Page images

T (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 uty 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. The 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 proprietors, 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 wellfounded, 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 C'mijirmati'on of Possesaory or Qualifilcl T itle.—Part Ill. 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 posSflflsory 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 accompamed by an affidavit with prescribed particulars, and after the expiration of fi_ve years from the first publication of notice of the application, the applicant may, in the absence of any effectual 0 position, be registered as an iibsolute owncr. The notices are to be publishes 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 mtroduction of a new clause (clause 16), authorising the Laud 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 Commitiee do not see any sullicient reason for allowmga title originally registered as possessory, and therefore with but Blight evidence, to become either absolute or qualified, i.e., absolute ex cpt against certain persons, after so short a period as five years, or indeed at iiny lh9rtei_' 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 <l_eprecate_ the introduction of two modes of limitation, the one by lapse of 1511116)-pphcable generally, and the other by advertisement applicable only to 3P°¢18-l_ estates. They regret that the Bill does not make it necessary that the solicitor for the applicant should concur in the afiidavit, as is required by the rules under the Act. It has been suggested to the committee that the month of l\ovember 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 tne whole desirable to have a fixed month for all such notices, and the public are now in 31° 1_18b1t of looking out in November for advertisements affecting their l$l1t)f- 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 Pfiflons who mu have adverse claims and the su estion of the Council

~ Y ' ' ' SS that a change of proprietorship should ,not determine the application which

the successor should be at liberty to continue, has been adopted (clause 13, 3b'9f3{Jl10I_i 6). Clause 9, sub-section 3, has been struck out, and no special P1V18iu_n is made for costs in connection with any petition against an entry mmfimmg th° W118, and this, in common with so many other matters, aPPf-‘Bis to be left to the rules. The committee see no reason for the special %'°f°°h°n_8i11 by clause 15, sub-section 3, to persons absent from “ the

mt°d_ Kingdom in the service of the Crown," and think that the same pi'°°tl°n (if necessary at all) should be extended to all persons out of the km8d°m.

:b9“"dT5¢8.—This part of the Bill has been greatly altered since its introduction, but is even less likely to be often made use of than in thmglllill shape. For the clauses as originally drawn promised finality, as noireslllt 0_!_11n application involving probably considerable discussion, if whM11111 litigation. But, as the clauses now stand, the boundaries even chm 8-lccrtaincd and entered in the register are not conclusive. By the new accu'§i°l83°_ 19), If the boundaries as entered in the register are not in ‘Mfr Ilce with the actual boundaries as enjoyed by the registered proprietor

ether ‘*PP1"e11t1y by reason of mistake at the time of entry, or by subaaquetn encroachment on the part of an adjoining owner), the registered Pfoprietor, if he would under existing law be barred by the Statute of

[ocr errors]

Limitations, is to be similarly haired notwithstanding the entry. If the element of finalit is eliminated, the object of this part of the Bill is not clear, and few landbwners 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 boimdaries 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 s ecified 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 establishcd 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 infrequcncy of mistake or fraud, and it is unlikcl 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 (2Q and 21) has with one exception been confined to verbal alterations and additions, rendered necessary either by other changes in the Bill or m order to make clearer the grounds on which compensation may be sought. The_except1on is in clause 20. sub-section l, which limits the right to COII1p0Il8itl0!1 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 m 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 mdemnity against the legal ex penses 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 1Dd0lIl111t)"fl.g3.1D.8t 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 compensation at all. The compensation provided by the insurance fund is by the Bill limited to “ the capital value of the land pr 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 thzat, if

the system as embodied in the revised Bill is to be adopted, there 811001 b6 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. Ertmaion of Registration.-Clauses 22 and 23 are_altogether new, and provide for an application for registration with a qualified title, find f°1' T9815‘ ' f d' 'd d hares and of chambers or other portions of a house

tration o un ivi e s ' , _ . constituting a separate freehold, none of which could have been_dealt Wit]; under the Bill as drawn. Clause 24, which provides for the registration lp

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]
[merged small][ocr errors][graphic][graphic][graphic][ocr errors]

clause 35 provides an appeal against the refusal of aii application to register,
which is certainly necessary, and was not beforegiven. _Tho powep 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 pf 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 tho_clause as now
inserted (clause 37 (2)) the functions of the Houses of Parliament arc? not
limited to the adoption or rejection of the rules as a whole, and this might,
especially in the caso 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, Pailiament would be compelled to annul the whole. The com-
mittee 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

roposed 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 in-

ormation, 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 tho
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 imanimous expression of
opinion obtained from tho 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 lsnd
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 suflicient period, is allowed, tho commencement of the now
system will inevitably be marked by extreme confusion, and disappointment,
since neither oflicials 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 bo fixed
by the special tribunal constituted under the Solicitors’ Remuneration Act.

.Ammdments of Law q Raul Property.—Tlie Bill proposes to abolish all
existing modes, rules, or canons of descent as regards real estate; gives to
the personal representatives of a copyholdor a year within which to
dispose of the copyhold land wiihout taking admission; empowers per-
sonal representatives to appropriate real or personal estate in satisfaction
of a legacy or share residue; assimilates, except on one point, the rules of
devolution and administration of real and personal estate on the death of the
proprietor; onlargesall estates tail which could without anyconscnt be barred
mto estate in fee simple absolute without any deed ; declares that expres-
sions which before the Act would have crested 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 tem-
porary or permanent. ' The amen_ ments authorising the appropriation of

egacies or_shai-e of residue,_ enlarging estates tail into estates in fee simple,
pnd authorising the redemption of rent charges out of capital, are retrospective.
.[‘ho last-nientipned amendment was brought before the Lord Chancellor by
the council quite rscently._ 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, ex-
cept that real estate is to remain liable to succession duty, and is not to become
hablc t_o probate_or legacy duty,_ that a surviving wife or husband is to
be entitled on intestacy to_s. hfo interest in the husband’s or wife's rcal
estate, with a proviso saving the rights of persons married before the
passing of the Act, an_d 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
thnt_thc provision by which u 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
B116 WW9 mflfrlefll to a second husband or not, and the children might be
left destitute. The comm tt ' '

[ocr errors]

Land Transfer Board, who are to inform the Commissioners of Inland Revenue, and the caution is to expire at the end of six months imless renewed by the commissioners, who may not without special leave renew after tho 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 grantsm, the hardship of stale or dormant claims for uty, 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 tho case of a tenant in tail of unsound mind entitled in reversion at the date of the Act, and then and thencsforth until he becomes tenant in tail in possession. The section enlarging a base fee into a foo 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. \Vith the passing of the Act, therefore, estates tail wi1l,_ except in the case of existing settlements, be no longer known to the Enghsh law.

Dmantinuancc of Registries of Dmi.r.—-Power is taken to close local registries as to past only of the land within their districts,'if such ps.rt is within aland transfer district. In the elapse (49, sub-section (1)) providing for the existing stafi of existing registry oflices, the words (p. 24, line 8) “if he so consents," which appeap in the draft amendments hpve been inadvertently left out, and should be inserted after the word “ or in that line. Tho remainder of the clause is unaltered.

Supplemental I’roviaim.~i.—The committee refer to their observations on clause 37 asto 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 e_ntrus‘ted with the preparation of the rules, must of course come into _o_flico as soon after the passing of the Act as possible. ' An _ addition (su_b-section 4) has been made to clause 5 , _to which, if the committee rightly apprehend its effect, they entertain very strong objection. The clause deals with the remuneration of tho members and ofliccrs of the Land Transfer Board, and goes on to provide that “ any pflicers employed on behalf of applicants for registration, or other persons dealing with the Land Transfer Oliice, maybe remunerated by the pziyment_of such fess by the parties as may be prescribed." This proviso appears to pomt to the establishment of oflicials authorised to transact for reward the business of the Land Transfer O_fii<>B1 and it is obvious that such a systeni would be extremely unfair '63 solicitors, and would, as has been previously found to be the case, 188 to touting of a very objectionable character. The committee do not of course, desire to limit the right of any proprictor_ to transact ll!-B own business without employing an agent of any kind. _But if an agent be employed, and is to be remunerated _for the 5G1‘V1C6B_ Whwl} he may render, the committee feel bound to claim that the business 0 conveyancing for fee or reward which has up to the present time biitffl exclusively entrusted to solicitors should continue to be_ so entrusted._ Pub 20 policy has hitherto dictated this course as the best_ in the public iiiterefl , and solicitors as a body have, in consequence of their exclusive prlvilffilfli, been subjected to summary discipline and to numerous I‘€Shl‘1Ctl01J.S: _ BY have to undergo a prolonged professional education and SBV9l'9.EXBI11ll1B-l30l;5: and their remuneration, instead of being, as in otherprofessions, fixe ti); themselves, is carefully limited by statute. The committee contend the fl would be manifestly unfair and unreasonable to_ introduce» as P'“'t ° D‘:

snerally compulsory scheme, provisions tending to place tbs _¢'im
duct of much, if not the greater part, of the conveyancing 118111 te
of the country into oflicial hands. The chance would °P°“‘in
with special hardship on solicitors practising in the country _01' as
small practice. Moreover, on public grounds, and.for guaiimteglllfi is
much as possible the bona fidu and accuracy of dealings with lan , lon-
im ortant that those who practise in land transfer business should be 518$}; h
sible and well trained; and that all transactions should be conducted mfizrgof
a solicitor, who would identify the parties, and be amenable as 1111 ° cmed
the co\i.rt for any irregularity. If the committee have oorljeclly "PPr°°“ib,a
the intention of the proviso cited, they feel that on this poin_t PVBTY Ptilistrict
opposition should be offered to the Bill. In clause 56, in addition tpb made
registrars of tho High Court, there are inserted as ollicers which ms) p Lmd
auxiliary t.o the Land Transfer Board, “ clei-ks of the 1102100» clerks P,
Tax Commissioners, clerks to justices, or repistrars of county courts; ihfion

Miscellaneous. —Clause 62 has been intro uced to complste tlleyflislfiu com
of real and personal estate, and provides that the word ‘ heirs s f dem-
tinue to take effect as a word of limitation only, for the P"1‘P°5e °m°ni,,
mining the quantity of the estate or interest to be taken by thtfihll pow
connection with whose name the word is used; but when used for cap“ em.
of designating a class intended to take beneficially, shall, in docupi resent;
outed beforo the passing of the Act, have the same mcan111$ M ales? B com
hut in documents executed after the passing of the Act shall, I111 cording to
trary intention appears, be construed to refer to the next of km, “(Fm we Ac;
the statute of distribution. The Bill is to be construed F15 ‘>11; W
of 1875, and is to come into operation on the lst .lanufl1'Y, 183 ub_secfi,,,,

First S0/L8dflZ".—ThG additional object of ih_e insurafiw his - 5 go be (2)) suggests that the difficulty inherent in an mdefeasible tit B fififle is evident to tho framers of the Bill, and that the idea of ii gllflffin to B regiy gaining croimd. For this sub-section contemplates_c0mP°“5°'t‘°nvim,ed by tered proprietor dispossessed because his title was in E0199 “'3, The mt fraud, forgery, or error. and the real owner has been reinsta33 -which ,0. of insurance is somewhat reduced by the new proviso on P- i ilhintim vidcs that where a transfer for valuable consideration is mlldfilwu on Bud, months after first registration, no ii1siu'iince_fce sh_B-ll be Palmb ef £1 claim transfer. Sub-section C, as originally drawn, deprived a. perfl0llt0 negjrecty or to compensation, if ho had contributed to the loss by the “av Dino default of himself or his agent. But as rcviwdq the aggneve per”


]une 11, 1887. THE SOLICITORS’ JOURNAL. 545



be entitled in such a case either to no compensation, or to a plroportionately less amount of compensation according to the degree in w 'ch he has so contributed. The committee regret to find that no rovision is made for full compensation to the person aggrieved, but only i)or 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 ii. 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.


Axsppendix 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 :——

1. Whether, assuming registration of title to be desirable, the modification 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 desirable ?

‘3. Wl;ethei- the system of registration of title ought to be made comp sory

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 inland 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 P

5._Whethe.r 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?

- 7. Whether the plan proposed for an insurance fund is well adapted and suflicient to meet the dangers arising from fraud or mistake?

8. Whether the proposed composition of the Land Transfer Board is 5fltlB€fl?CiOl'y; or whether it would be capable of any, and what improvemen

9. Whether the power of making the rules by which the system of regisn-anon, 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 111 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 publlsh an analysis. _ The result of the replies may be thus summed up

A_larg_e ma]or1ty 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 1s 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 gouipulsory, there is some difference of opinion, 15 being against and mu; favour of that course, while the view is more than once expressed ml; registration, compulsory, should be applicable to possessory Mp: only, and be m respect of the next dealing after the passing of the

Fears are expressed that the system will be choked with the volume cf ‘t_:‘i>Tk» unless district registries are very numerous and have but small dis

Qts attached to them, and unless the local knowledge of practising solicitors be utilized.

That registration must involve incrrused cost and delay is the almost mmously expressed opinion, and special stress is laid upon this in of B_ transactions which are_so numerous in the country. The societies

O ‘¥n{mBhBl11 8nd'Preston give valuable details upon this point.

lmf"§10l1s_are divided, but are, on the whole, adverse to the proposed gbsol Y which prossessory or qualified titles are made convertible into wouklllto titles, and fears are expressed that it would facilitate fraud, and

Not 3°‘ b6 f0lmd \_1se_ful_enough to justify the cost and risk. bmmduige of the societies is_ in favour of the plan for conclusively settling much mielittgud fears are evidently felt that, if the plan should be adopted,

The hgiiriiiilcimiiiliidcei 17 rliuliid ma to 1» ft s

_ _ s genera y ml e a necessary pa o f,‘§§n§f§‘°§,f5:;1; °l-llefliiilon is taken to_its cost being thrown up_on landthavlligih mm 9. ggglnlifilnzi. to register, instead of upon the public, and to The e1;P0_s1t1on of the Land Transfer Board is not considered satisfactory. consist lg! §f10I1 In the memorandurnprefixod to the Bill that it would wen as in copersons of epperience in organization and administration as desiring thatngpggpgzgghis quoted, the socieitles arclgilnanimous in

, o necessan ' ave muc ractl erience “h%‘,‘11§nf‘£'m Pm or the_board. l P upis amug feellng that the power of making rules should not be

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 carefu ly considered and to some extent embodied in the supplemental report.


Mr. JOHN Roman Pli!LLll’S, barrister, stipendiury magistrate for the borough of West Ham, died on the 3rd inst. after s lingering illness. 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 Lincoliils-inn in Trinity Term, 1870, and he formerly practised on the South \Vales and Chester Circuit. He was for some time on the staff of the Wanxnr Rsrosrau. 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 \Vcst Hum. lilr. Phillips was a magistrate for the county of Essex. At the West Ham Police-court on the 4th inst., Mr. liieeson, mayor of West Ham, Mr. Bishop Oulpeper, deputy-stipendiary magistrate, Mr. Bruty, clerk of the court, and Mr. Thomas Willis, solicitor, expressed their sorrow at Mr. Phil1ips’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. J OHN Wnmunrs, solicitor, town clerk of Brecon, died at that place on the 27th ult. iifter a somewhat long illness. Mr. Williams was born in 1829. He was admitted ii. solicitor in 1861, having been articled to Mr. Roger Watkins, whom he succeeded in 1873 as town clerk of the borough of B1-econ, 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.

Mr. FRANCIS Fasnnaicx PXNKBTI‘, Chief Justice of the \Vest African Settlements, died at Freetown, Sierra Leone, on the 28th ult. Chief J iistice 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 Leone. In the following year he was appointed to act as Chief Justice of the West African Settlements, and in 1882 he received a permanent appointment as Chief Justice. The deceased had twice administered the Government of the West African Settlements, and he was a member of the Executive and Legislative Councils.

Mr. WILLIAM Paras J OLLIFPB, barrister, died suddenly at Bournemouth on the 31st ult. at the age of seventy-four. Mr. J ollifie was the only son of Mr. Christopher J olliife, of Tosh, Dorsetshire, and was born in 1813. He was called to the bar at Grsy’s-inn in Trinity Term, 1839, and he had

ractised for many years as an equity draftsman and conveyancer. Mr. gollifie 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. J ollitfe was buried on the 4th inst.

Mr. ROLLA Roiiss, barrister, died at Fern Hill, Melton, Suffolk, on the 2nd inst. inhis eighty-second year. Mr. Rouse was the son of Mr. William Rouse, of Hasketon, Sufiolk, 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 und deputy-lieutenant for the county of Suffolk, and he held for several years the rank of major in the 2nd Battalion of Suffolk Bifle Volunteers. He was married in 1830 tothe daughter of the Rev. Philip Meadows, but he had been a widower for about five years.


Mr. Lens Kxownizs, barrister, llI.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 Pcndlebury, Lancashire, and was born in 1857. He was educated at Rugby and at Trinity College, Cambridge. Be 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. Wrnnrssx M1rciisx.i., solicitor, of 25, Fenchurch-street, has been appointed a Commissioner to administer Oaths in the Supreme Court of Judicature.

MI. JOHN Hvsrrnars Honsox, solicitor (of the firm. of Hinckley &

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

oession to Mr. Charles Simpson, resigned. Mr. Hudson was admitted a suing his researches The results of his investigations, as given by the Tinies,

solicitor in 1861.

Mr. Fasnsurcx Tanawnr Hans, solicitor, of Totnes, has been ointed Registrar of the Totnes County Court (Circuit No._ 58), llistrict Registrar under the Judicature Acts, in succession to his pa

arc, lirst roof of the successful iesults of the supervision of offenders dis

ap_ charged om,pnson conditionally on their good behaviour during the unaud expired terms of their original sentences; and next, that one of the chief


er defects of English procedure, in regard to criminals, consists in the general I

. . . . - - - - . H ' - " a the late Mr. Theodore Bryett. Mr. Hare was admitted asolicitor m 1862. absence °f the mlmmon of prwecuuons by the Government e is smpme

He is clerk to the Totnes Burial Board and to the county magistrates.

Mr. J ans‘ Browns NICHOLSON, solicitor, of Sunderland, has appointed Clerk to the Boldon School Board. Mr. Nicholson was mitted a solicitor in I884.

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

been so disappointinglv. He dwells upon the fact that an arrangement which ad‘ throws upon private citizens, however r and ignorant and otherwise occu

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

School Board. Mr. Mace was admitted a solicitor in 1872.
Mr Bsiwarm Wiss, barrister, has been appointed Attorney Ge

[ocr errors]

. . - ner - - - h 1s_ for the Colony of New soum wa1e8_ prison labour, reforniatory and industrial sc oo

Mr. WILLIAM Srizsn, Q.C., has been appointed an Examiner for the

degree of B.C.L. at the University of Oxford.

to act as a Police Magistrate at Bombay. Mr. Boevy is the fourth s of Sir Martin Crawley Boevy, Bart., and was born in 1873. He

educated at Balliol College, Oxford, and he was called to the bar Lincoln's-inn in Trinity Term, 1868. He has been for many years

Mr. An-ri-iisn WILLIAM ORAWLIY Boiivir, barrister, has been Bppoiu w

[ocr errors]



[ocr errors]

n 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 the Hilary Sittings.

Professional habit is dlflicult to shake ofi. Rumour has it that sev

er of the replies to the invitations to the festivities issued by the Incorporate n

Law Society were headed “ Re the Entertainments ”; and that at least 0 gentleman accepted the invitation to one banquet expressly “ witho prejudice “ to his chances of the other.

fessor of jurisprudence, Dr Johann Ernst Otto Stobbe He was the a t

Tho Times announces the death, at Leipsic, of the eminent German p


[ocr errors]


d SPECIAL N0'ric1l.—Qnoen's Bench Fmul Appeals in Court L, and Chancel’) 6 Appeals (General List) in Court ll , will be taken on the usual days during at lnnity Sittings.

Queen's Bench Intarlooutory Appeals in Court 1., and Chancery interlocutory Appeals in Court 11., will be taken on the first day of the Sittinzs, also Ill ‘ Court I., on the second day (Wednasdav), and afterwards as usilll, B"?!


of a large number of valuable W k b id _ - _ _ 11 hf)? Wednesday, during the Sittings. Bankruptcy Appeals also, as usual, on Fridlil

[ocr errors]

fl in Court I. _ d Appeals from the Lancaster Palatine Court (it any), which have been pears over in the General List, will be taken in Court II. on Thursday, J ans I

[ocr errors]

mittee, and there will consequently be no necessity for a poll.
The limes says :—“ It is generally well worth while to consider attcnti 'ely

the proceedings at the annual meetings of the Incorporated Law Soeilztv. Rare y do they fail to elucidate points of practical importance Their discus

sions, an unfriendly might 2:5, at est express only! the opinions of ii professional trade union ; but, at events, it is an onlig tened 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 izontrust to that most feeble of institutions, the Bar Committee, which as fur as i

, s generally known, has yet doiic little more than indulge in querulous wails as to distribution of patronage or puny unnoticed suggestions. . . . Probably there never was a ti h th ' '

me W en ere was so httle energy directed to legal reform as now. _Thc 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 passmg. In regard to criminal law, for example, there is an absolute stoppage. liven a small, unobjectionable measure of reform such as Lord Bramwe 's Bill for easing the work of ' b

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

1m great advantage in pur

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[merged small][ocr errors]
[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]
[merged small][graphic]
[ocr errors][graphic]

In re Avery’s Patent, N 0. 6938, A D. 1885, and Trade Marks Act, 1883 app oi

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]


For Hearing.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

To be continued.

[ocr errors]

Causes for Trial or Hearing. _ _ (Set down to Wednesday, June lat, inclusive.) Motions, Petitions, and Short Causes will be taken on the usual days, as statei

in the Trinity Sittings Paper.

[ocr errors]

His Lordship.

[ocr errors]

Stirling, on Fridays and Saturdays.

[ocr errors]

Before Mr. Justice KAY. ‘ Brown v Alabaster act wig,

Causes for Trial (with witnesses and
without witnesses).

In re Meyrick Harttnann Gillett v
Lowndes act

Eden v Weardale Iron Co, ld act wits

Ecclesiastical Commrs v Sir WEdcn
act wits

Russell v Davies act

Lowther v Curwen act wits

Kirby v Freeman act wits

Mason v \Vestoby act

In re Stuart Mansion House Chmbrs
v Stuart act

Native Guano Cold v Sewage Marine
Cold act wits

Venn v Hendriks act wits

Russell v Lamb act and m fj wits

Blair v Deakin Eden v Deakin act
wits pt lid

Magnus v Queensland National Bank
act, wits

Elmore v Pirrio 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

Rowclitfc v Longiord Wire Iron &c Co
act wits

Harris v Newitt act wits

1n re Bond Bigwood v Bond act&
m f j

McDonald v Towerzey act, wits

Harrison v Spitzley act wits

In re Hardbottls Hardbottle v Hard-
bottle act wits

In re Horwood Horwood v Paddison

Eisman v Scholes act and in fj

In re St John St John v St Joan act
and snmns wits

Hancock v Wyatt act

Hawkes v Curtice

Owen v Roberts act

Pembertsn v Goodall act 8: sumns

Thwaite v Hill act

In re Coell Hicks v Payne act wits

Humpbriea v Donnitliorne act wits

Ttiornhill v Hoynud act wits

Gower v H M Postmaster Gcu special

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

In re Kippax Ackroyd v Kippax act

Goodall v Pemberton act and ni f j

Wiltsoire v J oyca act wits

Peach v Selby-Lowndei act

Sceptre Life Assoc v Harrison act wits

Upmgton v Hiil act wits

Welchman v Leech act wits

Elliott v Merrill act wits

Britain v Hirsch, Pritchsrd, & Co act

Ellington v Clark, Burnett, 8: Co, ld
act wits

Basksrville v Iron & Steel Works
Assoc, ld act wits

Buckeridge v Patman act wits

In re Bethell Haydon v Lighttoot
act wits

[ocr errors][ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
« PreviousContinue »