Page images
PDF
EPUB

The

(clause 5, sub-section 1), and in the following sub-sections provisions have been inserted to prevent this entry from enlarging the estate of the tenant for life, or prejudicing the rights of the trustees or reversioners. But the duty of entering on the register the name of a succeeding tenant for life is still cast upon the trustees, and the executors of a will creating a settlement are still to be deemed trustees until other trustees are appointed. The committee remain of opinion that the duty of registration should be thrown upon the succeeding tenant for life, after notice to the trustees; or that upon refusal or failure by the trustees the tenant for life should have power to register; for it may well happen that the trustees may decline to carry out a duty involving some expense which they may have no funds to meet. The right to apply for registration is by the new sub-section (6) given to a tenant for life who succeeds to settle land before trustees of the settlement (if at the death of the preceding tenant for life there were no trustees) have been appointed. And in the case of a person entitled under a defeasance, the duty of registration is thrown on the successor and not on the trustees. committee suggest that, inasmuch as the registration of a proprietor as tenant for life nesessarily implies the existence of a settlement, words should be introduced to relieve a purchaser or other dealer with the land from being affected with notice of the trusts of that instrument. Clause 6, the provisions of which in the Bill as originally introduced conflicted with the provisions of section 30, has been entirely redrawn, and is now clause 8. As now drawn, it is confined to the object of giving to the personal representatives of a sole registered proprietor, or the survivor of several registered proprie tors, the right to deal with the land or charge, and omits all reference to the liability of real estate to debts, which is a matter dealt with in a subsequent part of the Bill. The doubt suggested in the report of the council, whether the effect of registration was not simply to record the state of the title at the date of registration without forbidding the continuance of all future dealings according to the present system of conveyancing, is admitted to have been well founded, and clause 9 is intended to remove the doubt by declaring that nothing in section 49 or any other part of the principal Act shall enable any legal estate or interest in any registered land or charge to be conferred otherwise than by a registered disposition. Confirmation of Possessory or Qualified Title.-Part III. of the Bill introduces an entirely new mode of acquiring an absolute title without (apparently) much, if any, investigation of title except by or on behalf of the applicant himself. Any person registered with a possessory or qualified title (and it may probably be assumed that most registrations will be with possessory title as least costly and troublesome), may (clause 10) apply for confirmation of his title as an absolute title at the expiration of five years from the date of publication of the first notice. The application is to be accompanied by an affidavit with prescribed particulars, and after the expiration of five years from the first publication of notice of the application, the applicant may, in the absence of any effectual opposition, be registered as an absolute owner. The notices are to be published in the month of November in each of the five years. It appears to the committee that the scheme for confirmation of a possessory or qualified title involves a very important alteration of the law, and one which is liable to grave risk of abuse. The introduction of a new clause (clause 16), authorising the Land Transfer Board on such an application to grant a qualified title only, and not necessarily an absolute one, as originally contemplated, is a great improvement and safeguard. But the Committee do not see any sufficient reason for allowing a title originally registered as possessory, and therefore with but slight evidence, to become either absolute or qualified, i.e., absolute except against certain persons, after so short a period as five years, or indeed at any shorter period than is required by the Statute of Limitations for the time being in force. If the period fixed by the Statute of Limitations is deemed too long, it should be shortened by a general Act; and the Committee deprecate the introduction of two modes of limitation, the one by lapse of time applicable generally, and the other by advertisement applicable only to special estates. They regret that the Bill does not make it necessary that the solicitor for the applicant should concur in the affidavit, as is required by the rules under the Act. It has been suggested to the committee that the month of November would be an inconvenient month for the advertisements, in consequence of the number of railway notices which appear at that time. But the committee incline to the opinion that it is on the whole desirable to have a fixed month for all such notices, and the public are now in the habit of looking out in November for advertisements affecting their locality. The clauses have been carefully revised, so as to leave a very wide discretion in the Land Transfer Board, and to protect as far as possible persons who may have adverse claims; and the suggestion of the Council that a change of proprietorship should not determine the application which the successor should be at liberty to continue, has been adopted (clause 13, sub-section 6). Clause 9, sub-section 3, has been struck out, and no special provision is made for costs in connection with any petition against an entry confirming the title, and this, in common with so many other matters, appears to be left to the rules. The committee see no reason for the special protection given by clause 15, sub-section 3, to persons absent from the United Kingdom in the service of the Crown," and think that the same protection (if necessary at all) should be extended to all persons out of the kingdom. boundaries.-This part of the Bill has been greatly altered since its original introduction, but is even less likely to be often made use of than in its original shape. For the clauses as originally drawn promised finality, as the result of an application involving probably considerable discussion, if not actual litigation. But, as the clauses now stand, the boundaries even when ascertained and entered in the register are not conclusive. By the new clause (clause 19), if the boundaries as entered in the register are not in accordance with the actual boundaries as enjoyed by the registered proprietor (whether apparently by reason of mistake at the time of entry, or by subsequent encroachment on the part of an adjoining owner), the registered proprietor, if he would under existing law be barred by the Statute of

Limitations, is to be similarly barred notwithstanding the entry. If the element of finality is eliminated, the object of this part of the Bill is not clear, and few landowners will care to embark on so delicate an investigation as is incident to all boundary questions for the attainment at last of so qualified a result. Subject to this general observation, the provisions of this part of the Bill as revised are greatly improved. A proprietor may apply to have the boundaries of part of his land determined without necessarily involving an inquiry into the boundaries of the entire estate. The affidavit accompanying the application is to set forth the grounds of the applicant's knowledge and belief that the persons named are in possession of the adjoining lands. Opposition may be made on behalf of a specified class of persons, or of the public, without being accompanied by alleged injury to the opposing petitioner, as was necessary in the Bill as framed; and a joint application to settle boundaries may be made by adjoining owners, although only one may have registered his land.

Insurance Fund.-The Bill provides for the establishment of an insurance fund by means of an insurance fee upon first registration with absolute or qualified title, and on subsequent dealings with registered land. The committee consider that this fund should be established at the cost of the public, and not of landowners. Inasmuch as the registration is assumed to be compulsory and not optional, the benefit must be assumed to be to the public generally rather than to landowners as a class. For if it were beneficial to them as a class, compulsion would be unnecessary. If registration were optional, an insurance fund would not be required, as the system would be in substitution for, and, on the hypothesis, preferable to, the present system of conveyancing, and would need no other safeguarding than that which the present system affords. If, however, registration is to be compulsory, landowners must of course be indemnified against any mistake, fraud, or error which they are against, or, at least, irrespective of, their consent compelled on public grounds to risk. But it is obviously unfair and unreasonable to compel landowners to incur a risk which the Bill assumes they would not do voluntarily, and at the same time to throw on them the cost of insurance against the consequences; and the insurance against mistake or fraud should fall on the public, and be provided out of the Consolidated Fund. Experience here and elsewhere shows the extreme infrequency of mistake or fraud, and it is unlikely that any serious claim will have to be met. But the premium charged will add greatly to the unavoidable cost incident to registration, and will, for the reasons already given, be felt to be an unfair tax upon the landowners, who, more perhaps than any other class, are feeling at this time the consequences of the severe agricultural depression of the last few years. The revision of these clauses (20 and 21) has with one exception been confined to verbal alterations and additions, rendered necessary either by other changes in the Bill or in order to make clearer the grounds on which compensation may be sought. The exception is in clause 20, sub-section 1, which limits the right to compensation to cases in which the person aggrieved "cannot obtain compensation from the persons liable to pay the same." In other words, instead of affording to a registered proprietor a ready means of indemnity, provided he can satisfy the Land Transfer Board of his right to compensation, leaving the Board, under section G of the first schedule, to recover from the person or persons (if any) liable in respect of the mistake or wrongful act which caused the loss, the aggrieved proprietor is first to exhaust his legal remedies (which must in many cases involve much cost and delay, and in case of fraud can scarcely do more than result in a judgment against a pauper), and then apply to the Board for compensation, which will not include any indemnity against the legal expenses which have been necessarily incurred. The committee submit that this is unreasonable, and that the landowner, having no option but to register his land, should have a full and ready indemnity against loss caused by some act or omission for which he is not responsible, since, if he were, he would have under the provisions of the scheme in the first sche lule no right to compensation at all. The compensation provided by the insurance fund is by the Bill limited to "the capital value of the land or charge as ascertained for the purpose of the payment of the insurance fee. ' Under the Australian system of registration the capital value for the purposes of the fee is fixed (if the registrar requires it) by the declaration of the owner, supported (if required) by a licensed valuer; and the measure of damages is fixed at the full value of the land at the moment of deprivation or loss of right, and this principle would have to be adopted if the system of guaranteed title be substituted for that of indefeasible title. The committee are of opinion that, if the system as embodied in the revised Bill is to be adopted, there should be a right on the part of any registered proprietor to increase his insurance by filing a declaration of increased value and paying an additional premium. Extension of Registration.-Clauses 22 and 23 are altogether new, and provide for an application for registration with a qualified title, and for registration of undivided shares, and of chambers or other portions of a house constituting a separate freehold, none of which could have been dealt with under the Bill as drawn. Clause 24, which provides for the registration of rights in or over land, has been extended, but the committee retain the opinion expressed in the former report, that unless such registration is compulsory, so as to make the register an exhaustive statement of the title to registered land, it would be preferable not to allow registration at all of matters incident to most land, and readily ascertainable on inspection or ordinary inquiry. On the other hand, to make the register an exhaustive statement of title would involve greatly increased cost and complication. Section 18 of the Act, as extended by clause 29 of the Bill, appears to do all that is necessary.

Transfers and Charges.-These clauses are slightly added to, so as to make more clear the powers of a registered owner of a charge on land to deal with his security, and to ensure these powers being exercisable by a transferee, and not only by the first registered proprietor.

Miscellaneous.-Clause 25 of the Bill is altogether struck out, and clause 32 substituted, and the provisions now proposed for the registration of a married woman's interest in land appear sufficient and clear. Sub-section (3) to

clause 35 provides an appeal against the refusal of an application to register, which is certainly necessary, and was not before given. The power of the Lord Chancellor to make rules from time to time is very wide, and is in some respects extended by the revised clause, but sub-section 10 of the original clause, which conferred upon the Lord Chancellor actual legislative power, has been struck out, and the suggestion made by the council that Parliament should have express and not merely implied power to annul any rules has been adopted. But it may be doubted whether under the clause as now inserted (clause 37 (2)) the functions of the Houses of Parliament are not limited to the adoption or rejection of the rules as a whole, and this might, especially in the case of the first rules, which must necessarily be voluminous, be extremely inconvenient, since, in order to strike out a particular rule or class of rules, Parliament would be compelled to annul the whole. The committee suggest that the clause should be altered in this respect, and allow either House to annul or modify all or any of the rules laid before the House. The Committee feel bound to repeat the objection which appears to them to exist to vesting the power of making rules in the Lord Chancellor alone. The whole character of the measure, and the greater or less success of the proposed scheme, will depend to a very great extent upon the rules issued from time to time for the guidance of applicants and of the board. Scarcely a clause of the Bill purports to do any act except in "the prescribed manner," or on "the prescribed conditions," or within "the prescribed time," and it is not too much to say that the framer of the rules can greatly extend or materially diminish the scope and effect of the Bill when passed into law. No doubt the Lord Chancellor will act upon the best information, and the rules when issued may, if open to grave objection, be annulled by Parliament; but the remedy is not one to be relied on, and the Committee entertain strongly and unanimously the opinion that the rules should be framed by the Land Transfer Board, assuming its constitution to be strengthened as already suggested, or at all events by a tribunal on which practising barristers and solicitors are represented, and should be submitted to the Lord Chancellor for approval and issue. Upon the importance of some such restriction the committee refer to the unanimous expression of opinion obtained from the country law societies. The committee strongly urge that the rules, however and by whomsoever framed, should be issued and in the hands of the profession and the public not less than six months before the issue of any order in council declaring the registration of land compulsory, so that preparation may be made for the revolution in dealing with property in that district which such a declaration will involve. Unless this, or some such sufficient period, is allowed, the commencement of the new system will inevitably be marked by extreme confusion, and disappointment, since neither officials nor practitioners will have any previous knowledge of the work which they are expected to perform. The Bill alone without the rules contains nothing but a bare outline indicating the framework of the intended organisation and procedure, leaving all details (and in such a system details are all important) to be "prescribed." The Committee further urge that the costs to be charged by solicitors in respect of registration and the dealings with registered land should be fixed by the special tribunal constituted under the Solicitors' Remuneration Act. Amendments of Law of Real Property.-The Bill proposes to abolish all existing modes, rules, or canons of descent as regards real estate; gives to the personal representatives of a copyholder a year within which to dispose of the copyhold land without taking admission; empowers personal representatives to appropriate real or personal estate in satisfaction of a legacy or share in residue; assimilates, except on one point, the rules of devolution and administration of real and personal estate on the death of the proprietor; enlarges all estates tail which could without any consent be barred into estates in fee simple absolute without any deed; declares that expressions which before the Act would have created an estate tail shall create an estate in fee simple; repeals the Statute of Westminster the 2nd, and authorises the redemption out of capital of improvement rent charges temporary or permanent. The amendments authorising the appropriation of legacies or share of residue, enlarging estates tail into estates in fee simple, and authorising the redemption of rent charges out of capital, are retrospective. The last-mentioned amendment was brought before the Lord Chancellor by the council quite recently. The amendments introduced into the Bill go much further than was originally contemplated, and assimilate the devolution, on the death of the proprietor, of real and personal estate for all purposes, except that real estate is to remain liable to succession duty, and is not to become liable to probate or legacy duty, and that a surviving wife or husband is to be entitled on intestacy to a life interest in the husband's or wife's real estate, with a proviso saving the rights of persons married before the passing of the Act, and of infants and lunatics (clause 39, sub-sections (2) and (4)). The committee think that the law should either be made the same as to both real and personal estate, or should be left as at present, and that the provision by which a life interest in real estate is given to a surviving husband or wife is open to serious objection. No obligation is thrown on the surviving parent to maintain the children (if any) out of the income. On the intestacy of a husband, his widow would be entitled to the income whether she were the mother of his children or not, and whether she were married to a second husband or not, and the children might be left destitute. The committee recommend that, if the proposed alteration in the distribution of real estate be sanctioned, the words "pari passu with | his personal estate," which would greatly fetter the discretion of the personal representatives of the deceased proprietor, should be struck out of clause 42, sub-section 1, and that as far as possible the administration of real and personal estate should be identical. The powers given in the Bill to the personal representatives of a deceased proprietor to conclusively value the property of the deceased for the purpose of appropriation in specie is modified by requiring the valuation to be made in accordance with "the prescribed provisions.' Clause 44 is entirely new, and amends the law as to succession duty by making it an incumbrance on land capable of registration. The duty of entering a caution to protect this charge is thrown on the

Land Transfer Board, who are to inform the Commissioners of Inland Revenue, and the caution is to expire at the end of six months unless renewed by the commissioners, who may not without special leave renew after the expiration of two years from the date of the original entry. The caution is to be removed on satisfaction of the duty. The clause is intended to render impossible, as against purchasers or grantees, the hardship of stale or dormant claims for duty, but its practical working is not clear. The enlargement of estates tail into absolute estates in fee simple, without any disentailing assurance, is slightly modified, so as to provide for the continuance of the entail not only in the case of a tenant in tail in possession at the passing of the Act, but also in the case of a tenant in tail of unsound mind entitled in reversion at the date of the Act, and then and thenceforth until he becomes tenant in tail in possession. The section enlarging a base fee into a fee simple absolute has been struck out. The clause abolishing future estates tail has been strengthened, and another clause added, extending the alteration of the law to lands of copyhold tenure. With the passing of the Act, therefore, estates tail will, except in the case of existing settlements, be no longer known to the English law. Discontinuance of Registries of Deeds.-Power is taken to close local registries as to past only of the land within their districts, if such part is within a land transfer district. In the clause (49, sub-section (1)) providing for the existing staff of existing registry offices, the words (p. 24, line 8) "if he so consents," which appear in the draft amendments have been inadvertently left out, and should be inserted after the word “or that line. The remainder of the clause is unaltered.

in

Supplemental Provisions.-The committee refer to their observations on clause 37 as to the extreme importance of allowing a sufficient interval to elapse before registration is in any district made compulsory. But the Land Transfer Board, if constituted at once, and entrusted with the preparation of the rules, must of course come into office as soon after the passing of the Act as possible. An addition (sub-section 4) has been made to clause 53, to which, if the committee rightly apprehend its effect, they entertain very strong objection. The clause deals with the remuneration of the members and officers of the Land Transfer Board, and goes on to provide that "any officers employed on behalf of applicants for registration, or other persons dealing with the Land Transfer Office, may be remunerated by the payment of such fees by the parties as may be prescribed." This proviso appears to point to the establishment of officials authorised to transact for reward the business of the Land Transfer Office; and it is obvious that such a system would be extremely unfair to solicitors, and would, as has been previously found to be the case, lead to touting of a very objectionable character. The committee do not, of course, desire to limit the right of any proprietor to transact his own business without employing an agent of any kind. But if an agent be employed, and is to be remunerated for the services which he may render, the committee feel bound to claim that the business of conveyancing for fee or reward which has up to the present time been exclusively entrusted to solicitors should continue to be so entrusted. Public policy has hitherto dictated this course as the best in the public interest, and solicitors as a body have, in consequence of their exclusive privileges, been subjected to summary discipline and to numerous restrictions. They have to undergo a prolonged professional education and severe examinations, and their remuneration, instead of being, as in other professions, fixed by themselves, is carefully limited by statute. The committee contend that it would be manifestly unfair and unreasonable to introduce, as part of a generally compulsory scheme, provisions tending to place the conduct of much, if not the greater part, of the conveyancing business of the country into official hands. The change would operate with special hardship on solicitors practising in the country or in small practice. Moreover, on public grounds, and for guaranteeing as much as possible the bona fides and accuracy of dealings with land, it is important that those who practise in land transfer business should be responsible and well trained; and that all transactions should be conducted through a solicitor, who would identify the parties, and be amenable as an officer of the court for any irregularity. If the committee have correctly appreciated the intention of the proviso cited, they feel that on this point every possible opposition should be offered to the Bill. In clause 56, in addition to district registrars of the High Court, there are inserted as officers which may be made auxiliary to the Land Transfer Board, "clerks of the peace, clerks of Land Tax Commissioners, clerks to justices, or registrars of county courts." Miscellaneous.-Clause 62 has been introduced to complete the assimilation of real and personal estate, and provides that the word "heirs "shall continue to take effect as a word of limitation only, for the purpose of determining the quantity of the estate or interest to be taken by the person in connection with whose name the word is used; but when used for the purpose of designating a class intended to take beneficially, shall, in documents executed before the passing of the Act, have the same meaning as at present; but in documents executed after the passing of the Act shall, unless a contrary intention appears, be construed to refer to the next of kin, according to the statute of distribution. The Bill is to be construed as one with the Act of 1875, and is to come into operation on the 1st January, 1888.

First Schedule.-The additional object of the insurance fund (sub-section (2)) suggests that the difficulty inherent in an indefeasible title begins to be evident to the framers of the Bill, and that the idea of a guaranteed title is gaining ground. For this sub-section contemplates compensation to a registered proprietor dispossessed because his title was in some way vitiated by fraud, forgery, or error, and the real owner has been reinstated. The cost of insurance is somewhat reduced by the new proviso on p. 33, which provides that where a transfer for valuable consideration is made within three months after first registration, no insurance fee shall be payable upon such transfer. Sub-section C, as originally drawn, deprived a person of any claim to compensation, if he had contributed to the loss by the act, neglect, or default of himself or his agent. But as revised, the aggrieved person is to

be entitled in such a case either to no compensation, or to a proportionately less amount of compensation according to the degree in which he has so contributed. The committee regret to find that no provision is made for full compensation to the person aggrieved, but only for compensation to the amount of the purchase money or charge. It is obvious that if a registered proprietor had acquired land for building, and had laid out money thereon, and was then dispossessed, the purchase money given for the vacant site would be a very inadequate compensation. The committee repeat their recommendation that, if the proposed scheme of insurance be retained, power should be given to a proprietor of land to increase the amount of his insurance by increasing his premium and filing a declaration of increased value in the prescribed manner.

vested in the Lord Chancellor alone, but in a board on which barristers and solicitors should be represented. The three alterations in the law referred to in questions 10, 11, and 12 are almost unanimously approved, though some of the societies consider the question one of public policy rather than of law. In addition to replies to the specific questions, most of the societies expressed opinions upon the Bill or specific clauses in it, and these have been carefully considered and to some extent embodied in the supplemental report.

LEGAL NEWS.

OBITUARY.

THE COUNTRY LAW SOCIETIES ON THE LAND borough of West Ham, died on the 3rd inst. after a lingering illness.

TRANSFER BILL.

An appendix to the report of the Committee of the Incorporated Law Society contains an epitome of the replies and observations of the country law societies to and upon the queries submitted by the Incorporated Law Society. These queries were as follows:

desirable?

1. Whether, assuming registration of title to be desirable, the modifica. tion of the Land Transfer Act, 1875, proposed by the Land Transfer Bill, 1887, is the best scheme possible, and, if not, what improvements would be 2. Whether the system of registration of title ought to be made compulsory? 3. Whether a Land Transfer Board and its branches, formed in the manner suggested in the Bill, would be able to despatch and deal promptly with the multitude of transactions in land which each day press for settlement?

4. What effect the system proposed is likely to have on the cost of conveyancing, especially in transactions under £200 ? 5. Whether the plan proposed for the conversion of possessory or qualified titles into absolute titles is likely to work well?

6. Whether the plan proposed for conclusively settling boundaries is likely to work well?

ment?

7. Whether the plan proposed for an insurance fund is well adapted and sufficient to meet the dangers arising from fraud or mistake? 8. Whether the proposed composition of the Land Transfer Board is satisfactory; or whether it would be capable of any, and what improve9. Whether the power of making the rules by which the system of registration, confirmation of title, and transfer of land and charges, is to be formed and regulated, ought to be vested in the Lord Chancellor alone, or whether the concurrence should be required of any other authority? 10. Whether it is desirable that real estates should vest on the death of the owner in his personal representatives?

11. Whether is desirable that, on the death intestate of a landowner, his real estate should be divided between his next of kin by his personal representatives as if it were personal estate ?

12. Whether it is desirable that estates tail should be abolished?

Twenty-one replies were received, of which we hope hereafter to publish an analysis. The result of the replies may be thus summed upA large majority of the replies are, on the assumption that registration of title is to be adopted, in favour of the scheme of the Bill, but stress is laid on the importance of a Consolidation Act (which the Lord Chancellor has since promised) and of numerous local registries with small districts. On the question whether or not the system should be compulsory, there is some difference of opinion, 15 being against and 5 in favour of that course, while the view is more than once expressed that registration, if compulsory, should be applicable to possessory titles only, and be in respect of the next dealing after the passing of the Fears are expressed that the system will be choked with the volume of work, unless district registries are very numerous and have but small districts attached to them, and unless the local knowledge of practising solicitors be utilized.

Act.

That registration must involve increased cost and delay is the almost unanimously expressed opinion, and special stress is laid upon this in small transactions which are so numerous in the country. The societies of Birmingham and Preston give valuable details upon this point.

Opinions are divided, but are, on the whole, adverse to the proposed plan by which prossessory or qualified titles are made convertible into absolute titles, and fears are expressed that it would facilitate fraud, and would not be found useful enough to justify the cost and risk.

Not one of the societies is in favour of the plan for conclusively settling boundaries, and fears are evidently felt that, if the plan should be adopted, much litigation would certainly result.

The insurance fund is generally admitted to be a necessary part of the scheme, but objection is taken to its cost being thrown upon landowners, who are compelled to register, instead of upon the public, and to the high rate of premiums.

The composition of the Land Transfer Board is not considered satisfactory: The expression in the memorandum prefixed to the Bill that it would consist of " persons of experience in organization and administration as well as in conveyancing," is quoted, and the societies are unanimous in desiring that solicitors, who necessarily have much practical experience, should form part of the board.

There is a strong feeling that the power of making rules should not be

[ocr errors]

Mr. JOHN ROLAND PHILLIPS, barrister, stipendiary magistrate for the Mr. Phillips was the only son of Mr. David Phillips, of Cilgerrun, Pembrokeshire, and was born in 1844. He was called to the bar at Lincoln's-inn in Trinity Term, 1870, and he formerly practised on the South Wales and Chester Circuit. He was for some time on the staff of the WEEKLY REPORTER. Mr. Phillips was author of a "History of Glamorganshire,' "The Civil War in Wales, and its Marches," and other historical works. In 1881 he was appointed by Sir William Harcourt to the office of stipendiary magistrate at West Ham. Mr. Phillips was a magistrate for the county of Essex. At the West Ham Police-court on the 4th inst., Mr. Meeson, mayor of West Ham, Mr. Bishop Culpeper, deputy-stipendiary magistrate, Mr. Bruty, clerk of the court, and Mr. Thomas Willis, solicitor, expressed their sorrow at Mr. Phillips's death, and their sense of the industry, courtesy, and patience which had characterized his magisterial career. Mr. Phillips was married in 1873 to the daughter of Mr. Arthur Hargreaves, of Nebraska, U.S.

Mr. JOHN WILLIAMS, solicitor, town clerk of Brecon, died at that place on the 27th ult. after a somewhat long illness. Mr. Williams was born in 1829. He was admitted a solicitor in 1861, having been articled to Mr. Roger Watkins, whom he succeeded in 1873 as town clerk of the borough of Precon, which office he held until his death. Mr. Williams had a considerable practice in the town and district. He was buried at the Brecon Cemetery on the 30th ult., the mayor and many members of the corporation being present at the funeral.

Settlements, died at Freetown, Sierra Leone, on the 28th ult. Chief Mr. FRANCIS FREDERICK PINKETT, Chief Justice of the West African Justice Pinkett was the second son of Mr. Edward Pinkett, of Barnstaple, and was born in 1838. He was called to the bar at Gray's-inn in Michaelmas Term, 1863, and he practised for several years on the Western Circuit and at the Devonshire Sessions. In 1880 he was appointed Crown Solicitor, Registrar-General, and Master of the Supreme Court at Sierra the West African Settlements, and in 1882 he received a permanent apLeone. In the following year he was appointed to act as Chief Justice of Government of the West African Settlements, and he was a member of pointment as Chief Justice. The deceased had twice administered the the Executive and Legislative Councils.

Mr. WILLIAM PETER JOLLIFFE, barrister, died suddenly at Bournemouth on the 31st ult. at the age of seventy-four. Mr. Jolliffe was the only son of Mr. Christopher Jolliffe, of Tosh, Dorsetshire, and was born in 1813. He was called to the bar at Gray's-inn in Trinity Term, 1839, and he had practised for many years as an equity draftsman and conveyancer. Mr. Jolliffe had been standing counsel to the Governors of Queen Anne's Bounty since 1878, he was selected a bencher of Gray's inn in 1875, and he was a member of the Council of Legal Education. He was married in 1843 to the daughter of the Rev. William Penny, but he became a widower in 1884. Mr. Jolliffe was buried on the 4th inst.

Mr. ROLLA ROUSE, barrister, died at Fern Hill, Melton, Suffolk, on the 2nd inst. in his eighty-second year. Mr. Rouse was the son of Mr. William Rouse, of Hasketon, Suffolk, and was born in 1805. He was called to the bar at the Middle Temple in Michaelmas Term, 1839, and he was known as the author of several legal handbooks, including "The Practical Man," "The Practical Conveyancer," and "The Copyhold Enfranchisement Manual." He had also edited "Bateman's Law of Auctions." Mr. Rouse was a magistrate and deputy-lieutenant for the county of Suffolk, and he held for several years the rank of major in the 2nd Battalion of Suffolk Rifle Volunteers. He was married in 1830 to the daughter of the Rev. Philip Meadows, but he had been a widower for about five years.

APPOINTMENTS.

Mr. LEES KNOWLES, barrister, M.P., has been appointed Assistant Private Secretary to the President of the Local Government Board. Mr. Knowles is the eldest son of Mr. John Knowles, of Pendlebury, Lancashire, and was born in 1857. He was educated at Rugby and at Trinity College, Cambridge. He was called to the bar at Lincoln's-inn in November, 1882, and he is a member of the Northern Circuit. Mr. Knowles has been M.P. for the West Division of the Borough of Salford since July, 1886.

Mr. WILLIAM MITCHELL, solicitor, of 25, Fenchurch-street, has been appointed a Commissioner to administer Oaths in the Supreme Court of Judicature.

Mr. JOHN HUMPHRIS HODSON, solicitor (of the firm of Hinckley & Hodson), of Lichfield, has been elected Town Clerk of that city, in suc

cession to Mr. Charles Simpson, resigned. Mr. Hodson was admitted a solicitor in 1861.

Mr. FREDERICK TRELAWNEY HARE, solicitor, of Totnes, has been appointed Registrar of the Totnes County Court (Circuit No. 58), and District Registrar under the Judicature Acts, in succession to his partner, the late Mr. Theodore Bryett. Mr. Hare was admitted a solicitor in 1862. He is clerk to the Totnes Burial Board and to the county magistrates. Mr. JOHN SPOURS NICHOLSON, solicitor, of Sunderland, has been appointed Clerk to the Boldon School Board. Mr. Nicholson was admitted a solicitor in 1884.

Mr. THOMAS MACE, solicitor (of the firm of Kilby & Mace), of Banbury, Chipping Norton, and Charlbury, has been appointed Clerk to the Oxhill School Board. Mr. Mace was admitted a solicitor in 1872.

Mr. BERNARD WISE, barrister, has been appointed Attorney-General

for the Colony of New South Wales.

Mr. WILLIAM SPEED, Q.C., has been appointed an Examiner for the degree of B.C.L. at the University of Oxford.

Mr. ARTHUR WILLIAM CRAWLEY BOEVY, barrister, has been appointed to act as a Police Magistrate at Bombay. Mr. Boevy is the fourth son of Sir Martin Crawley Boevy, Bart., and was born in 1873. He was educated at Balliol College, Oxford, and he was called to the bar at Lincoln's-inn in Trinity Term, 1868. He has been for many years a member of the Bombay Civil Service.

Mr. HARRY PEARSON BROCKLESBY, solicitor (of the firm of Brocklesby, Ley, & Brocklesby), of 9, Walbrook, has been appointed a Commissioner for taking Affidavits and Acknowledgments in the High Court of Judica

ture at Calcutta.

Mr. LEWIS EMANUEL, solicitor (of the firm of Emanuel & Simonds), of 36, Finsbury-circus, has been appointed a Commissioner for taking Affidavits in the Supreme Court of the Colony of South Australia.

GENERAL,

The annual general meeting of the bar will be held in the old dining hall, Lincoln's-inn, on Saturday, the 18th inst., when a resolution will be proposed to alter the date of the annual meeting to the last Saturday in the Hilary Sitting ›.

Professional habit is difficult to shake off. Rumour has it that several of the replies to the invitations to the festivities issued by the Incorporated Law Society were headed" Re the Entertainments"; and that at least one gentleman accepted the invitation to one banquet expressly "without prejudice" to his chances of the other.

The Times announces the death, at Leipsic, of the eminent German professor of jurisprudence, Dr. Johann Ernst Otto Stobbe. He was the author of a large number of valuable works, besides being the editor of the Zeitschrift für Deutsches Recht.

The contract for the erection of the Victoria Law Courts, at Birmingham, of which the foundation-stone was laid by the Queen a couple of months ago, has been assigned to Mr. John Bowen, of Birmingham, the sum being £78,869.

In order to avoid a contest, Mr. F. W. Maclean, Q.C., M. P., Mr. E. Cutler, Q.C., and Messrs. A. Underhill, S. Hall, and F. Evans have withdrawn their names from the list of candidates for election as members of the Bar Committee, and there will consequently be no necessity for a poll.

The Times says:-" It is generally well worth while to consider attentively the proceedings at the annual meetings of the Incorporated Law Society. Rarely do they fail to elucidate points of practical importance. Their discussions, an unfriendly critic might say, at best express only the opinions of a professional trade union; but, at all events, it is an enlightened trade union, which discusses matters affecting the legal profession in no narrow, purely cost-making spirit. Its work in past years stands out in favourable contrast to that most feeble of institutions, the Bar Committee, which, as far as is generally known, has yet done little more than indulge in querulous wails as to distribution of patronage or puny unnoticed suggestions. Probably there never was a time when there was so little energy directed to legal reform as now. The movement for which Lord Selborne did so much, and which resulted in the Judicature Acts, has long spent its force. In the House of Commons there is no interest in the matter, and no measure of legal reform has the remotest chance of passing. In regard to criminal law, for example, there is an absolute stoppage. Even a small, unobjectionable measure of reform such as Lord Bramwell's Bill for easing the work of assizes by extending the jurisdiction of justices to burglary meets with opposition. Some of the old agencies for legal reform no longer exist; the Juridical Society, for example, which did good work in its time, is dead, and nothing has taken its place. But for the activity of the Incorporated Law Society, legal reform as it was once understood-the efforts of legal experts to improve law-would be almost extinct."

There has just been published in Germany a work on the penal and prison system of England, from the pen of a Prussian judge, Dr. P. F. Aschrott, entitled Strafensystem und Gefängnisswesen in England." In order to procure the materials and requisite information for the preparation of this interesting volume its author visited this country two years ago, and through the courtesy of the authorities was furnished with every facility for the attainment of his object. His own official position and his special commission of inquiry from the German Government afforded him great advantage in pur

suing his researches. The results of his investigations, as given by the Times, are, first, proof of the successful results of the supervision of offenders discharged from, prison conditionally on their good behaviour during the unexpired terms of their original sentences; and next, that one of the chief defects of English procedure, in regard to criminals, consists in the general absence of the initiation of prosecutions by the Government. He is surprised that the institution of the office of Public Prosecutor, which at one time was so hopefully looked to, as holding out a prospect of better things, has resulted throws upon private citizens, however poor and ignorant and otherwise occuso disappointingly. He dwells upon the fact that an arrangement which pied, the expensive burden of setting the law in operation for the vindication of their most ordinary rights of property is fraught with much danger and injustice to the community, and tends to furnish impunity to the offenders in many instances and to inflict cruel wrongs on helpless sufferers. The work also contains interesting observations on many other matters, including prison labour, reformatory and industrial schools.

[blocks in formation]

Jackson
Koe

Wednesday................. 15

Thursday ..................... 16
Friday ............................................ 17
Saturday................................................... 18

Mr. Justice
KAY.

Mr. Ward

King

Ward

King

Ward

King

Mr. Justice
STIRLING.

Mr. Carrington

Lavie

Carrington
Lavie

Mr. Justice
CHITTY.
Mr. Godfrey
Leach
Godfrey
Leach
Godfrey
Leach

Mr. Justice
KEKEWICH.

Mr. Pemberton

Clowes

Pemberton
Clowes
Pemberton

Carrington
Lavie

Clowes

COURT OF APPEAL.

TRINITY SITTINGS, 1887.

SPECIAL NOTICE.-Queen's Bench Final Appeals in Court I., and Chancery
Appeals (General List) in Court 11., will be taken on the usual days during
Trinity Sittinge.
Queen's Bench Interlocutory Appeals in Court I., and Chancery Interlocutory
Court I., on the second day (Wednesday), and afterwards as usual, every
Appeals in Court II., will be taken on the first day of the Sittings, also in
Wednesday, during the Sittings. Bankruptcy Appeals also, as usual, on Fridays
in Court I.

Appeals from the Lancaster Palatine Court (if any), which have been passed
and Thursday, July 7th, and Thursday, August 4th.
over in the General List, will be taken in Court II. on Thursday, June 9th,
specially appointed by the court.
The Admiralty Appeals (with Assessors) will be taken in Court I. on days to be

APPEALS FOR HEARING.

(Set down to Wednesday, June 1st, inclusive.)
FROM THE CHANCERY DIVISION, THE PROBATE, DIVORCE
AND ADMIRALTY DIVISION (PROBATE AND DIVORCE),
AND THE COUNTY PALATINE AND STANNARIES COURTS.
For Hearing.
(General List.)

Lord Camoys v Mayor, &c of Burslem appl of pltft from judg of V C Bacon
(part heard Feb 2, 1886, by Master of Rolls, Lords Justices Lindley & Lopse-
Societe Generale de Paris v Dreyfus Bros & Co app of defts Dreyfus Bros & Co,
so for engineer to report-report filed-s o till appln made to restore).
from order of Mr. Justice Pearson, dated 26 March 1885 April 1, 1885
(S O, July 18)

1886.

In re Company or Fraternity of Free Fishermen, &c. of Faversham & Co's Acts app of the Company from winding up order dated March 30, made by Mr. Justice Kay April 14 (advanced by order)

In re The Barangah Oil Refining Co id & Co.'s Acts app of W. P. Arnot from refusal of Mr. Justice North, dated Nov 3, 1886 (Order by consent March 17restored by order)

De Mora v Concha app of Manuel A Concha, and Adelinda his wife, from order
of Mr Justice Stirling, dated April 29, varying Chief Clerk's Certificate and
notice of contention by Juan Jose de la T Concha May 13 (to be in paper on
June 20 by order)

In re Herbert H Sugg, dec Sugg v Sugg app of dfts from jdgt of Mr Justice
Stirling, dated 1 July, 1886 Dec 7 (S O pending arrangements)

1887.

Jones v Baldock app of dft William Rathbone from jdgt of Mr Justice Chitty,
dated 22 July, 1886 Jan S

Thomas v Doughty app of dft from judgt of Mr Justice Pearson, dated 16
March 1886 Feb 2 (security ordered 2 March)
Metzlers (exors) v Chappell app of exors of Chappell from order of Mr Justice
In re Prince Batthyany-Strattman, dec Batthyany-Strattman v Walford & ors
Chitty, dated 19 Nov, 1886, disallowing items in account Feb 5
Newman & Co v Pinto & Sons app of dfts from judgt of Mr Justice
app of dft Anne Smith from jdgt of V C Bacon, dated 12 Aug, 1886 Feb 19
Kekewich, dated 17 Feb, 1887 Feb 23

In re Avery's Patent, No. 6938, A D. 1885, and Trade Marks Act, 1883 app of plts from refusal of Mr Justice Stirling, dated 23 Feb, 1887, to revoke reept Lindsay's Patent Feb 23

Norton v Norton_app of plt (in forma pauperis) from judgt of V C Bacon, dated 15 Feb, 1886 Feb 25

In re John Smith, dec Smith v Daniell app of plt from judgt of Mr Justice
Kekewich (sitting in cambrs for Mr Justice Kay), dat-d 8 Feb, 1887 Feb 28
Bankes v. Small app of dft from judgt of Mr Justice Kekewich, dated 11 Jan
1887 March 3

Thomas Weidben v Scattergood app of dft Alice Scattergood from jdgt of Mr
Justice Stirling, dated 24 July, 1886 March 9 (security ordered March 23)
J W Weldhen v Scattergood app of dft Alice Scattergood from judgt of Mr
Justice Stirling, dated 24 July, 1886 March 9 (Security ordered March 23)
Cavendish v Cavendish app of plt from judgt of Mr Justice North, dated 1 Feb-
uary, 1887 March 10
Seguin v Daugars (on behalf, &o) app of dft G G Daugars from judgt of Mr
Justice Kekewicb, dated 4 Feb 1887 March 12 (security ordered 14 May)
In re G W Marrett, dec Chalmers v Wingfield app of plt from refusal of Mr
Justice Stirling to vary Chief Clerk's certificate, dated 21 Feb, 1887 March 14
Talbot v Talbot app of J L Frere from order of Mr Justice Chitty, dismissing
petition March 17

Sheppard, on behalf, &c, v The Scinde, Punjaub, & Delhi Ry Co app of plts
from judgt of Mr. Justice Kekewich, dated 16 Feb, 1887 March 23
In re TJ Coward, dec Coward v Larkman (construction) app of dft C M
Larkman from judgt of Mr Justice Kay, dated 19 Feb, 1887 March 23

FROM THE QUEEN'S BENCH AND PROBATE, DIVORCE, AND ADMIRALTY (ADMIRALTY) DIVISIONS.

For Hearing. 1886.

Oppert v Beaumont & anr app of plt from judgt of Lord Justice Fry at trial in Middlesex without a jury Aug 31

Messenger v Messenger app of plt from judgt of Mr Justice A L Smith at trial at Carlisle Nov 11

1887.

Casebourne & Co & Dorman Long & Co v Avery & ors Owners SS Chadwick & anr app of dfts R P Houston & Co from jdgt of Mr Justice Cave at trial at Leeds without a jury Jan 13

Taylor v Haigh app of plt from jdgt of Mr Justice Grantham at trial at Leeds without a jury Jan 27

Waller v The Northern Accident Insurance Co, ld app of defts from judg of Mr Justice Cave at trial at Newcastle-on-Tyne without a jury Feb 10 (S O till June 18 by order

Durrant v Holdsworth & anr app of plt from judgt of Mr Justice Mathew at trial without a jury in Middx Feb 10

Canning v Turner & anr app of plt from judgt of Mr Justice Day at trial at Newcastle-on-Tyne with a jury Feb 10

Calvert v Thomas & Lloyd app of plt from judgt of Mr Justice A L Smith at trial at Liverpool without a jury Feb 11

Gribble v Brunton, Bourke & Co app of plt from judgt of Mr Justice Mathew at trial in Middx without a jury Fab 12

Wight v Shaw app of plt from judgt of Mr Justice Denman at trial at Croydon with a jury Feb 15

Elliott v Dabell app of plt from judgt of Baron Pollock at trial without a jury in Middx Feb 15

Fison & Co v Brabyn app of plt from judgt of Mr Justice Grantham at trial at Ipswich without a jury Feb 17

Ship Bertha (claim for loss of life) Sellstrom & ors v Bristol Steam Navgn Co app of plts from judgt of Mr Justice Butt, dated Mar 23, 1886 Feb 18 (without assessors-S O pending appl to House of Lords in Ship Bernina) Mac Iver and ors v Mac Iver app of plt from judgt of Mr Justice A L Smith, at trial at Liverpool without a jury Feb 22

Ship Sara (claim by master) Baker v The Owners of Sara app of dfts (interveners) from judgt of Mr Justice Butt, dated Feb 14, 1887 Feb 23 (without assessors)

Jones v Joan app of plt from judgt of Mr Justice Stephen, at trial at Cardiff without a jury Feb 23

Lishman v Christie app of plt from judgt of Mr Justice Cave, at trial at Newcastle-on-Tyne with a special jury Feb 28

The Chillington Galvanizing Co v J Batt & Co app of plts from judgt of Mr Justice AL Smith, at trial at Liverpool without a jury Mar 1

Attwells v Blows & anr app of dft Blows from jadgt of Mr Jastice Day, at trial in Middx without a jury Mar 8 (S O during bkcy of deft Blows

A Jones & Co, ld v Whitaker app or dtt from judgt of Mr Justice Stephen, at trial in Middx without a jury Mar 10

Thornton Baker app of plt from judgt of Mr Justice Field, at trial at Nottingham without a jury Mar 10

The Masonic and General Life Assurance Co, ld v Pike app of plt Co from judgt of Mr Justice Day, at trial without a jury Mar 11

Pearman v Burdett-Coutts app of plt from part of judgt of Mr Justice Grove, at trial as to costs Mar 15

Smith v Hobbs app of dft from order of Justices Cave and Wills on special case and judet thereon Mar 17

James v Bishop app of deft from judgt of Mr Justice Wills at trial at Cardiff without a jury March 21

Guardians of Poor of Worcester Union v Guardians of Poor of Parish of Birmingham (Q B Crown Side) app of Worcester Guardians from Justices A L Smith and Grantham affirming order of Justices on special case from Sessions March 22

Crears v Burnyeat, the younger (Exor) & anr app of plt from order of Justices Day and Wills setting aside verdict and judgt at trial-action tried by Mr Justice A L Smith at Carlisle with a jury March 23

Boy The Mutual Loan Fund Association, ld app of deft from judgt of Baron Pollock at trial in Middlesex March 24

Wm Lewis & ors v The Mayor, &c, of Borough of Swansea app of defts from judgt of Mr Justice Mathew at trial at Swansea without a jury March 26 Baker v McGeorge & ors app of plt from judgt of Baron Pollock at trial in Middlesex without a jury March 28

To be continued.

HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE.

CHANCERY DIVISION.
TRINITY SITTINGS, 1887.
Causes for Trial or Hearing.

(Set down to Wednesday, June 1st, inclusive.)

Motions, Petitions, and Short Causes will be taken on the usual days, as statel in the Trinity Sittings Paper.

Causes with and without Witnesses will be taken by Mr. Justice Kay on the usual Cause days ia the order as they stand in the Cause Book.

Mr. Justice Caitty will take Witness Causes on the following days, viz.:— June 21, 22, 23, 28, 29, 30, July 5, 6, 7, 12, 13, 14.

Mr. Justice North will take Witness Causes on days to be named by His Lordship.

Mr. Justice Stirling will commence taking Witness Causes on Tuesday, June 14; his Lordship will sit in Chambers on every Monday during the Sittings. Mr. Justice Kekewich will take Witness Causes every day, in the order as they stand in the Cause Book.

Adjourned Summonses will be taken as follows:-Mr. Justice Kay, on Fridays and Saturdays; Mr. Justice Chitty, with Non-Witness Actions, except Procedure Summonses, which (if any) are taken every Saturday; Mr. Justice Stirling, on Fridays and Saturdays.

N.B. Mr. Justice North will take Adjourned Summonses as follows:-Class I., with Motions, on Fridays; Classes II. and III., in the Non-Witness List; Class IV., on Fridays and Saturdays. For description of each Class see notics issued by his Lordship's Chief Clerks, dated May 1, 1884.

Before Mr. Justice KAY. Causes for Trial (with witnesses and without witnesses).

In re Meyrick Hartmann Gillett v Lowndes act

Eden v Weardale Iron Co, ld act wits Ecclesiastical Commrs v Sir W Eden

[blocks in formation]

v Stuart

act

Native Guano Co ld v Sewage Marine
Co ld act wits

Venn v Hendriks act wits
Russell v Lamb act and m fj wits
Blair v Deakin Eden v Deakin act
wite pt hd

Magnus v Queensland National Bank act, wits

Elmore v Pirrie act wits
Atkinson v Same act wits

In re Earl of Aylesford's Estate Acts
Machell v Earl Poulett act
Denman v Leach act, wits
Sharp v Brown act
Sharp v McHenry act
Rowcliffe v Longford Wire Iron &c Co
act wits

Harris v Newitt act wits

In re Bond Big wood v Bond act & mfj

McDonald v Towerzey act, wits
Harrison v Spitzley act wits

In re Hardbottle Hardbottle v Hardbottle act wits

Brown v Alabaster act wits
Scovell v Robinson act wits
Spalding v Skoulding act & couater

claim

Rogers v Barry Docks and Ry Co act
Stier v Stier m fj

Andrews v Barnes act wits
Judge v Tisdall act wits
Gaulard v Sir Coutts Lindsay & Co, ld
act wits

Godwin v Rathbone act & m fj wits
Hatten v Russell act

Munro v Met & Met Diect Ry Co act

Wits

Johnson v Park act & m fj wits
Barnard v Hoare act wits
Wilke v Newman
Ryder v Auders act

act wits

Hobman v Hughes act wits
Sampson v Streatham & Genl Estate
Cold act wits

Clarke v Lane mfj

In re L Harbord & Patent Designs &c
Act motn

Slann v Smith act wits

In re Furber Rooke v Blandy act
Bowden v Bowyer act & m fj
Edison & Swan &c Co v Holland act
Topping v Workington & District
Liberal Club ld act wits
Milward v Jackson act & m fj
Ballinger v Dunn & Duncan act wits
In re W Moss Lloyd's, Barnett's &
Bosanquet's Bk v Moss act
Briant v Falkner act
Morr's v Partridge act wits
McNar v Howard act
Chifford v Cliff act wits

In re Horwood Horwood v Paddison Dukes v Dukas act
act

Eisman v Scholes act and m fj

In re St John St John v St Joan act
and sumns wits
Hancock v Wyatt act
Hawkes v Curtice
Owen v Roberts act

Pemberton v Goodall act & sumns
Thwaite v Hill act

In re Coell Hicks v Payne act wits
Humphries v Donnithorne act wits
Thornhill v Hoy and act wits
Gower v H M Postmaster Gea special

case

St Saviour's District Bd of Works v South-Eastern Ry Co act wits

In re Kippax Ackroyd v Kippax act wits

Goodall v Pemberton act and m fj wits

Wiltsaire v Joyce act wits
Peach v Selby-Lowndes act
Sceptre Life Assoc v Harrison act wits
Upington v Hill act wits
Welchman v Leech act wits
Elliott v Merrill act wits
Britain v Hirsch, Pritchard, & Co act
wits

In re London Celluloid Co & Co's Acts motn

Quait v Eastwood act wits
White v Peto Bros

Booker v Rollinson

act wits

act wits

[blocks in formation]

Ellington v Clark, Burnett, & Co, ld
act wits
Baskerville v Iron & Steel Works Meikle v Price act
Assoc, ld act wits

Buckeridge v Patman act wits

In re Bethell Haydon v Lightfoot act wits

T & T Vicars v Bennis & anr act wits Costes v Whitehead m fj (short) Hardie v Didcot, Newbury, &c, Ry Co

act

« PreviousContinue »