Page images
PDF
EPUB

as

BANKRUPTCY CASES.

extreme care, and would be strongly inclined to the opinion that such

persons had not exceeded their powers ; of course, if the court E.x parte NELSON, Re HOCKADAY-0. A. No. 1, 14th January. thought they had, it would be bound to say so. As to the other point, BANKRUPTCY-BILL OF SALE-VALIDITY-STATEMENT OF CONSIDERATION

it could not be denied that the case was within rule 129, and the only SUBSTITUTION OF New Bill of SALE POR INVALID BILL OF SALB-Bills question was whether the rule was authorized by section 127. Looking at OF SALE Act, 1882, s. 8.

that section in connection with sub-section 2 (d.) of section 104, his lord

ship thought that the rule was within the power. Sub-section 2 (d.) of The question in this case was whether a bill of sale was invalid under section 104 appeared to assume that there would be, from time to time, the Bills of Sale Act of 1882 by reason of the consideration for it not rules in force in relation to appeals, and those rules could only be derived having been “truly set forth” as required by section 8 of the Act. from the power given by section 12 to the Lord Chancellor, with the Section 8 of the Bills of Sale Act, 1878, required that a bill of sale should “set forth” the consideration for it, and section 8 of the Act Bowen, L.J., said that the question was one of the greatest importance.

concurrence of the President of the Board of Trade, to make rules. of 1882 requires that a bill of sale shall “truly set forth" the con It was said that the rule was invalid because it imposed on the right of sideration for it. In the present case a bill of sale had been given by appeal a restriction not to be found in the Act, and that it was not the grantor to the grantee as security for money, and it was expressed to within the scope of the authority to make rules given by section 127... It be made in consideration of £100 paid in 1882 and of £120 “now paid" was urged that the rules might properly impose on an appellant a condition by the grantee to the grantor. By this bill of sale the grantor assigned with which it would be in his own power to comply, but that it would be the goods to the grantee "as beneficial owner.” On the 17th of April, going beyond the authority to impose a condition with which it would be 1886, the Court of Appeal, in Ex parte Stanford (17 Q. B. D. 259, 30 impossible for him to comply except with the consent of another person SOLICITORS' JOURNAL, 418), decided that the use of the words, beneficial owner," rendered a bill of sale void under the Act of 1882, and, (d.) of section 104 went beyond the ordinary authority to make rules

over whom he had no control. In his lordship’s opinion sub-section 2 in consequence of this decision, the grantee, on the 26th of April, 1886, regulating the exercise of the right of appeal, and authorized the making gave the grantor a new bill of sale in substitution for that of October, of rules which would in some sense touch the right of appeal itself. 1885. The new bill of sale was expressed to be made in consideration of Otherwise sub-section 2 (d.) of section 104 would not have been required the £220 “now paid " by the grantee to the grantor, but no money at all, for the ordinary power of regulation was given by section 127. It actually passed on its execution. The trustee in the bankruptcy of the could not be supposed that sub-section 2 (d.) of section 104 was merely grantor sought to set the bill of sale aside on the ground that the con- superfluous. Its language was not very felicitous ; but, looking at the sideration was not truly stated in it, and it was urged that, even if, under whole scope of the Act, and at the fact that otherwise sub-section 2 (d.) the Act of 1878, the statement would have been held sufficient, on the would be superfluous, his lordship, thought that it gave power to make a authority of Credit Co. v. Potts (6 Q. B. D. 295), the insertion in section 8 rule saying within whát limit the right of appeal should be confined. His of the Act of 1882 of the word “truly" made a difference, and that lordship would express no opinion about the other point beyond what Credit Co. v. Potts did not apply.

the Master of the Rolls had said. Fry, L.J., concurred, basing his THE COURT OF APPEAL (Lord ESHER, M.R., and Bowen and Fry, L.JJ.) decision entirely on sub-section 2 (d.) of section 104, which he could not held that the addition of the word “truly " made no difference, and think was a mere repetition of the power conferred by section 127, but that the case was undistinguishable from Credit Co. v. Potts. The busi, must give it a larger force. He thought it enabled the Lord Chancellor pess effect of the transaction was the same as if the £220 had been repaid to impose a fetter on the right of appeal by imposing a limit of amount. by the grantor to the grantee, and re-advanced by him to the grantor on -COUNSEL, Edward Clayton ; H. T. Eve. SOLICITORS, Thomson f Ward; the execution of the new bill of sale, and, therefore, on the authority of J. J. Chapman. that case, the consideration was “truly stated."-COUNSEL, Aspland, Q.C.; Gozens-Hardy, Q O., and T. Ribton. SOLICITORS, Spyer $ Son; W. A. Willoughby.

CASES AFFECTING SOLICITORS. Ex parte FOREMAN, Re HANN-C. A. No. 1, 17th January.

HESTER v. HESTER-C. A. No. 2, 19th January. BANKRUPTCY-APPEAL-LIMITATION OF Right-APPBAL FOR SUM UNDER SOLICITOR-Costs-ELECTION TO BE PAID UNDER OLD SYSTEM" Before

£50-LEAVE OF COURT-VALIDITY Or Rule-BANKRUPTCY Act, 1883, UNDERTAKING ANY BUSINESS "-SOLICITOR COMMENCING BUSINESS UNDER 8. 104, SUB-SBCTION 2 (d.); 8. 127-BANKRUPTCY RULES, 1886, R. 129. IMPLIED GENERAL RETAINER-SOLICITORS' REMUNERATION ORDER OF In this case a question arose as to the validity of rule 129 of the Bank.

August, 1882, RR. 2, 6. ruptcy Rules, 1886 (which corresponds to rule 111 of the Bankruptcy The question in this case was whether solicitors had, before “under. Rules, 1883), and which limits the right of appeal in certain cases. Rule taking " the business connected with the sale of some property, declared 129 provides, by sub-section 2, that, except by leave of the court, no their election, under rule 6 of the Remuneration Order, that their remunera. appeal to the Court of Appeal shall be brought from any order relating to tion should be according to the old sysiem, as altered by schedule II. to property when it is apparent from the proceedings that the money or the order. The action was brought to administer the trusts of a marriage money's worth involved does not exceed £50." Section 104 of the Act settlement. Part of the property comprised in the settlement was a lease. provides, by sub-section 2 (d), that "no appeal shall be entertained hold house which was subject to two mortgages. It was desired to sell except in conformity with such general rules as may for the time being be the house, but there was a difficulty in doing so because the trusteos of in force in relation to the appeal." By section 127: (1) The Lord the settlement had been removed in the action, and no trustees had Chancellor may, from time to time, with the concurrence of the President been appointed in their place. At the request of the solicitor of the of the Board of Trade, make, revoke, and alter general rules for carrying plaintiffs in the action, made by a letter written to the solicitors who into effect the objects of the Act; (2) all general rules made under the usually acted for the first mortgagees (who were the trustees of another foregoing provisions of this section shall be laid before Parliament settlement), the first mortgagces consented to exercise their power of sale, within three weeks after they are made, if Parliament is then sitting, and an order was made by the court in the action, in June, 1884, authorizand, if Parliament is not then sitting, within three weeks after the ing the first mortgagees to sell the house for £800. The proposed pur. beginning of the then next session of Parliament, and shall be judicially chaser, however, refused to proceed with the purchase, and ultimately noticed, and shall have effect as if enacted by this Act; (3) such general another person was found who was willing to purchase the house for rules as may be required for purposes of this Act may be made at any 6775, and the court made another order sanctioning this sale. Some time time after the passing of this Act; (4) provided always that the said in May, 1885, a draft contract for this sale was sent to the solicitors of the general rules so made, revoked, or altered shall not extend the jurisdiction first mortgagees, and on the 4th of June, 1885, they wrote to the plain, of the court; (5) after the commencement of this Act no general rule tiffs' solicitors telling them that the purchaser's solicitors had returned under the provisions of this section shall come into operation until the the draft contract approved, "subject to certain alterations which expiration of one month after the same has been made and issued." An they have made therein, the principal one being that they have appeal from a county court, in a case of alleged fraudulent preference in struck out a clause which we inserted, that, although the abstract which the value of the property involved was under £50, had been pre should commence with the lease of the 6th of August, 1862, sented to a divisional court, and the court (Cave and Wils, JJ.) had the vendors should not be bound, except at the purchaser's expense, to dismissed the appeal on the ground that the county court judge had not supply any abstract of title between such lease and the assignment to Mr. given leave to appeal. It was urged that rule 129 was not justified by Hester. This we did because we find that the abstract with the title the power to make rules given by section 127; that it purported to take deeds, and which was delivered on Mr. Hester's mortgage, occupies fiftyaway in certain cases the right of appeal given by section 104 (2) "at seven brief sheets, and if to this is added-say three sheets—for the the instance of any persons aggrieved”, that it did not, therefore, abstract of the mortgage and the transfer to the present trustees, the mere carry into effect the objects of the Act” ; and that it was void as being copying would come, roughly, to £10, leaving, if the charges are made

It On the other hand, it was contended that sub-section 2 (d.) of according to the scale, only £2 to cover the costs of the present sale. section 104, taken in connection with section 127, justified the making is clear that we cannot undertake to act as vendors' solicitors upon these of the rule, and that, at any rate, under section 127, the rule, even if it was terms, and, as under the 6th of the General Rules (in pursuance of the in excess of the power, acquired statutory validity after it had been made Solicitors' 'Remuneration Act, 1881; we are at liberty to elect that our and issued.

remuneration shall be according to the system existing at the date of T2B COURT OF APPEAL (Lord Esher, M. R., and BOWEN and Fry, L.JJ.) such orders as altered by schedule II., upon notice communicated to our held that the rule was valid. Lord ESHER,' M.R., said that it was not client before undertaking the business, we wish to inquire whether, as necessary to decide whether the rule, even if it were beyond the power, representing the persons entitled to the equity of redemption, you will became, when it was once issved, equivalent to an Act of Parliament, agree to our costs, as vendor's solicitors, being paid as if we had given

On the 11th of June the plaintiffs' solicitor replied: "I that, if it should ever become necessary to decide the point, any court do not see anything objectionable in your election to charge on the old before which it came for decision must look at rules made by such a scale as altered by schedule II.” He added that he would inquire whether great judicial officer and approved by such a great officer of State, with the second mortgagees had any objection, and on the next day he wrote

[ocr errors]

ultrà rires.

that the second mortgagees did not appear to have any objection. On the 13th of June the solicitors of the first mortgagees wrote to one of

LAW SOCIETIES, their own clients, telling them that the proposed purchaser had instructed his solicitors that he would give £775 for the house, and adding: “In.

CARDIFF INCORPORATED LAW SOCIETY. closed I send you, for signature, as one of the vendors, the form of agreement which has been prepared, and which please sign and return to

The first annual meeting of this society was held on the 13th inst., me, that I may obtain the signatures of your co-trustees." In the same when the president (Mr. Waldron) delivered the following address : – It letter the writer said: "I may mention, for the information of yourself has occurred to me that, in the address which I am about to deliver as and your co-trustees, that my firm elects that our remuneration should part of my obligations towards you in the position of president of our be according to the system existing previously to the Act as altered by society, it may interest you if, in the first place, I briefly recall, in a rereason for so doing. Before this letter was written the solicitors had not joined it, with some of the reforms which have taken place in the last received any express instructions from the first mortgagees to act for thirty-five years during which I have been in practice, and the prospects them in the particular matter of the proposed sale, but they had acted which lie before us in the future. When I was first articled office hours on the implied authority derived from their general retainer. The first commenced at 9 a.m., and (with an interval of an hour for dinner in the mortgagees afterwards assented to and adopted what had been done, and middle of the day and half an hour for tea between fire and six p.m.) the sale was carried out. of the sale, under an order in the action which had directed that these terminated at eight p.m. The copying press (if invented) was not in taxed costs should be retained out of the proceeds of sale, the taxing general use, and all letters were copied by hand in a letter book. The

as beneficial owner master allowed only the scale fee, amounting to £12, though the cost of conveyances which were usual in those days, and legal documents were

si had not then shortened the voluminous the abstract alope amounted to £12 10s. Kay, J., affirmed his decision, full of tedious reiteration, as some of us may remember in the wordy on the ground that the solicitors had “ undertaken” the business before drafts of wills, leases, conveyances, settlements, pleadings in civil they declared their election under rule 6. But he was of opinion that

a ctions, and, indeed, in all legal documents. This, of necessity, the notice of election was given to the right persons, and that it would, made more work for copying clerks and lengthened office hours. I digress if otherwise valid, have bound the second mortgagees. Neither the

for a moment to observe that it would be curious to ascertain how many second mortgagees nor the mortgages appeared to oppose the solicitors' copying clerks were thrown out of employment by the introduction of the The Court of Appeal (COTTON, LINDLEY, and Lopes, L.JJ.) affirmed words “ as beneficial owner." Previous to the passing of the Act for the

more easy recovery of Small Debts, in 1646,” all actions for sums above 408. the decision. COTTON, L.J., said that the question was whether, before

were brought in the superior courts, while the lesser amounts were rethe letter of the 13th of June, the solicitors had undertaken” the business in respect of which they were seeking to charge their clients coverable in the old county courts and some local courts of limited jurisdiction.

Within four years of the passing of the Act of 1886 the jurisdiction of the The court had already decided, in Re Allen (ante, p. 185), that the Act of that year was extended to the recovery of debts not exceeding £50, “ business” meant any business which would be covered by the scale fee and this was followed by conferring on the new county courts a limited -i.e., any basin esso connected with” the particular business in respect of which the scale fee was prescribed. In the present case the solicitors had jurisdiction in equity, in suits by creditors, legatees, devisees, and next of clearly before that date acted in matters which would be covered by the kin, for the execution of trusts, for foreclosure, or redemption, specific, scale fee. But it was urged that they had not before then been instructed and admiralty When I came to Cardiff in the year 1852 there were only by the clients to act for them in the matter, or undertaken by any com nineteen solicitors here, with a population of something under nineteen munication with them to act for them. Whatever might be the case if a thousand. There are now, I believe, about one hundred solicitors, and solicitor commenced to act for a complete stranger to him before communicating with him, the colicitors in the present case had generally acted ratio is about one to every thousand. Of the nineteen solicitors who

the population one hundred thousand. So that it would appear that the for the first mortgagees, and though his lordship did not forget the remark of James, L.J., that a man could not be said to keep a solicitor, practice proceedings in bankruptcy (in the larger failures) were conducted

were here on my arrival I regret to say only two remain. In my earlier yet, in such a case as the present, a solicitor was considered as having a general authority to do what was necessary for his client, though, of of South Wales and Monmouthshire. Imprisonment for debt had not

in the bankruptcy court at Bristol, which had jurisdiction over the whole course, he had no power to bind the client by any contract without his then been abolished, and the lesser defaulters, after a probation in the consent. The solicitors, acting as solicitors for the first mortgagees, debtors' ward of the county jail, were whitewashed in the old insolvent received the draft contract for sale, and afterwards communicated with court for small debtors. The course of business in the Bristol court in the their clients. What they had done was done on the assumption that they more important failures was usually as follows:-A debtor unable to meet had an implied authority to act for them, and the clients did not repudiate his engagements executed a deed of assignment for the benefit of this authority; The solicitors must be considered as having under creditors and placed his affair in the hands of an accountant. If the taken” the business, not on the 13th of June, but at the earlier accountant did not succeed in inducing the creditors to concur in the deed, date they transacted business in the matter under the implied

a hostile creditor made it an act of bankruptcy and presented a petition. authority, which was afterwards ratified by the clients. The election The solicitor who attested the execution of the deed was summoned to was, therefore, too late, and the case was governed by Re Allen. Bristol to produce and prove it, and with some other formal evidence the It was suggested that there had been such an alteration in the terms of the contract for sale that the solicitors could not be considered as having commenced a struggle for proofs and proxies to obtain the choice of

estate of the debtor was taken possession of by the official assignee. Then undertaken the same business in the first instance as that which they creditors' assignee, with whom the administration of the estate then afterwards carried out. That might be so if a contract was altered so as to relate to a different property, but in the present case the altered con- public examination were a safeguard against fraud and reckless trading,

remained. It was a clumsy and expensive process, but the terrors of the altered, and it could not be said that the solicitors did not undertake the realized and divided among the creditors as they are now by the Board of same business. It was also suggested that, even if the solicitors had no Trade. In the times I am speaking of the proceedings in the Court of right to elect, the clients were willing to agree that they should be Chancery were a scandal to the country. A suit relating to a question remunerated under schedule II. But there was no evidence of this before between parties, which might be determined by a Vice-Chancellor in a the taxing master, and the point was not raised in the objections before short trial, was usually postponed from term to term and might take years him, and, therefore, by section 42 of rule 27 of order 65 of the R. S. C., 1883, the court was precluded from entertaining the point. But, even if best test of truth and fact, and the whole proceeding by bill and answer

to settle. The taking of evidence by affidavit, then in vogue, was not the it could do so, it would be a serious question whether, when the solicitors and the subsequent proceedings were heartbreaking to the litigants but here had lost the right to elect under rule 6, their clients could enter into an agreement with them to the prejudice of the second mortgagees. LINDLEY, biennial "bills of costs. The country solicitor had to wait a long L.J.s agreed that the solicitors commenced the business before they had time for taxation and payment of his costs, and the result been specially requested by the clients to do so, and this distinguished the case from Re Allen. But they undertook the business on the faith of their advanced which he had to bestow

rarely recompensed him for the labour, time, and capital general retainer by the clients, who afterwards ratified what they had ber a suit for an account in which I was concerned for a trusteese

and expend.

I was not undertaken" when it was first begun. It would not be right to say property-the subject of the suit? There were over 800 vouchers, all set was previously an actual contract in relation to it between the solicitor out on each. The majority of us are old enough to remeruber the old prea that business could in no case be undertaken by a solicitor unless there which had to be made exhibits to affidavits, and the title of the suit net and the client. LOPES, L.J., concurred. The Court, in the course of the notice of election was given to the right persons so as to bind the devices of pleaders up to the joinder of issue and notice of trial, buena the argument, expressed their concurrence in the view of Kay, J., that ceedings in an action of law. The declarations, pleas, rejoinders, surre: second mortgagees. Counsel, Ingle Joyce. SOLICITORS, R. Smith & Wilmer. then there might be a plea of puis darrien continuance.

curious instance of the cffect of the last plea. It was in an action by a wine merchant against the committee of a club for wine supplied to the club. It was necessary that the wine merchant should be able to prove

the order for the goods, and for this purpose he proposed to call the me for The Prince of Wales has accepted the invitation of the Treasurer (Lord be defendant to be called as a witness, and the objection was taken. The "Grand day” of Hilary Term, at that Inn next week. The invitation was plaintiff to the member which was handed up to the judge, I believeje sent to the Prince of Wales in his capacity as Treasurer of the Middle was Lord Denman, Temple.

defendants, asked to see the release, and at once admitted its validity, but

remem

[graphic]

when they elected me as your first president, an honour which I owe for a period of two years; and to Arthur Llewelyn Davies, Esq., of the more to the doubtful advantage of seniority than to any merit of my Inner Temple, a studentship in jurisprudence and Roman law of one own.

hundred guineas, for one year,

The council have also awarded to the following students certificates that The following are extracts from the report of the committee :

they have satisfactorily passed a public examination :-William Lawrence Members.—The society consists now of ninety enrolled members, all of Bradbury, Evan Edwin Brook, Charles Ernest Chambers, Ramdas whom are practising in Cardiff and its immediate neighbourhood; but it Chubildas, George Benson Clough, John Ratcliffe Cousins, Felix Reginald cannot be too widely known that all solicitors are eligible as members who Dias, John Hugh Armstrong Elliot, Frederick Feeney, Henry Newland appear in the Law List for this town and within a radius of twelve miles Field, Hugh Fort, Walter Grindley, William Tudor Howell, Herbert Levi from the borough. Your committe desire to impress on the members Jacobs, Reginald Heber Jones, Andrew Cassels Kay, Edmund Lyon Keates, strength, and the efforts which it makes to carry out in their integrity, Mac Munn, Thomas Miler Maguire, Percy Copeland Morris, Reginald generally that the society's real power for good lies in its numerical Henry Joseph Knowles, William Andrew Lang. Gerald Champion Lewis,

William Hessel Linsley, Frederick Lodge, Edward Alexander Sinclair the objects for which the society was formed.

Matters before the committee. - Your committe have had before them the James Neville Neville, Joseph Gerald Pease, James Aiken Pixley, Frank following Bills-viz. :-"A Bill to abolish the landlord's right of distress for Rhodes, James Roberts, Arthur Godfrey Roby, David Emile Seligman, rent of agricultural holdings in England, and his right of priority over other Joseph Shaw, William Staunton Sherrington, Charles Edward Seth Smith, creditors of the tenant in England"; "The County Courts Consolidation John Frederic Matthias Harris Stone, William Paul Studholme, Samuel Bill,”: “The Compulsory Purchase' of Land Compensation Bill"; and Wadsworth, John Harrison Wagner, Herbert George Ward, 'Pridham " The Barristers' Fees Bill, 1886.” All these Bills have had due considera- Henry Wippell, Robert Henry Walter Woodward, and John Arthur tion at the hands of your committee, but in consequence of the broken Penfold Wyatt, of the Inner Temple ; John Scott Abernethy, Ralph nature of the last session of Parliament none of these Bills were proceeded Sillery Benson, Harold Catmur Brushfield, James Curran, Patrick Dargan, with. It is, however, believed these and other kindred subjects will be

Hubert Sydney George Barrow Doo, Robert James Drake, Henry Savage dealt with by Parliament in the coming session, when such matters will Sharp Elwin, Edward Claudius Scotney George, Arthur Volkner Grace, have the careful consideration of your committee. Variou s other matters Clarence Adolphus Hamlyn, Heber Leonidas Hart, Duncan Macrae have been submitted to your committee by the Incorporat ed Law Society Hutson, Alfred Kalisch, Krishna Singh Kapur, John Knowles, Moung of the United Kingdom, and have had their due attention. In particular Kyaw, Roshan Lal, Henry Montague Laurie, Edmund Prior Leresche, your committee were asked to assist that society with suggestions as to a Pereira, Robert Garraway Rice, Matthew Adkins Rundell, Joseph Engene

Charles Major, Sylvain Mayer, Robert Ernest Moore, James Cecil Walter digest of cases under the Solicitors' Remuneration Act, 1881, committee take this opportunity of inviting members generally to submit Serret, James Todd, William Wallace, John Wilkins, John Bruce to them any points under that Act to which attention should be called.

Williamson, and William Basil Worsfold, of the Middle Temple ; Robert
Chignell, Geoffrey Drage, Percy Holland, Henry Stratton Izard, Arthur

Jackson, George Herbert Peake, William Awdry Peck, Joseph Reade,
LEEDS INCORPORATED LAW SOCIETY.

John Sarbah, Alexander Faulkner Shand, John Southall, Edward Talbot,

Arthur Theodore Thring, and Edward Granville Waddilove, of Lincoln'sThe following are extracts from the roport of the committee presented inn; and John Henry Anderson, of Gray's-inn, Esqs. to the annual general meeting held on the 15th ult. :

The following students passed a satisfactory examination in Roman Members.—The present number of members of the society is aînety, and law:-Alfred Williams Adams-Williams, William Denby Arton, David of the subscribers to the library, eight. It is satisfactory to note that Hugh Watson Askew, Thomas William Barton, Alfred Sidney Newnham the number of members of the society increases, though not in proportion Davis, Philip Evered, George Arthur Greene, Hugh McLeod Innes, Louis to the solicitors practising in the town.

William Jelf-Petit, Reginald McKenna, Walter Halliday Moresby, John Legislation. The committee have no special subject of general pro- James O'Flynn, Howell John James Price, Joseph Child Priestley, Ernest fessional interest to report upon. The year has been singularly barren Barkley Raikes, David Watson Rannie, Joseph Sladen, Hugh Richard in legislation, and the General Election occupied so large amount of Soulsby, Charles Frederick Denne Sperling, and Francis William Sutton time and attention in the middle of the year, that most legislative projects Stewart, of the Inner Temple; Ernest 'Frederick Abbott, Nowrojee have been necessarily postponed. We are promised a new Bill for registra- Dadabhoy Allbless, Nogendro Nath Banerjee, Francis Thomas Bradshaw, tion of titles for the coming session, which will require and receive the Patrick George Carvill, Chan Toon, Harry Broughton Edge, Richard careful attention of your committee. 'One or two statutes may be noticed : Cunningham Ewing, James Blades Gooding, Robert Donald Grant, The Marriages Validity Act, 1886 (49 & 50 Vict. c. 3), removes doubts Thomas Wright Haddon, Herbert Welch Halton, Henry Francis Herford, which have been entertained as to the validity of certain marriages Charles Alexander Howell, Angus Scott Lewis, Henry Thomas Lethbridge solemnized in England, one of the parties to such marriage being resident Marshall, David Trevor Roberts, Herman Robinson, John Robert in Scotland. The Marriage Act, 1886 (49 & 50 Vict. c. 14), legalizes mar- Roxburgh, Epaminondas Emile Sauzier, Pandit Srilal, George Allen riages solemnized after the passing of the Act—the 10th of May, 1886– Upward, and Hiram Parkes Wilkinson, of the Middle Temple Herman between eight in the forenoon and three in the afternoon. The Guardian- Kossuth Burney, Allan Napier Macnab Daly, Harrop. William Abel ship of Infants Act, 1886 (49 & 50 Vict. c. 27), This Act gives the Harrison, St. George Haysmither Jackson, Richard Horatio Couch Kent, guardianship of infants, whose fathers may have died after the 25th of and William Harcourt Moira Maclean, of Lincoln's-inn; and James June, 1886, to the mothers, and enables the mother to appoint guardians William Ross Brown, John Kyrle Frederick Cleave, and Samuel Joseph by deed or will. The Act makes several other a. erations in the law of Goldston, of Gray's-inn, Esqs. guardianship which cannot be shortly summarized, but the following are to be specially noted as of importance to country practitioners : In the event of guardians being unable to agree upon a question affecting

LAW STUDENTS' DEBATING SOCIETY. the welfare of an infant, they may apply to the court for its direction, section 3 (3). “The court may, on the application of the mother, make lane, on Tuesday, the 18th inst., Mr. J. Dawson Crawford in the chair,

At the meeting of the society, held at the Law Institution, Chancery. an order for custody of the infant," section 5. In England "the the motion upon the agenda paper for discussion was “That the case of

the High Court of Justice" " the county court of Montague v. Sandwich (reported 32 Ch. D. 525) was wrongly decided,” the district in which the respondent or respondents, or any of them, The debate was opened in the affirmative by Mr. Thomas Douglas, who reside."

was followed by Messrs. W. Mackenzie, H. Mossop, and Adam Fox, and

opposed by Messrs. W. Y. Woolcombe, G. Riddeli, Wilmot E. Elmslie SOLICITORS' BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION.

T. H. Bower, R. Hole, and Walter 'Aysom. After Mr. Douglas had The usual monthly meeting of the board of directors of this association motion to the society, which decided in favour of the affirmative by na

replied, the chairman shortly summed up the arguments, and put the was held at the Law lustitution, Chancery-lane, London, on Wednesday, majority of one vote. There were twenty-eight gentlemen present, and the 19th inst., Mr. Sidney Smith in the chair. The other directors pre- the meeting terminated at 9.20. sent were :-Messrs. W. Beriah Brook, Edwin Hedger, J. H. Kays, R. Penpington, Henry Roscoe, H. S. Styan, W. Melmoth Walters, F. T. Woolbert, and J. T. Scott, secretary. A sum of £275 was distributed in grants of relief, twenty-four new members were admitted to the

LIVERPOOL LAW STUDENTS' ASSOCIATION, association, and other general business was transacted. It was also

The annual meeting of this association took place last week. Mr. T. announced at the meeting that Mr. Ebenezer John Bristow had accepted Bellringer, the retiring president, occupied the chair, and there was a the invitation of the directors to preside at the anniversary festival of the large attendance. The committee in their annual report, read by Mr. A. association this year.

G. Inglis, the honorary secretary, shewed that during the past year 51 new members had been elected, eight members had resigned, and eight had been struck off the rolls. The number of members had increased from 364

at the close of the last year to 396 at the present time. Of this number, LAW STUDENTS' JOURNAL.

32 were barristers-at-law, 193 solicitors, five bar students, and 166

articled clerks. Since the previous report 22 members had passed the COUNCIL OF LEGAL EDUCATION.

final examination, and 36 had passed the intermediate examination. The

balance sheet shewed that the financial position of the association conHILARY EXAMINATION, 1887.

tinued to be satisfactory, there being a balance of £31 128. 4d. Mr. J.C. GENERAL EXAMINATION OF STUDENTS OF THE Inns or Court, held at election of propose dr. Kenion' to the position of president for the ensuing

Lincoln's-inn-hall, December 20, 21, 28, 29, 30, and 31, 1886. The Council of Legal Education have awarded to William Harrison chair vacated by Mr. Bellringer. Mr. Kenion said that he attributed the Moore and John Mahan Gover, Esqs., of the Middle Temple, studentships honour of his election rather to the circumstance of his being the president in jurisprudence and Roman 'law of one hundered guineas, to continue ! of the Liverpool Law Society than to his individual merit ("No, no."

:-"

court

[ocr errors]

means

or

[graphic]

It was a matter of sincere congratulation to observe how large a hold the Registrar for the Whitby District, in succession to his father, the late Mr. society had obtained upon the articled clerks of this great city. It was Matthew Gray. Mr. W. S. Gray was admitted a solicitor in 1884. equally satisfactory to notice that the solicitors had given it large and

Mr. CHARLES BAILEY HALLILEY, solicitor (of the firm of Pearse & substantial support, though he should have been pleased could he have Halliley), of Bedford, has been appointed a Commissioner to administer been in the position of stating that they had manifested a greater personal interest by their presence at the meetings. It was only by constant

Oaths in the Supreme Court of Judicature. practice that the art of readily conveying one's thoughts and ideas by

Mr. Philip HENRY EDLIN, Q.C., assistant judge of the Middlesex Sesspeech could be acquired, and be urged upon any member of the associa- sions, has been appointed Deputy-Treasurer of the Middle Temple for the tion who found himself unable to give proper effect to his arguments to ensuing year. attend the law debates. The law student almost more than anyone else Mr. GAD WILLIAM MEADOWS, solicitor, of Hastings, has been appointed had need to perfect himself in every conceivable way, for competition in a Commissioner to Administer Oaths in the Supreme Court of Judicature. the race of life had nowhere become greater or more keen than in their Mr. WILLIAM JESSE FREER, solicitor, of Leicester, has been appointed profession. Speaking after an experience of more than 23 years, he unhesi- Deputy-Treasurer for Leicestershire in successiou to Mr. William Napier tatingly said that the prospects of a solicitor nowadays were not of that Reeve, resigned. Mr. Freer is also deputy-clerk of the peace for Leicesterenviable character usually attributed to them by outsiders. The career shire. He was admitted a solicitor in 1875. of every one who might be classed as a successful solicitor was as a rule slow; years of patient labour, and every effort had to be made before he & Lees), of Oldham, has been appointed a Commissioner to administer

Mr. FREDERICK NEWTON TWEEDALE (of the firm of Tweedale, Sons, attained to a practice that was more to him than an honourable and Oaths in the Supreme Court of Judicature. respectable livelihood. The profession was still a most ennobling one. It called forth all the higher attributes of man. No class in society was more Mr. William FOSTER, barrister, has been appointed Attorney-General trusted with the weighty affairs and secrets of life, and was more looked of the Colony of New South Wales. up to in all the multitudinous phases of social life. They were the recipients of their clients' greatest confidences. Their clients' very being coln’s-inn.

Mr. Frank LOCKWOOD, Q.C., M.P., has been elected a Bencher of Linwas often placed in their keeping. Such conditions necessarily brought with them great and increasing responsibilities. How much, then, did

Mr. Thomas WATKIN Wayne MORGAN, solicitor (of the firm of Morgan & it behove each of his hearers to neglect no opportunity of qualifying him- Male), of Town Hall-chambers, Pontypridd, has been appointed a felf to perform and discharge those duties and responsibilities in a high and Commissioner to administer Oaths in the Supreme Court of Judicature. fearless manner?. It was important further for the well-being of the profes- Mr. Morgan was admitted a solicitor in January, 1878. sion that, in addition to great legal erudition, they should observe one towards Mr. W. STORER COLLINS, solicitor (of the firm of James Collins & Son),' another the strictest integrity and good faith, courtesy and kind con of Bath, has been appointed a Commissioner to administer Oaths in the sideration. After further reference to their duties and responsibilities, Supreme Court of Judicature. Mr. W. S. Collins was admitted a solicitor the president said that he had often thought that amidst the press of in Hilary Sittings, 1880. business he was not fulfiling as he ought to do all the obligations he had entered into with his articled clerks, and he had no doubt that his professional brethren shared in the same opinion. Then if their pupils did not

PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED. turn out as brilliant as they could wish he honestly confessed that they WILLIAM LAMBERT and HERBERT EDWARD GRIFFITH, solicitors (Lambert (the speaker and his professional brethren) were in a measure responsible. & Griffith), 17, Bedford-row. Jan. 8.

[Gazette, Jan. 18. The speaker concluded by moving the adoption of the report.

Mr. Alfred Bright seconded, and, after a few words from Mr. Shand, the motion was agreed to.

GENERAL Mr. H. Todd was elected secretary, and Mr. J. E. B. Bagshaw was

At the Dorchester Assizes, on thel8th inst., the foreman of the grand jury elected treasurer. A committee was also appointed, and the proceedings (Mr. John Floyer) said that, in accordance with a request made by his concluded when a vote of thanks had been passed to Mr. Kenion for pre- arrangements. The grand jury had no wish to make any presentmant on siding.

the existing system of holding four assizes a year; but they desired to say

that when the assizes were not held at Dorchester they considered BRISTOL LAW STUDENTS' SOCIETY.

Winchester was preferable to Bristol or any other town in which to hold W. Benson, solicitor, in the chair. The subject for debate was “That shire at an expense of upwards of £500, in consequence of the witnesses

The sixth meeting of the session was held on the 4th of January, Mr. them. They wished also to point nut, however, that at the last assizes, in the case of Furber v. Cobb (17 Q. B. D. 459) should be reversed on appeal.” having been all summoned for the first day of the assizes and kept there David Johnstou, seconded respectively by Mr. J. L. V. S. Williams and arrangements should be made that the witnesses should not be summoned Mr. W. R. Parry. The openers replied, and the chairman summed up, and, the question being voted upon, was decided in the negative by a Winchester during the whole of the assizes.

for the first day in future, and, further, that they should not be kept at

Mr. Justice Mathew said that majority of one.

the suggestions of the grand jury should be communicated to the judges. He pointed out that the witnesses must, however, go to Winchester on the first day of the assizes, as their presence was absolutely necessary to go before the grand jury; but he did not see why it should not be

arranged to take the cases from outlying counties first. With reference LEGAL NEWS.

to the question of expense he feared it was inevitable, and the only con

solation he could give them was that it was charged to the Consolidated OBITUARY.

Fund and did not fall on the county. Mr. WILLIAM Robert Giblin, puisne judge of the Supreme Court of the Colony of Tasmania, died about a fortnight ago. Mr. Justice Giblin was born in 1840. He was called to the bar in Tasmania in 1864. He was for sixteen years a member of the Colonial House of Assembly. He was Attorney-General of Tasmania from 1870 till 1872, and from 1873 till 1876.

COURT PAPERS. He afterwards became colonial treasurer, and he was prime minister of the colony from 1878 till 1885, when he became a puisne judge of the Supreme

SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE. Court. Mr. Justice Giblin had recently acted as governor of the colony.

Mr. Justice Mr. Watson ROBERT JONES, solicitor (of the firm of Bridgman, Weaver, Mon., Jan. 24 Mr. Pemberton Mr. Koe

CHITTY. & Jones), of Chester, died on the 8th inst. Mr. Jones was admitted a Tuesday ... 25

Mr. Carrington

Pugh solicitor in 1865, and he had since practised at Chester as a member of the

Wednesday 26 Jackson

Carrington firm of Bridgman, Weaver, & Jones.

Jackson

Pugh He was at the time of his death Thursday.. 27 associated in partnership with Mr. Wilfred Marratt Weaver. Mr. Jones's

Friday

Carrington

Saturday... 29 Carrington Jackson death has caused much sorrow at Chester, and his funeral, which took

Pugh

Mr. Justice Mr. Justice place at the Chester Cemetery on the 13th inst., was attended by many

Mr. Justice

STIRLING. professional and other friends. He leaves a widow and five children. Monday, January ... 24 Mr. King

Mr. Clowes Mr. Leach
Tuesday

Pemberton Godfrey
Wednesday

Leach
APPOINTMENTS.

Thursday

Ward

Pemberton Godfrey
Friday

King

Clowes Mr. Risdon DARRACOTT SHARP, solicitor, of Christchurch and Bourne- Saturday

Godfrey
mouth, has been elected Town Clerk of the Borough of Christchurch.
Mr. Sharp was admitted a solicitor in 1850.

Mr. HENRY SALTER DICKINSON, solicitor, of Poole, has been elected
Town Clerk of that Borough on the resignation of his father, Hr. Henry WARNING TO INTENDING HOUSE PURCHASERS AND LESSEES.-Before purchasing
1878. He is registrar (jointly with his father of the picted Countyitott. expert man the sanitaryhengineeringu ventilation to use Victorinungsa, West
Clerk to the Whitby Board of Guardians, Assessment Committee, School 60 wholesale firms.

FURNISH ON NORMAN & STACEY'S SYSTEM; No Deposit; 1, 2, or 3 years credit; Attendance Committee, and Rural Sanitary Authority and Superintendent- Mayrhae...Liverpool.st., E.C.Cucodis delivered free:- Advi.

« PreviousContinue »