« PreviousContinue »
D Ο Μ Ι Ν Ι Ο Ν Ο F Ο Α Ν Α D Α.
ISSUE OF £200,000 STERLING £5 PER CENT. MORTGAGE DEBENTURES
THE ONTARIO INVESTMENT
Messrs. C. Cooper, Hall, & Co. are prepared to receive subscriptions through | lated in the names of the trustees in Government securities of the United Kingdom the National Bank of Scotland (Limited), London, and its branches in Scotland, or of Canada, for £200,000 mortgage debentures of the Ontario Investment Association (part of The debentures constitute the first part of an authorized issue of £100,000 an issue of £400,000), payable 1st July, 1902, and bearing interest at 5 per cent. Series A., which, in the terms of a deed, dated 9th August, 1882, made between per annum, payable by coupons in London half-yearly on the 1st January and 18t the association and the trustees for the debentare holders, are made a first charge July.
upon all the assets and property of the association, including the whole uncalled The subscription price is par, payable as follows:
share capital, amounting to 2,142,212dols. The association is by the deed Deposit on application £6 per £100 debenture.
restrained from issuing any further debentures to rank with those of Series A., Payment on allotment ............ 20
in excess of one-half of the amount of its assets as certified in its published on 11th November, 1882.. 75
accounts, not including in such assets any unpaid share capital.
The subscribed share capital of the association is 2 650,000dols., of which $100
507,788dols. has been paid up, and it has, besides, an existing réserve fund of Subscribers will bave the option of paying in full on allotment under discount 500,000dole. Its business consists in lending on mortgage of real estate, municipal at the rate of 5 per cent. per annum.
debentures, and other solid and recognized securities; the aggregate advanoes of The first coupon for interest at 5 per cent. on the above instalnaents will be pay- | directors are men of high standing in the province, and the shareholders are &
the association being spread over a very large area with an amplo margin. The able 1st January, 1883.
large and influential body. The association has from its formation poid dividends The debentures will be issued (free of charge for stamp duty or commission) for of 8 per cent, per annum in addition to accumulating a reserve fund of 500,000dols., sums of £100 and £500 eacb, and will be exchanged for the bankers' receipts as and by the latest advices from Canada, the shares are quoted on the Canadian Boon after the payment of the last instalment as the debentures are ready, of which Stock Exchanges at 39 per cent. premium. due notice will be given.
Application for the debentures, with a deposit of £5 per £100 debenture, should be They are redeemablo, by purchases in the open market, by a sinking fund of 2 forwarded to Messrs. C. Cooper, Hall, & Co., 46, Lombard-street, London, or the per cent. per annum on the amount issued. If, however, the premium on the National Bank of Sootland (limited), 37, Nicholas-lane, London, or any of its debentures is so high as to make an investment of the sinking fand more to the branches in Scotland, of whom prospectuses and application forms can be advantage of the association than purchasing its own debentures, any of the pay- obtained. ments on account of the sinking fund may be temporarily invested and acoumu- 46, Lombard-street, London, 1st September, 1882.
of PROVIDENT_LIFE OFFICE.
НЕ MORTGAGE COMPANY
60, REGENT STREET, and 14, CORNHILL, LONDON. MANAGER-T. B. SPRAGUE, M.A.
The Rt. Hon. Viscount Sherbrooke (Chairman).
Henry H. Fowler, Esq., M.P. (Vice-Chairman). Accumulated Fund £2,500,000.
Existing Assurances exceed
£6,600,000 The Řt. Hon. Sir Wm. Hart Dyke, Bart., M.P.
2,207,986 Sir Gabriel Goldney, Bart., M.P.
200,077 The Society transacts every description of LIFE IN- Sir Philip Rose, Bart.
Claims Paid exceed.. SURANCB BUSINESS.
James Staats Forbes, Esq.
2,342,000 INSURANCES AGAINST ISSUE are effected at moderate Ralph L. Lopes, Esq. rates of premium.
George Russell, Esq.
During the past year (1881) each main item has shown
improvement upon the preceding year, The attention of Solicitors and others desiring to raise
John Westlake, Esq., Q.C. money on Reversions is directed to this Society's improved BANKERS-London and Westminster Bank (Limited).
1890. 1891. New Premiums
£18,845 £19,908 method of making advances on this class of security, the SOLICITORS-Messrs. Ashurst, Morris, Crisp, & Co.
279,852 290,077 leading feature of which is, that absolute power of re
MANAGER-Mr. Henry Fisher.
2,121,711 2,207,986 demption on fixed terms, whether the life tenant be alive
CHARLES STEVENS, Secretary.
SECRETARY-Mr. C. C. Bowlby. or dead, is reserved to the reversioner for five years or for such other term as may be agreed. In the case of The Securities upon which Advances can be obtained
ATIONAL DISCOUNT COMPANY include Land and Houses of Freehold, Leasehold, and absolute reversions the redemption money is simply the Copyhold Tenure, Improved Ground Rents, Permanent
(LIMITED). accumulated amount of the advance at five per cent. Annuities, Charges under the General or Special Drain
Nominal Capital, £4,250,000. compound interest. age, Building, and Improvement Acts.
Subscribed Capital, £4,233,325. Paid-up Capital, £816,665.
Reserve Fund, £400,000.
Notice is hereby given that the present Rates of Interest LONDON OFFICE–69, KING WILLIAM STREET, E.C. annual instalments extending over an agreed number of
Three and a Half per Cent. per annum at Call. A, MACKAY, Resident Secretary. years.
Three and Three Quarters per Cent at Seven Days' Solicitors-Messrs. BURTON, YEATES, HART, & BURTON,
The Directors are prepared to purchase Ground Rents.
Four per Cent. at Fourteen Days' notice.
WILLIAM HANCOCK, Manager. pany's Offices, 15, Great George-street, Westminster, S.W.
CHARLES H. HUTCHINS, Sub-Manager. LIFE
No. 35, Cornhill, E.C., September 14, 1882. lane, London, W.O.
T. GEORGE'S HOSPITAL MEDICAL The Funds in hand and Capital subscribed amount to up
SCHOOL, HYDE PARK CORNER, W.
The WINTER SESSION will commence on Monday, Chairman-JAMES CUDDON, Esq., Barrister-at-Law,
£151,000 October 2nd, with an Introductory Address by Dr. Herbert Life Premiums
181,000 Watney, at 4 p.m. Deputy-Chairman-C. PEMBERTON, Esq. (Lee & Pember. Interest...
The William Brown £100 and £40 Exhibitions are open tons), Solicitor, 44, Lincoln's-inn-fields.
$2,708,000 to all Perpetual Students. Every description of Fire and Life Insurance business
The two Brackenbury Prizes of £30 each, Sir Charles transacted.
Clarke's Prize, the Thompson Medal, the Treasurer's, Whole World and Unconditional Life Policies granted at YOMMERCIAL UNION ASSURANCE Brodie, Acland, Pollock, Johnson, and General Proficiency & slightly increased rate of Premium.
Prizes are open to all students. Policies of Insurance granted against the contingency
The appointments of House-Physician and House-Surof Issue at moderate rates of Premium.
Capital fully subscribed
geon, of which there are four, tenable each for one year,
Capital paid-up Advances made on Mortgage of Life Interest and Rever
are awarded by competition, and no charge is made by sions, whether absolute or contingent.
Life Funds in Special Trust for Life Policy.
the Governors of the Hospital for board or residence. holders exceed
Clerkships and Dresserships, and all the minor appointProspectus, Copies of the Accounts as deposited with Total Annual Premium Income exceeds 1,050,000
ments, are given without extra fees. the Board of Trade, and every information sent on appli- CHIEF OFFICES : 19 AND 20, CORNHILL, LONDON, E.C. be obtained by personal application between 1 and 3 p.m.,
A prospectus of the School and further information may cation to
FRANK MCGEDY, Actuary and Secretary. WEST END OFFICES: 8, PALL MALL, LONDON, S.W or by letter addressed to the DBAN at the Hospital,
LAWANCE COMPANY. Chien Alice—128, Chancery
NORTHERN ASILI BAANCE COMPANY.
COM NOBRANA.- FIRE, LIFE, MARINES
LONDON, SEPTEMBER 23, 1882.
fees for investigating title.” But then the question arises whether CURRENT TOPICS.
it is intended that the auctioneer's fee shall be a disbursement to be allowed to the solicitor, or whether the solicitor who claims commission for conducting the sale will have to pay the
auctioneer's fee out of his own pocket ? As rule 4 expressly NOTWITHSTANDING THE TRANSFER of causes to the Queen's provides that “the remuneration prescribed by Schedule I. to this Bench Division, which we announce elsewhere, there seems to be Order is not to include
auctioneer's or valuer's charges,” every probability that the Michaelmas list of causes of the Chan- it seems clear that the client will have to pay the auctioneer's fee. cery Division will equal in number the unprecedently heavy list of After the Order has come into operation, therefore, vendors' solicilast Michaelmas, which contained a total of 627 causes.
tors will have to arrange with auctioneers for payment by fee instead of by commission. It will be interesting to see how this
revolution in London practice will be worked out. Will the DOUBTS HAVE BEEN EXPRESSED as to whether the courts in the Council of the Incorporated Law Society enter into negotiations building of the Royal Courts of Justice will be ready for occupa- with the leading London auctioneers, with a view of settling a tion in November. As regards at least ten of the courts there is no uniform scale of fees for offering properties and for valuations, or foundation for these doubts, inasmuch as the fittings are actually will each solicitor have to make his bargain with the auctioneer in place, and a few days would suffice for their completion. As in each case ? regards the remaining courts active progress is being made, and there seems to be no reason why many, if not all of them, should not be ready for use by the commencement of the Michaelmas
“ YOU CANNOT PROPERLY LOOK," observed BRAMWELL, L.J., Sittings.
in Attorney-General v. Great Eastern Railway Company (L. R. 11 Ch. D. at p. 460), “ at the marginal note of an Act of Parlia
ment.' “What authority has the Master of the Rolls” [in Re THE MEASURE which has been in contemplation for some time Venour's Settled Estates (L. R. 2 Ch. D. at p. 255)] “ for saying for the purpose of relieving the heavy lists of the Chancery Divi- that the courts look at the marginal notes ?* asked JAMES, L.J., sion has now been carried into effect, an order having been made in the same case. “I never knew an amendment set down or for the transfer from the Chancery Division to the Queen's Bench discussed upon the marginal note to a clause," added BAGGALLAY, Division of ninety causes "commenced in the Chancery Division, L.J. “ The House of Commons never has anything to do with but not being causes commenced for any of the purposes set forth in the amendment of a marginal note. I nerer knew a marginal the 3rd sub-section of the 36th section of the Judicature Act, 1873, note considered by the House of Commons.” If, therefore, any and thereby specially assigned to the said Division.". It is under- greater authority than that of WILLES, J., in Claydon v. Green stood that the number of causes originally intended to be trans- (L. R. 3 C. P. 522), were wanted to countervail the dictum of the ferred was much greater, but in consequence of the replies Master of the Rolls in Re Venour's Settled Estates, here we have received to a circular sent by the Senior Registrar of the Chancery it in abundance from three judges of the Court of Appeal
. And Division to the solicitor for the plaintiff in each case, many causes it is highly satisfactory that it should be so in connection with have been struck out of the proposed list, owing to briefs having the statutes of the recent session, for the marginal notes to those been delivered or some other good reason having been assigned statutes are more than ordinarily defective, misleading, and bad. for retaining the cause in the Chancery Division.
We referred last week to an instance of the kind in the Conveyancing Act. Faults still worse may be found in the Bills of Sale Act.
Thus, the marginal note to section 7 lays down one kind of law, THE VARIETY OF SUGGESTIONS offered by correspondents as to while the section itself lays down another, The note to section the meaning of rule 11 in Schedule I. of the Remuneration 6 is : “Exception as to certain things.” The note to section 8 Order shows the perplexity which has been occasioned by that leaves out one of the three necessaries to a bill of sale. The provision. Last week the opinion was expressed that the marginal note to the important section 2 of the County Court object of the rule providing that “ the scale for conducting a sale Act, which repeals the limit as to costs and fees, is merely “9 & by auction shall apply only in cases where no commission is paid 10 Vict. c. 95, s. 91, repealed, and enactment in lieu thereof.". by the client to an auctioneer," was to be found in the words In the notes to the Electric Lighting Act the words “ Board of " by the client”; hence, that where the auctioneer's commission Trade” scarcely ever occur, and the note to section 6, “ Regulais stipulated to be paid by the purchaser the rule will not be tions to be inserted in licenses," is misleading. The note to the applicable. This week a correspondent tells us that the true 10th section of the Inferior Courts Judgments Extension Act, explanation is to be found in the word “ commission "; that in “ Act not to apply in certain cases,” is a sample of scores of Manchester and Liverpool an auctioneer is not always paid by a notes in which a little trouble might have sufficed to inform the commission on the sum realized by the sale, but is merely paid a reader of what kind the “certain cases” are. The notes to fee for offering the property for sale, and that the rule is intended sections 8 and 9 of the Married Women's Property Act are to apply to these cases. The same view is supported by other corre- respectively these :—To section 8, “ Investments in joint names of spondents, one of whom, whose large experience gives weight to married women and others.” To section 9, “ As to stock, &c., his statement, tells us that where the auctioneer's opinion as to value standing in the joint names of a married woman and others”. is not desired, a fee of three or five guineas is accepted as sufficient thus making sections 8 and 9 to mean the same thing. As a note payment for offering properties worth from £1,000 to £5,000. to section 16 of the same Act, we have the curious words, “ Act With this evidence before us we are inclined to think that we of wife liable to criminal proceedings.” These are merely samples, have at last arrived at the meaning of the rule. It is intended and it is hardly too much to say that we have scarcely been able that, if the auctioneer is paid by fee instead of by commission, the to discover a single satisfactory marginal note in this statute. vendor's solicitor shall be able to claim commission for conducting the sale. If words are to have any meaning, it would seem that such a fee cannot be held to be "commission” within the terms THE OBSERVATIONS of Lord Justice BRETT in Bradley, Re. of the rule, although we observe that in rule 6 in Schedule I., Part spondent ; Baylis, Appellant (30 W. R. 823; L. R. 8 Q. B. D. I., the purchaser's solicitor's commission is spoken of as “ the above 195) have already caused great perplexity to revising barristers. The Lord Justice in that case, according to the Law Reports, Appeal has already held that section 70 of the former Act has said, “Supposing a man remains in the house and lets off an effect to which we must take the liberty to apply the language several rooms to different persons who are then his lodgers, above used, in Re Hall Dare's Contract (supra, p. 371): a deciand he afterwards lets off all the rest of the rooms, and sion which evidently surprised and probably annoyed some leaves the house and preserves no actual control over it, so eminent persons who had helped to bring it about. We fear that that he is not to go into it, either by his servants or by him- very undesirable consequences might follow from the sections now self, then those persons who were before lodgers have become under consideration ; and they undoubtedly present an opportunity by that fact householders. But suppose during the qualifying for asking some very awkward questions. year one of those lodgers leaves, and the owner thereupon (as Consider the case of the death of the donor of the power : the assuredly he must) resumes the control over that unlet part, words relating to which are placed in italics. Since an act done according to my view of the statutes, immediately by that act of after the death is made good only as in favour of a purchaser, it his those people left in the house who have been householders seems to be the general duty of the attorney to abstain from acting become lodgers again. Therefore, to my mind it will be neces- if he receives notice of the death. The Act does not give him a sary, notwithstanding what we are deciding in the present case, generally valid power, but only a power which is valid for a for revising barristers to see that during the whole qualifying limited purpose. Circumstances can be imagined which would year in these cases the whole house has been occupied by persons give rise to very curious cases of conscience. It is well known under conditions which make them householders, and if during the that an entail cannot be barred by a mere contract. Suppose that year the whole house has not been so occupied, and the owner has a tenant in tail should contract to sell, and having given a power had a control over it, then none of those persons have been of attorney, expressed to be irrevocable for the space of a year, to householders for the qualifying year.” The words we have italicised execute the conveyance, should die within the year and before the seem to leave no doubt as to the meaning of the Lord Justice ; execution : ought the attorney to execute the conveyance, or no? but it is to be observed that they do not occur in the report in the and if, out of friendship to the issue in tail, or from any other WEEKLY REPORTER, which, we believe, represents what was motive, he refused to execute it, could he be compelled to execute actually said by the Lord Justice in delivering his judgment, and it ? the four words certainly constitute rather a slender ground for the It is quite clear that this case was not foreseen by any of the contention that the mere vacating of a room by a tenant in a house eminent and learned persons concerned in the passing of the Act; wholly let out involves the resumption of control by the landlord, for if they had foreseen it, they could hardly, with any propriety, so as to turn the householders into lodgers, especially considering have omitted to say so; and we do not think it to the the observations as to the definition of a lodger in the judg- public advantage that Acts of Parliament should include cases ment of Lord Justice Cotton in the same case. The Revising which were not foreseen by their authors. In this case, Barrister at Plymouth seems, however, to have adopted Lord whatever reply is given to our questions, we find them all unJustice BRETT's view, but the Revising Barrister at Westminster, satisfactory. "If it be replied that the donee ought, under after apparently adopting it, afterwards reversed his own decision, such circumstances, to desist from executing the deed, and even but granted a case. The subject is too important and complicated that the execution under such circumstances would be void, we to be discussed in a few lines, and we propose to return to it here might be disposed to applaud the decision ; but we should lament after, but, whether Lord Justice BRETT's view is right or wrong, that, in order to arrive at this desirable result, resort must be had the course ultimately adopted by the Westminster Barrister is to methods of interpretation with which we have lately been made clearly that which should be recommended to revising barristers. too familiar, and of which we do not approve. If it be replied,
that the attorney might himself elect whether to execute the deed, and that his execution would be valid but could not be com
pelled, we do not think it desirable that the conflicting claims of THE NEW CONVEYANCING ACT.
the purchaser and the issue in tail should depend upon the favour
or caprice of the attorney. And lastly, if any ardent and thoroughII.
going champion should reply, that the attorney ought to execute We come now to examine those sections of the Act—8 and 94 the deed and could be compelled to do so if he refused, and that which seem to us to be open to the most serious objection.
entails ought to be barrable by contract, and, indeed, that they Section 8 enacts that if a power of attorney, given for valu- ought to have no existence—why, without expressing any judg. able consideration, is expressed to be irrevocable, then in favour they ought not to be established as the unforeseen result of an
ment upon the merit of those propositions, we feel quite clear that of a purchaser,
accident. “ (i.) The power shall not be revcked at any time, either by anything done by the donor of the power without the concurrence of the donee of the power,
This is only one out of several cases which might be proposed or by the death, marriage, lunacs, unsoundne-s of mind, or binkruptcy of the to much the same purpose. It is a serious fault in both of the donor of the power; and
Conveyancing Acts, which goes far to obscure their merit (and "(ii.) Any act done at any time by the donee of the power, in pursuance may, therefore, go some way to excuse us, if we have ever seemed of the power
, shall be as valid as if anything done by the donor of the unreasonably to underrate their merit), that they often fail to marriage, Junacy, unsoundoess of mind, or bankruptcy of the donor of the anticipate the existence of anybody so perverse as to apply them power, had not been done or happened; and
to cases which did not occur to their authors. “ (iii.) Neither the donce of the power nor the purchaser shall at any time be prejudicially affected by notice of anything done by the door of the against section 8; with some peculiar to itself, since it is more
Section 9 is, of course, open to all the objections which lie marriage, ludacy, unsoundness of mind, or bankruptcy of the donor of the obviously open to abuse. The fixed time not exceeding a year, power."
during which the power is to be irrevocable, is to be computed from We need not cite section 9 at length, which exactly resembles sec- the date of the instrument. It is scarcely credible that this was tion 8 in its provisions, except that the power of attorney does not intended; yet there seems to be no possibility that the courts will need to be given for valuable consideration, and that the time be able to hold that “ one year from the date” means “ one year during which it may be made irrevocable is restricted to one year. from the execution”; they might just as well take it upon them to
Much modern legislation is distinguished by its feverish solici- say, that “one year” means two years or six months. It follows tude to protect purchasers for valuable consideration ; and this that, though the period of irrevocability is limited to a year, this remark applies very strongly to the Conveyancing Acts. The may be any year whatever. If the courts should assume jurisdicdesire is, in itself, laudable, and it bas always been carried to tion to amend the section in the way suggested, we should esteem a reasonable length to the general satisfaction. But it is one of the result more unfortunate still. those things which admit of being carried too far. There is a The 10th section has, since its original appearance in 1880, substratum of excellent sense in the old motto careat emptor ; gone through as many and great transmutations as Sir John and a mind must be strangely constituted which desires to pro- Cutler's silk stockings. We cannot easily understand the frame tect purchasers in the commission, with their eyes open, of what of mind which could swallow section 65 of the former Act, and is nothing more nor less than a deliberate fraud. The Court of feel scruples over this harmless and even beneficial enactment,
It provides that an executory limitation in defeasance of a fee citor, so that the further charge is not prepared by the same solisimple or term of years, upon default or failure of issue, shall citor who investigated the title on the original mortgage. We become void as soon as any such issue shall attain twenty-one presume that in this case the provision of the last clause of rule years.
If there ever existed any method by which such a 2 (c) will come into operation, and the remuneration will be regulimitation might be barred, there exists none now; and we are lated according to the present system as altered by Schedule II. somewhat inclined to wonder that some such measure was not Part II. of Schedule I. regulates, first of all, the remunerapassed shortly after the fines and Recoveries Act. But it would tion for completed leases and agreements for leases “other still be quite possible, under certain circumstances very easy of than a mining lease or a lease for building purposes or occurrence, to effect the same, or nearly the same, object by other agreement for the same." Building leases reserving rent” methods having indisputable validity.
are dealt with, as we shall see hereafter, in another porWe have already made some mention in our columns of the tion of Part II. It would obviously be difficult or impossible amendments introduced by section 11 into section 65 of the to frame or work a scale which would be just, as between former Act relating to the enlargement of long terms. Some solicitor and client, in the case of mining leases reserving perhaps may regret that Lord Cairns did not see his way to a royalties; and the provision by which the remuneration of the total repeal of that ill-contrived and ill-conceived enactment; or, solicitor in this case is left according to the present system as at all events, that he did not take this opportunity to recast it altered by Schedule II. is the only reasonable one which could entirely. Few clauses have ever been passed which allow so have been adopted. But should not some definition have been much room for improvement, or, indeed, which clamour so loudly given of the terms “mining lease” and “lease for building purfor it. But these are days in which we must be thankful for poses”? Does a “mining lease" in the Order include a grant or small mercies; and the slight amendments which have been licence for mining purposes, or a lease of a brickfield or quarries ? vouchsafed by Lord Cairns are likely to be universally approved. Do “building purposes” include the improving, adding to, or
Section 12 enacts that the right to call upon a mortgagee to repairing of buildings ? transfer, instead of re-conveying, given by section 15 of last year's
The lessor's solicitor's commission for “preparing, settling, and Act, (1) shall be exerciseable by each incumbrancer, or (2) by completing lease and counterpart” of a lease to which this scale the mortgagor, notwithstanding any intermediate incumbrance; applies is “ £7 108. per cent. on the rental,” where the rent does but that their respective“ requisitions” (as it calls them) shall not exceed £100, with a minimum charge of £5; and where the rank in order of priority, the mortgagor coming last. This follows rent exceeds £100 and does not exceed £500, “ £7 10s. in respect the principle of Teevan v. Smith (supra, p. 464), by which it was of the first £100 of rent, and £2 10s. in respect of each subsedecided before the passing of this Act, that a puisne mortgagee, quent £100 of rent”; and where the rent exceeds £500, as a person“ deriving title under the mortgagor," was entitled to
“ £7 10s. in respect of the first £100 of rent, £2 10s. exercise the specified power.
in respect of each £100 of rent up to £500, and £1 Lastly, we observe that the “repeal clause," section 13, intro- in respect of every subsequent £100.” It will be obduces some new words, apparently designed to meet the criticisms served that the words
are omitted after the passed upon the language of section 71 of last year's Act, which £2 10s. prescribed for each subsequent £100, and also after seem, on the whole, to be sufficient for the purpose.
the £1 prescribed for each £100 after £500; and this led a correspondent, whose letter was printed in our last week's issue, to inquire whether it was intended that no more than the £7 10s.
should be given unless the rent actually reached £200; in other THE REMUNERATION ORDER.
words, whether remuneration was to be given in respect of frac
tions of £100 beyond the first £100. Rule 6 in Part II. of IV.
Schedule I., which provides that “fractions of £5 are to be CONTINUING the subject of the remuneration for transactions in reckoned as £5," certainly contemplates remuneration in respect which the same solicitor acts for different parties, the next case of fractions, and although it may possibly be suggested that it which occurs is that where the same solicitor acts for a purchaser has reference only to rent below £100-in which case the scale and mortgagor, and another solicitor acts for the mortgagee. In provides a remuneration of " £7 10s. per cent. on the rental”– this case rule 6 in Schedule I. does not apply, for the conveyance we think that the rule is intended to have a general application, and mortgage are not prepared by the same solicitor. And it and that the words “ per cent.” have been accidentally omitted would appear that the solicitor acting for purchaser and mort after the “ £2 10s.” and “ £1." This is a matter of considerable gagor will be entitled to full commission in both capacities—that importance, upon which the profession ought to have some is to say, on a mortgage for £5,000 he will be entitled to two com- authoritative statement of the meaning of the Order. missions of £45 each.
The remuneration of the lessee's solicitor for perusing draft We now come to the remuneration for transfers of mortgages lease and completing is to be one-half of the amount payable to and further charges, which is governed by rule 10 in Schedule I. the lessor's solicitor. This rule provides that “the above scale as to mortgages is to In considering the question of the sufficiency of this remuneraapply to transfers of mortgages where the title is investigated, tion it should be remembered that, under rule 4, the remunerabut not to transfers where the title was investigated by the same tion is to include copying and parchment. The cost of these will solicitor on the original mortgage or on any previous transfer; and be no inconsiderable item in the case of lease and counterpart. it is not to apply to further charges where the title has been so Moreover, as nothing is said in the Order on the subject, we prepreviously investigated. As to such transfers and further charges sume that the costs of all copies of plans or engrossing plans on the remuneration is to be regulated according to the present the instruments are to be included in the remuneration. We believe system as altered by Schedule II. hereto. But the scale for nego- we are not far wrong in saying that £100 may be taken as about tiating the loan shall be chargeable on such transfers and further the average rental of the leases which a London solicitor has to charges where it is applicable.” As regards transfers the effect prepare. How much of the £7 10s., which the lessor's solicitor of the rule in placing transfers where the title is investi- is to be allowed, will be swallowed up in the expenses we have gated, and has not been previously investigated by the transferee's mentioned, most of our readers will be able to estimate for themsolicitor, on the same footing as mortgages, seems to need no ex- selves. planation. But as regards further charges it is to be ob- It will be observed that rule 2 (6) provides that, “in respect of served that there is only a negative provision that the leases and agreements for leases . completed, the remunerascale is not to apply to them “where the title has tion of the solicitor having the conduct of the business, is to be been 80 previously investigated”—that is to say, where that prescribed in Part II. of Schedule I.” Now, Part II. of it has been “investigated by the same solicitor on the original Schedule I, is headed, “Scale of charges as to leases or agreemortgage or on any previous transfer,” and it is provided ments for leases,” but it only provides for the case of " lessor's that, “ as to such . further charges,” the remuneration is solicitor for preparing, settling, and completing lease and counterto be regulated according to the present system, &c. No express part.” It is perhaps not rery usual nowadays for a solicitor to provision is made for the case of the mortgagee changing his soli- prepare both an agreement for a lease and a subsequent lease of the same property, except in building leases ; but suppose he does prepare an agreement for a lease and a subsequent lease at a rent
CORRESPONDENCE. cf £100, is he to be entitled to £7 10s. for the agreement and £7 10s. for the lease? It can hardly be that the single commis- THE REMUNERATION ORDER.-RULE 1 IN SCHEDULE I. sion of £7 10s. is to cover both the agreement and the lease, for
[To the Editor of the Solicitors' Journal.] by the express words of the scale the £7 10s. is to be payable
Sir,- I bave been abroad during the last few weeks, and have only " for preparing, settling, and completing lease and counterpart." just seen the new Remuneration Order and your criticisms upon it. Here again is a matter on which an authoritative statement as to Rule 11, that “the scale for conducting a sale by auction shall apply the meaning of the Order would be
only in cases where no commission is paid by the client to an auctioneer," The latter part of the scale we are now considering has refer- is, as you remark, somewhat mysterious. There are, however, I venture ence to “charges as to conveyances in fee, or for any other free to suggest, two coustructions that may be put on it. One course would hold estate reserving rent, or building leases reserving rent, or
be to italicise the word "commission,” leaving the solicitor entitled to other long leases not at rack-rent (except mining leases), or agree- fee instead of commission, and another to italicise the words“ by the
the remuneration provided by the scale where the auctioneer received a ments for the same respectively.” In the case of building leases, client,” and treat the rule as intending the solicitor to pay the auctioneer the ground-rent reserved is often so small that it would be absurd out of his own remuneration. to make the remuneration of the solicitor the same as on leases In the course of a somewhat extensive practice during the last twenty at rack-rent, and it is provided that in the case of the above- years, I have very seldom paid a country auctioneer a commission for mentioned conveyances and leases the remuneration of the vendor's selling. I invariably make a bargain that a fee of so many guineas shall or lessor's solicitor for preparing, settling, and completing convey- be accepted for his services, and, in many cases where the auctioneer's ance and duplicate, or lease and counterpart, where the rent does opinion as to value is not desired, a fee of three or five guineas is accepted not exceed £5, shall be £5; where the rent exceeds £5 and does not
as suficient payment for offering properties worth, perhaps, from £1,000
to £5,000. exceed £50, the same payment as on a rent of £5, and also twenty Many country solicitors are also, in effect, land agents, not only per cent. on the excess beyond £5 ; where the rent exceeds £50, managing considerable estates, but trusting to their own acquaintance but does not exceed £150, the same payment as on a rent of £50 with the value of land instead of obtaining valuations by auctioneers or and ten per cent. on the excess beyond £50; and where the rent professcd land valuers. Is it the intention of the framers of the rule to exceeds £150, the same payment as on a rent of £150, and five encourage this practice ? per cent. on the excess beyond £150. And the remuneration of
I throw out these suggestions tentatirely in the hope of eliciting some kind of explanation of this rule.
H. the purchaser's or lessee's solicitor for perusing draft and com
Hereford, September 20. pleting is to be one-half of the amount payable to the vendor's or lessor's solicitor. On a building lease, therefore, at a rent of £50, the lessor's solicitor's commission for preparing, settling, and
[To the Editor of the Solicitors' Journal.] completing lease and counterpart will be £14, and the lessee's Sir,- The correspondent referred to in the first of your "Current solicitor's commission for perusing draft and completing will be Topics.”, to-day has not given the true explanation of Rule 11 in
Schedule I. of the Remuneration Order. $7.
It is a pity that some It is provided that “where a varying rent is payable, the stood arises from the part taken by one of the Council of the Law
Manchester or Liverpool solicitor has not explained what it is underamount of annual rent is to mean the largest amount of annual Society who hails from Liverpool in settling the Order. The explanation rent."
is this :-In Manchester and Liverpool and in other places in the North, If a lease is granted partly in consideration of a premium and and perhaps elsewhere, an auctioneer is not always paid by a commission partly of a rent, vendor's and purchaser's solicitor's commission on the sum realized, as is the case in London. The country auctioneer is on such premium will have to be added to the remuneration in merely paid a fee for offering the property, which he seldom values and respect of the rent (rule 5 in Part II. of Schedule I.).
in most cases is not competent to value. The vendor is advised either by Under rule 2 in Part II. of Schedule I., a solicitor concerned fixes it for himself, and it is understood that the object of the rule is to
his solicitor or by a surveyor (who is not an auctioneer) as to value, or le for both vendor and purchaser (in conveyances at a rent), or for enable the solicitor, in a case where no commission is paid to anyone both lessor and lessee, is to charge the vendor's or lessor's solici- else, to get one for himself for "conducting" the sale. This opens up a tor's charges, and one-half of the purchaser's or lessee's solicitor's subject which clients will have something to say about, and it must be charges. On a lease at a rack-rent of £100, therefore, the solici- admitted that in many respects the Remuneration Order will not be tor acting for both lessor and lessee will be entitled to £9 7s. 60. satisfactory to clients.
A LONDON SOLICITOR. On a building lease, reserving a rent of £50, the solicitor
September 16. acting for both lessor and lessee will be entitled to £17 10s. The additional charges which may be made are (1) vendor's or
[To the Editor of the Solicitors' Journal.? lessor's solicitor's charges for abstract, if furnished, according to
Sir,—I believe that in the North of England a solicitor conducting a the present system as altered by Schedule II. ; (2) £1 1s. extra into the box on the day of sale, for which the auctioneer usually receives
sale of property only employs an auctioneer for the purpose of getting to vendor's or lessor's solicitor in case a mortgagee or mortgagor a fee of about three guineas. joins in the conveyance or lease (where a party other than a The deposit is always paid to the vendor's solicitor. vendor or lessor joins in a conveyance or lease, and is represented It surprises me that London solicitors should continue to pay enormous by a separate solicitor, the charges of such separate solicitor are commissions to auctioneers for little or no work. “to be dealt with under the old system as altered by Schedule I believe a notaire in France always does everything from beginning to 11."]
end without an auctioneer.
My advice to London solicitors is to do everything—advertising, receiving deposit, &c.—and to pay an auctioneer a fee of three guineas tu get into the box wheu necessary.
Solicitor. Mr. Justice Day bas written a letter announcing his intention to prohibit London, E C., September 21. the reporting of private judicial proceedings heard before him in chambers.
Mesere. Jackson & Jackson, the Texas reporters, says the Albany Law THE REMUNERATION ORDER AND THE LAW SOCIETY. Journal, are now and then waggish. Thus, ia Durley v. State, p. 172, they say: "The conviction was for aggravated assault opon a woman who weighed
[To the Editor of the Solicitors' Journal.] 250 pounds, and the penalty was only twenty-five dollars—just ten per cent." Sir, -The new Orders and Rules under the Solicitors' Remuneration
Act were published in your journal on the 19th ult. Members of the The anngal report of the Commissioners of Patents for the year 1881 lias Law Society, like myself, have been daily expecting to receive from that just been issued. It states that the number of applications for letters patent establishment prints of such orders and rules, which have not, however, number of letters patent sealed was 3,948, of which 68 lapsed in consequence that the answer given was that the council did not meet until the of the patentees having neglected to file final specifications in pursuance thereof, leaving 3,880 in force. Of this latter number final specifications 29th inst., wben the question whether the members should be supplied were filed in respect of 3,621, complete specifications being filed in respect of with copies or not would be discussed. The result of this will probably 259. Applicants failed to seal their patents in 1,798 cases, opposition was be that the Michaelmas Sittings will have commenced, and solicitors offered in four cases, and one application stands over through the decease of will be engrossed with other matters, before they are officially informed the applicant. A table is given showing that about 65 per cent of the appli- of the great changes about to be made in their professional charges. Cations for patents from 1852 to 1881 became valid patents.
Comment appears to be needless.