and that the meeting desires to
LINCOLN's Inn.-Shanker Lal Batra, Charles Alan Bennett, William John express acd record its high appreciation of his abilities and services, which Henry Brodrick, William Ernest Hoilams, William Kirk, William George during the long period of about twenty-five years have been placed at the Randles, Charles Harold Smith, and Zau Tha. disposal of, and rendered to, the Leeds Law Society by him, in the capacity INNER TEMPLE.-Ernest Alabaster, Stanley Bean Atkinson, William of Hon. Secretary to the Society, and adds the bope that, though severi ag Edward Colston Baynes, Hubert Ernest Langton Bolton, Angus Campbell, his official connection with, he will continue to assist the work of the Society Francis Joseph Dessaio, Samuel John Forster, Henry Ernest Fowler, James by his valuable counsels as a member.”
Thorniley Fox, Harold Spencer Morris, Francis Robert Sanderson, Henry
MIDDLE TEMPLE.-Mirza Mohammed Zoolcadur Beg, Frederick Henry
Berryman, Jonathan Fulton Carr, Syed Mohammed Cassim, Chaman Lal
Dhingra, Charles Henry Edwards, Tom Ekin, Robert Lyall Guthrie, Harold INCORPORATED LAW SOCIETY.
Frederick King, Erasmus Darwia Parker, Ernest Wrigley Perkins, Philip
Norman Richardson, and John Jackson Wilks.
Gray's INN. – Herbert Campbell Bennitt, Madhu Sudan Bhagat, The following candidates (whose names are in alphabetical order) were Alexander Macneil Cowan, Mohammed Abdul Aziz Khan, Frederick successful at the Preliminary Examination held on the 13th and 14th of Gurdon Palin, Ramchandra Vasudro Paranjpe, Des Raj Sahni, and October, 1897.
Johannes Christoffel Stegmann.
The number examined was 59, and of these 43 passed.
Roman LAW AND CONSTITUTIONAL LAW AND LEGAL HISTORY.
LINCOLN'S INN.-Charles Ernest Rowland Abbott, John Henry Nicholas Bagram, Donald John Makinson, William Owen
Armstrong, James Evans, Joshua Arthur Nunn, and Harold Claughton
INNER Temple.-Kenneth Eldmann Chalmers, Frederick Thomas Henry
Henlé, Gilbert Jordan, Robert Charlton Lane, George Thomas Martin, Bazett, Hugo Campbell Murton-Neale, Douglas William
Charles James North Russell, Aubrey Augustus Smith, and Cecil Willie
MIDDLE TEMPLE.- Robert Malcolm Booth, Kenneth James Greaves, and
Horace Cecil Monro. Churchill, John Abel Vyvyan Olding, Montague Toplady
GRAY's INN.-Joseph Baptista. Cooke, Herbert Edgar
Partridge, Percival Walter Couves, Cyril Chapman
The number examined was 21, and of these 17 passed. One candidate Peacock, Herbert Henry
was postponed until the Easter Examination, 1898. Cox, William Herbert
Pennington, Edward Crawley-Boevey, Chas les Arthur Penny, Bryan de Quetville
ROMAN LAW. Crofton, Henry
Poyser, Charles Langford Cruikshank, Robert Scott
Lincoln's Inn. — Walter Ernest Savory Callender, Sam Sidley Kay, Price, George Meyrick Crump, Alfred
Shurendra Lal Khastgir, Charles James L'Estrange, Cyril Arthur Liddon
Lewis, and Chaturbbai Bhailalbhai Patel.
INNER TEMPLE. - Edward Gustavus Bear, Richard Feetham, Graeme
Harrison, Eugéne Nielen Marais, Guy Harden Guillum Scott, Alexander Foot, Isaac Riddlo, Henry Alfred
Walker, Henry Stafford Webber, and George Bevil Hastings Wheler. Fraser, Dudley Robert Ridgway, Thomas
MIDDLE TEMPLB.-Shaikh Saiduddin Ahmed, Valentine Browne, William Garnett, Harold Gwyer Riley, Pennington
Alexander Francis Balfour Browne, Harold Richard de Carteret, Kanji Gedye, Reginald Edward Lower Robertson, Herbert Ernest
Premji Dodia, Ernest Arthur Ebblywhite, James Fairbairn, Ludwig FreyGibson, Jasper Edward Berkeley Seabroke, Claude
berger, Ewart Scott Grogan, Percy Alfred Harris, Sir John Keane, Owen Gillman, Arthur Charles
Shearman, Herbert Henry Atherton Mosts, William Robert Po tame nussell, and William Stocken. Glenshaw, Ernest Albert Isaacs Shepherd, Leonard
Gray's INN.—Charles William Arnett, Alexander Jabez Balm, George Griffith, George Heaton Sidgwick, Reginald Mears
William Clarke, Horace James Douglav, Thomas Ma kenzie Ledlie, Ruthlal Harding, Lauranca Thomas, George
Brijal Maj Mudar, Anandarai Bapubhai Mazmundar, George Ignatius Hatch, Andrew Dreweatt Thornley, Ernest James
Mendes, Edward Owen, Mehar Chand Pebra, John Henry Frederick Reed, Hodge, John Tumilty, John Spencer
Andrew Baxter Russell, Narain Dass Sethi, Bhai Gurbaksh Singh, and Ingledew, James Wilfred Gordon Wainwright, Arthur
Manilal Umedram Thakore.
The total number examined was 47, and of these 43 passed.
Weekes, Gilbert Terrell
Wood, Francis William Gent
LAW STUDENTS' SOCIETIES.
Yeo, Thomas Farquhar
LAW STUDENTS' DEBATING SOCIETY.–October 26.-Chairman, Mr. Seager
1896, will not work.” Mr. W. M. Woodhouse opened in the affirmative. COUNCIL OF LEGAL EDUCATION.
Mr. McCurdy opened in the negative. The following members also The following were the successful candidates at the recent Michaelmas spoke : Messrs. G. R Reid, Watson, F. Berryman, H. Jones, J. Brennan, Pass Examination, held on October 12, 13, and 14.
ů. H. Richardson, Hamilton Fox, E. A. Bell, Neville Tebbutt. The
motion was carried by fifteen votes. Pass CERTIFICATES. LINCOLN'S INN.-Narayan Kesheo Aloni, James Frederick Clyne, Dewan Mathra Das, Narayon Dass, Alfred Lindsay Densham, Frederick 'Richard Finch, Samuel Emanuel Kaye, Henry Alexander Little, Alfred Loosemore, We understand that the Northern Circuit are to give a congratu latory Arthur Harold Mather, Prem La] Seth, Balwant Singb, James Ronald dinner in honour of Mr. Justice Bigham on Saturday, the 18th of Decem, Walker, and Thomas Williams,
ber, in the Whitehall Rooms, Hotel Metropole.
members of the Bench present and Master Mellor having shaken hands with LEGAL NEWS.
them, the newly-appointed Judges proceeded to their respective Courts.
“Should angels have wings ? ” is (says the Albany Law Journal) a OBITUARY.
question which the New York Supreme Court may be called upon to decide Mr. Carlos COOPER, barrister, died on Tuesday at Norwich. He was
in the suit which Miss Mary E. Tillinghast, a New York artist, has begun called to the bar in 1839, and settled at Norwich. He had a good against John E. McIntosh.
It appears that, in January, 1896, Miss practice at quarter sessions, and obtained the reputation of a sound Tillinghast was commissioned by Mr. McIntosh to furnish him with a and painstaking lawyer. In 1862 he was appointed one of the revising memorial window in memory of Mrs. McIntosh, deceased, the consideration barristers on the Norfolk Circuit, and he discharged the duties of that therefore being the sum of 500 dols. The window, which was to have been office for thirty-four years. In 1865 he was appointed Recorder of Thet placed in St. Mark's Church, Syracuse, depicted, among other things, a trio ford, and was transferred to King's Lynn in 1885. In 1872 he was of angels. One of the angels was without wings, and this Mr. McIntosh is unanimously elected by the corporation of Norwich judge of the City is said to have considered so inartistio, that he refused either to accept the Court.
window or pay the contract price. On the other hand, Miss Tillinghast claims that the design for the window was submitted to and approved by Mr.
McIntosh, and that it is now too late for him to object to the wingless angel. APPOINTMENTS.
In her suit Miss Tillinghast seeks to recover the 500 dols. for the window, The Hon. Sir ROLAND VAUGHAN WILLIAMS has been appointed a Lord 286 dols. for replacing it in the church, and 5,000 dols. for damage done to Justice of the Court of Appeal, in the room of Lord Ludlow, resigned. her professional reputation by the defendant's refusal to accept the picture. Lord Justice Williams was born in 1838, and was educated at Christ Church, Oxford. He was called to the bar in 1864, and became a Queen's Counsel in 1889. In 1890 he was appointed a judge of the Queen's Bench Division.
THE LAND TRANSFER ACT, 1897, AND LAND Mr. ARTHUR Moseley CHANNELL, Q.C., has been appointed one of the
TRANSFER IN AUSTRALIA, Justices of the High Court in the place of Mr. Justice Vaughan Williams, appointed a Lord Justice of Appeal. Mr. Channell is the son of the late The following circular has been issued. Under the above Act, it rests with, Baron Channell. He was educated at Harrow and at Trinity College, the Authorities to select one County in England in which, subject to the Cambridge, and was called to the bar in 1863, and became a Queen's consent of the local County Council, to try for three years the experiment Counsel in 1885.
of compulsory registration of title. The authorities have intimated that Mr. ORMOND DRIMMIE MALCOLM, Q.C. (Attorney-General), has been Rubinstein, read at the recent meeting of the Incorporated Law Society at
they intend to select the County of London. In a paper. by Mr. J. S. appointed Chief Justice of the Bahama Islands.
Sheffield, several serious defects in the new Act are pointed out to support Mr. H. D. GREENB, . Q.C., M.P., has been appointed Arbitra tor in the contention that in view of the magnitude, complexity, and importance disputes under the Housing of the Working Classes Act, 1890.
of the interests involved, the London County Council should not allow the Mr. Thomas Rolls WARRINGTON, Q.C., has been elected a Bencher of Act-admittedly an experimental one-to be first tried in London. the Honourable Society of Lincoln’s-inn, in succession to the late Sir several journals, in which reference is made to the success of the Torrens
An article on “Land Transfer in Australia ” has recently appeared in George Osborne Morgan, Q.C.
Act in the Colonies. The system created by that Act is, however, Mr. Hugh BERTRAM Cox, barrister, has been selected for the post of essentially different from that created by the English Acts. The following Legal Assistant Under-Secretary of the Colonial Office, which will be letter bearing on this point is reprinted from the Estates Gazette of October 30, rendered vacant by the retirement of Sir J. Bramston on the 14th inst. 1897 :
“To the Editor of the Estates Gazette. CHANGES IN PARTNERSHIPS.
“Sir,- In the Estates Gazette of the 9th instant you were good enough to
give prominence to my paper on the Land Transfer Act, 1897, and in your DISSOLUTIONS.
leading article thereon you expressed your concurrence with my contention John CORY MONKHOUSE and John EDMOND Dunstan HORE, Liverpool, that it would be unwise to begin the experiment with the new Act in the solicitors (Hore, Monkhouse, & Hore). Oct. 30. Mr. Monkhouse will County of London. The following week an article appeared in your practise at 5, Commerce-chambers, 15, Lord-street, Liverpool, and Mr. columns entitled “Land Transfer in Australia,' signed J. P.' I cannot Hore will practise at 3, Cobham's-buildings, 53, Lord-street, Liverpool. claim to have any expert knowledge of the Torrens Act, but there are one EDWIN Davies and ANDREWES INGRAM, Swansea, solicitors (Davies &
or two considerations that occur to me which, with your permissicn, the Ingram).. Oct. 30. The business will henceforth be carried on by the subject being a very important one, I would like to draw attention. said Edwin Davies.
[Gazette, Nov. 2.
"1. The Torrens Act is a permissive Act, and it has succeeded because its value has been generally recognised. The Land Transfer Office, estab
lished here in 1862, has, however, been a dismal failure, but notwithstanding GENERAL.
this, the intention now is to compel people to resort to it. There is no The Westminster Gazette says that Lord Justice Williams is distinguished proper analogy between an attractive permissive Act in one country and an for his unconventionality. His departure from the traditional habit of judges experimental compulsory Act in another. to travel in first-class compartments on their railway journeys from one
in 2. The Torrens Act is principally of value the case of lands sold by the circuit town to another once occasioned an amusing mistake at an assize town Crown since 1862 and in other cases where the titles have been of comon the Western Circuit. The High Sheriff was waiting with his retinue to paratively recent creation. Such simple titles, however, have practically no receive him. As the train drew up at the platform a distinguished-looking allowed to be placed under Torrens Act only when their titles are found to be
existence in this country. Your correspondent informs us that 'lands are man stepped out of a first-class carriage. cluded the High Sheriff, who hastened to greet him with the reverence to unchalleogeable,' and that 'the Act provides that on the issue of a certificate which judges are accustomed on circuit. Meanwhile Mr. Justice Vaughan. the ti le of the person named on the certificate is indefeasible. There are no Williams was getting out of a third-class compartment in the rear of the such provisions in the English Acts. The purchaser will have to take such train and devoting his attention to his luggage. The distinguished-looking certificate as the Registrar chooses to give him. I need not here repeat what man, whom, to his utter embarrassment, the High Sheriff had mistaken for I have said in my paper as to the hardship on a purchaser who has paid the the judge, was the late Mr. Bovill, the Clerk of the Circuit.
full value for a property of having a certificate issued to him specifying
that he has a qualified title only. Amongst the calls to the Irish Bar, on Monday, by Lord Ashbourne, was "3. In my paper I dwelt on the temptation that will exist for the (says the Dublia correspondent of the Times), one of exceptional interest - amount of the consideration money to be overstated, especially if the parties namely, that of Sir Alexander Edward Miller, Q.C., of Lincoln's Inn, who act for themselves, and are not restrained by the controlling influence of appeared in a stuff gown, wearing on his left breast the medal of a
solicitors. I have reason to believe that in the Colonies this temptation is Companion of the Order of the Star of India. His presence recalled the amongst certain classes irresistible. Many apparently hold the view that circumstances of the eventful contest for the representation of the University all is faic in love, war, and land sales. One case has come under my of Dublin, in which he came forward as the accredited candidate of th: Con- notice where a person was offered £3,000 for land, provided he agreed to the servative Government in 1875, and was opposed by Mr. Edward Gibson, consideration appeariog as £6,000, and the transaction was completed on that Q.C., the Lord Chancellor, before whom he appeared on Monday seekiog basis. The same land then rapidly changed hands twice, the consideration admission to the Irish Bar. It is the first instance of the kind which has being stated to be first £9,000 and then £12,000,-a bank lending the livst ever occurred. Sir A. Miller has close ties of family and property with the purchaser £8,000 on the security of the land. Needless to say the bank North of Ireland, and was for years an active member of the general synod found itself in the end with the property on hand, now valued at £2,000. of the Church of Ireland. He is a graduate of the University of Dublin, an The failure of the Australian banks is still fresh in the public mind, and it is LL.D., and member of the Senate. He was proposed by the Lord Chief not, perhaps, too much to suggest that the facilities given by the Torrens Baron.
Act for carrying through doubtful transactions similar to the one I have On Tuesday the ceremony of swearing in the newly-appointed judges, mentioned may have contributed to some extent in bringing about the collapse Mr. Justice Darling and Mr. Justice Channell, took place in the Lord that took place. Chief Justice's Court, Mr. Justice Mathew presiding. There was “Many of your readers are no doubt property owners, and they may be considerable attendance of members of the Junior Bar and the public. excused if they hold the view that their interests are seriously threatened by Mr. Justice Darling and Mr. Justice Channell having come into Court in the new Act. If 'J. P.' will favour us with an answer to thy points their full buttomed wigs, the oath of allegiance and the judicial oath was referred to above, as well as those set out in my paper, your readers will, I administered to them by Master Mellor, the Senior Officer of the Crown venture to think, be exceedingly grateful to him.-- * Yours truly, Office, every person in Court standing. The oaths were administered to Mr.
"J. S. RUBINSTEIN, Justice Darling first, he being the senior of the two Judges. All the "5 Raymond Buildings, Gray's Inn, W.C."
MICHABLMAS SITTINGS, 1897.
Williams will be
sitting at Nisi
(Ry. & Canal
Wills, J. GBANTIAM, WILLIAMS, LAWRANCE, WRIGHT, J. COLLINS, J. BBUCE, J. KENNEDY,J. RIDLEY, J. BIGHAM, J.
1897. Circular to Secretaries of Public Companies in the United Kingdom. 2172
Stamps. 97 Inland Rovenue, Somerset House, London, W.C.
June 1, 1897. S1B,-I am directed by the Board of Inland Revenue to bring under your notice the recent decision in the case of Rowell y. The Commissioners of Inland Revenue, which was reported in the Times of April 5 last, and which is of great importance to Public Companies.
The question before the Court was whether a Debenture, falling within the definition of “Marketable Security," and containing an obligation on the issuer to redeem at a sum in excess of the amount advanced, was chargeable, not merely on the face value of the Debenture, but also on the additional amount which by the instrument was termed a premium.
The Court upheld the Board's assessment that duty was chargeable on the larger amount. All Debentures of this character, therefore, in order to be valid and a good delivery, must be stamped with sufficient duty to cover the additional amount secured.
The Board are aware that a large number of Debentures have been issued which are not so stamped, and they have accordingly instructed me to state, whilst notifying the decision of the Court, that they consider it desirable, in the interest of persons who may hold such Debentures, that any Company which may be affected thereby should take an early opportunity of intimating to each Bondholder that his Debenture is not properly stamped, and that he should have the additional duty impressed without delay.
If such Debentures are presented within a reasonable period the duty will be impressed without penalty. It may be useful to mention that the ruling of the Court does not apply where the issuer of a Bond has an option to redeem at a premium before a particular date.-I am, sir, your obedient servant,
T. N. CRAFER.
August 10, 1897. DEAR SIR, -Referring to what passed with the Deputation of the Council of the Incorporated Law Society on July 20, and to Mr. Lake's subsequent communication with Sir Henry Burdett and yourself, I am desired now to say that the Law Society adhere to their request that the Board of lnland Revenue should accept from the Companies the additional duty payable under Rowell's case, on Debentures repayable at a fixed date, at a premium, against a receipt and certificate specifying the Debentures covered by the payment, and that any such Debenture will, on production, be marked duly stamped.
I am also to repeat the request that, under the circumstances, and unless, in any particular case, the Board should be of' opinion that documents have been improperly withheld from stamping, the additional duty now found to be payable may be tendered, and the documents stamped at any time without penalty. This request is urged as a matter of fairness to legal advisers, who may not now be in communication with the clients on whose beha the documents may have been originally stamped.
It would be most convenient if a rule could be made in the direction indicated, which would be of general application in the case of existing deeds, the stamp duties on which may be affected by subsequent decisions or rules.-1 am, dear sir, yours faithfully,
E. W. WILLIAMSON, Secretary. F. C. GORE, Esq., Solicitors' Department, Somerset House, W.C.
Inland Revenue, Somerset House, W.C.
October 16, 1897. SIR,—The Board of Inland Revenue having had under consideration your letter of August 10 last, addressed to their solicitor, I am directed to acquaint you that they are prepared to accede to the proposal of your Society that Companies should be allowed to pay over the additional duty chargeable on Debentures falling within the decision in the case of Roweli y. The Commissioners of Inland Revenue against a receipt specifying the Debentures covered by the payment.
Any such Debenture will, on production, be stamped without penalty.
The Board are unable to give any pledge as to the course to be adopted with regard to Debentures on which the duty has not been tendered in advance, but they will be ready to consider favourably any application in a particular case, in which it can be shown that the failure to present the documents for stamping was not due to negligence on the part of the holder or issuer.
The Board think it would not be desirable to lay down any general rule, as suggested by your Society, for dealing with cases in which existing deeds may be affected by subsequent judical decisions or alterations in practice. I am, sir, your obedient servant,
T. N. CRAFEN, Secretary.
October 26 Nisi Prins Nisi Prius
It is stated that the Lord Chief Justice is gradually recovering from the injury to his knee. He has been able to walk a little, and to take May 31, 1894. The Judges named to sit in Divisional Court will, whenever t becomes
The Business of the Courts will be taken in accordance with the Judges' Resolutions of carriage exercise.
Recenaty, sit at Nid Prius.