Page images

follows (p. 202):— The President has jurisdiction to forbid a conference between the accused and his counsel until the former has been interrogated by the President.

La Giustizia Penale. Rome. March to July, 1897.

These numbers contain interesting reports of criminal cases in the Italian Courts. The jury is very much in evidence; the effect produced by many of the cases on the mind of an English lawyer is that trial by jury in Italy is itself on its trial, and one of the editors takes a very strong view in favour of its abolition.

Judgment of His Honour the Chief Justice in the Case of Brown v. Leyds, Delivered 22nd January, 1897. Pretoria : John Keith.

This is a reprint (revised by Chief Justice Kotzé himself) of the famous judgment deciding that the Grondwet of the South African Republic cannot be altered by a resolution of the Second Volksraad. The judgment will well repay perusal. It raises and disposes of numerous interesting questions as to the conflict of laws with the constitution.

The Harvard Law Review. Cambridge, Mass. March to June, 1897.

The articles which will be found most interesting on this side of the Atlantic will probably be those on “A Movement in English Legal Education " and “The Incidence of Rent," the latter by Mr. T. Cyprian Williams. There are notes of some curious cases, especially one raising the constitutionality of a provision in the charter of Kansas City inflicting a fine of two and a-half dollars on every qualified voter who failed to vote. On a delinquent voter objecting to pay the fine, the matter came before the Courts, and the provision was declared unconstitutional,

The American Law Register and Review. Philadelphia. January to June, 1897

This is a publication somewhat in the nature of The Harvard Law Review, and contains an interesting summary of recent English and American cases grouped in each number under the title “Progress of the Law.” Here, as in the Harvard publication, constitutionality fills a large space. An instance is People v. Warren, a New York case mentioned on p. 188. There it was held that a statute making it a crime for a contractor to employ an alien as a labourer on public works violates the treaty between the United States and Italy, which provides that resident Italians shall enjoy the same rights and privileges as citizens of the United States.

The Law and Privileges relating to the Attorney-General and the Solicitor-General of England, with a History from the Earliest Periods, and a Series of King's Attorneys and Attorney's and Solicitor's General from the Reiyn of Henry III. to the both of Queen Victoria. By James William Norton Kyshe, of Lincoln's Inn, Barrister-atLaw, Registrar of the Supreme Court of Hong Kong. London: Stevens and Haynes. 1897.

The origin, development and incidents of the offices of the two leading law offices of the Crown are known in a dim and fragmentary fashion to most members of the legal profession, though few are aware of the number of decisions there have been upon their privileges and prerogatives. The work of Mr. Kyshe not only imparts instruction on this and other heads, but teems with interest in regard to every matter directly or indirectly concerning these prominent posts.

The first part is historical ; and we learn from it that much doubt and uncertainty exists as to who was the first Attorney-General, and that the office did not become a fixed institution till the reign of Edward IV., though before that there were many Attornati Regis. The first Solicitor-General was appointed in the same reign, in the person of one, Richard Fowler, at a salary of £10 a year. They do not appear to have had seats in the House of Commons till much later. The second portion of the work deals with their privileges, peculiarities, and disadvantages, the last of which appear chiefly to have, in former days, consisted in being brought into unpopularity and odium, through having to be the agents of the Crown in enforcing its exactions upon the nation. Indeed the work is replete with citations from reports of cases in State and other prosecutions; and the coarseness and vituperative nature of the language frequently occurring in the mouth of the Sovereign's legal adviser would astonish us if used nowadays. The last portion of the work deals with the "right of reply," namely, having the last word in criminal prosecutions, which, though for long past firmly established in the Attorney-General personally, has been the subject of conflicting decision as to its extension to the Solicitor-General and ordinary counsel when representing the Crown—though there is little doubt but that at the present day the Solicitor-General has an equal claim to it, yet the tendency of judicial decisions is to narrow it as much as possible. Mr. Kyshe notices that in 1891 it was decided in the Supreme Court of the Straits Settlements that the privilege extends to the Attorney-General of a Crown Colony, though not to the Attorney-General of a County Palatine, the reason doubtless being that the latter does not represent the Crown but the county.

Among other periodicals we notice: The Chicago Legal News ; 7 he Law Book News, of St. Paul, Minn.; The National Corporation Reporter, of Chicago; The Canadian Law Times; The Western Law Times, of Canada; The Madras Law Journal; The Law Times, London; The Law Journal, London ; Bulletin Mensuel de la Société de Législation Comparée ; Annuaire de Législation Française ; Annuaire de Législation Etrangère, Paris; La Revue Générale ; Revue Bibliographique Belge; Case and Comment, Rochester, N.Y.; American Law Review; University Law Review; Canada Law Fournal ; Journal du Droit International Privá et de la Jurisprudence Comparée, Nos. I.-VI. (Paris, 1897).


Administration:(i.) C. D.- Breach of Covenant to Pay MoneyIndemnity-Right of

Administrator to Retain.—A life tenant and a remainderman joined in a mortgage to secure an advance to the former who covenanted to pay all moneys falling due under the mortgage, and to keep the remainderman indemnified. The life tenant died without having paid off any part of the principal. The remainderman took out administration, and was held entitled to retain in respect of the life tenant's breach of covenant.In re Allen; Adcock v. Evans, L.R. [1896]2 Ch. 345 ;

75 L.T. 136. (ii.) C. D.-Deposit by Testator as Security for Sons-Legacy to. Sons

Bankruptcy of SonsAppropriation of Deposit-Claims on Sons' Interest under Witt.--A testator deposited with a bank a sum of money as security for an advance to his sons, and by his will he made a bequest to each son. The sons became bankrupt, indebted to the bank a sum much in excess of the deposit. Held, that the trustees of the will were not entitled to retain the sons' interest under it, to recoup the testator's estate the loss of the deposit with the bank.—Lee v. Binns ; in re Binns,

L.R. (1896] 2 Ch. 584; 75 L.T. 99. (iii.) C. D.- Assets-MortgageEquitable Charge by Sole Executor and

Legatee-Unsatisfied Creditors-Priorities.- If an executor who is also residuary legatee parts by sale or mortgage for valuable consideration with the control of the testator's assets to a person who has no notice of any ground which rendered it improper for the executor so to deal with them, and who, if his title is equitable only, has given the proper notice, this person's purchase or mortgage is valid against any unsatisfied creditor of the testator.Graham v. Drummond,

L.R. [1896] 1 Ch. 968; 74 L.T. 417, (iv.) P. D.-Intestates Estates Act, 1890, s. 1--Court of Probate Act, 1857,

s. 73–-Grant to Executor of Widow who had not taken Administration.The Court, under sect. 73 of the Probate Act, 1857, granted administration to the executor of a widow who died without having administered to her husband's estate, which was of the net value of less than £500.

-In the goods of Bryant, L.R. (1896] P. 159. (v) P. D.-Intestacy of Married Woman-Husband a Bankrupt-Estate

under £30Grant to Official Receiver-Citation and Sureties dispensed with-Bankruptcy Act, 1883, 8. 121. (In the goods of Jane Turner, deceased, see 12 P.D. 18, followed.)—Where the husband of a deceased intestate was an undischarged bankrupt, the Court made a grant of her personal estate to the official receiver, and on account of the smalīness of the estate dispensed with citation of the husband and accepted the administrator's personal bond.-In the goods of Sarah

Jane Conolly, 74 L.T. 461. (vi.) C. A.-Statute Barred Debt Due to Administrator-Right of Retainer

Payment out of Court Claimed.- In the presence of the administrator of the estate of a deceased insolvent who had been liable to the administrator for a debt now statute barred, an order was made carrying over a fund of the deceased to a separate account and directing enquiry for persons beneficially interested. On the death of the administrator his personal representative took out letters of adminis. tration de bonis non to the insolvent estate and claimed to have the fund paid out to her. The Court refused to comply, as the object of


the claim was to acquire a right of retainer which would defeat the purpose of the enquiry directed.-Trevor v. Hutchins, L.R. (1896]

1 Ch. 844; 74 L.T. 470. (i.) P.D.-Probate - Administration with Will Annexed-Foreign Domicil.

Where a testatrix with a French domicil executed under a power of appointment a will in English form the Court granted administration with the will annexed. In the goods of Huber, L.R. (1896] P. 209.


Adulteration:(ii.) Q. B. D. -- Abstraction of Cream from Milk-Disclosure under sect. 9 of

Sale of Food and Drugs Act, 1875.—Milk was sold in a glass on which was engraved, “ Not guaranteed new or pure milk, or with all its

See notice.” The notice stated that every precaution was taken to ensure the excellence of the milk supplied, but that to meet the requirements of the Act, the quality was not guaranteed. Held, that the notice was a " disclosure of the alteration,” and the vendor was not liable for abstraction of any part of the article of food

sold.-Spiers and Pond v. Barrett, L.R. (1896] 2 Q.B. 65 ; 74 L.T. 697. (iii.) Q. B. D.-Place where Offence CommittedJurisdiction of Magistrate

-Sale of Food and Drugs Act, 1875, 88. 6, 20, 27.- Where the sale and delivery and the giving of a warranty in respect of milk all took place outside the limits of jurisdiction of a Metropolitan magistrate, the submission to the public analyst of a sample obtained within the limits will not give jurisdiction to the magistrate to hear the information against a defendant of having given a false warranty with respect to milk sold and delivered by him.- Reg. v. Horace Smith, L.R. (1896] 1 Q.B. 596; 74 L.T. 340.

Animal :(iv.) C. A.--Bite of Dog-Scienter.—In an action for injury from a dog bite,

evidence must shew that the owner of the dog knew that he was disposed to bite mankind ; not merely that the dog had previously bitten sheep or cattle.- Osborne v. Chocqueel, L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 109; 74 L.T. 786.

[ocr errors]

Apportionment: (v.) Ch. D.- Tenint for Life and Remainderman-Sale by Order of Court

Rights of Personal Representative of Life Tenant-Apportionment Act, 1870, ss. 2, 3, 4, 5.-On the death of a person entitled for life to the dividend on stocks, trustees were to pay transfer and assign the stocks to certain beneficiaries. The life tenant died in the middle of a halfyear. In the absence of her representatives, an order of the Court was made for the sale of the stocks. Some dividend for the half-year, in which the tenant for life died, was paid to the trustees before the sale was effected. Some stocks were sold cum dividend. Held, that under sect. 5 of the Act the personal representative of the life tenant was entitled to a proportion

of the dividend which actually came into the hands of the trustees. That as the Act would also have applied to the stocks sold cum dividend if the trustees had transferred them in specie to the beneficiaries, the personal representatives were entitled to stand in a position as good as if this course had been adopted.—Bulkeley v. Stephens, L.R. (1896] 2 Ch. 241; 74 L.T. 409.

Arbitration :(vi.) Q. B. D.-Reference to Three ArbitratorsNot Unanimous.—Where a

dispute is referred to the decision of three arbitrators, an award by two

« PreviousContinue »