Page images
[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]

been efiectually transferred to her by the testatrix, and that 0. had not l

been constituted a trustee of the note for her.

NORTH, J ., held that E. was entitled to the £200. He said that it could notbe disputed that, if the testatrix had placed £200 in money in the hands of C., with a direction similar to that which she gave respecting the note, there would have been an effectual voluntary gift of the £200 to E. It was not, however, necessary that money should be actually paid overit was only necessary that there should be either a complete transfer oi property or a valid declaration of trust of it. The note was placed in the _ands of 0., as_a trustee, to be handed over by him to E. on the happening of the particular event mentioned by the testatrix, and down to the time of her death she had never altered the intention which she had expressed to_hi.m. It was unnecessary to consider what would have been the result if the testatrix had changed her mind.—Couxssi., Oooluon, Q.O., and S. B. L. Druce; Cozens-Hardy, Q.O., and Phipmi Beale ; Gifurd, Q.C., and Bardsicell ; Yale Lee; Manby ; E. Ford. Souciroas, Gumleri, Burden 6' Woodliouse ; Lem Brothers ,- Lane, Fagge, Q Andrews; Vering Go. ,

[ocr errors][ocr errors]

Judgment was given in this case on an application to a Divisional Court for a new trial of a petition under the Legitimacy Declaration Act, 1858, which had been_tried before the President of the Probate, Divorce, and Admiralty Division and a special jury. The petitioner, Arthur Bolle Bosville, by his next friend, petitioned for a declaration that he was the legitimate son of Thomas Bolle and Elizabeth Marian Bosville. Mr. and Mrs. Bosville were married on the 14th of J une, 1882, and a daughter was born inthe following year. On the 30th of June, 1884, the wife eloped with Augustus William Craven. On the 6th of August, 1885, the court pronounced a decree msi dissolving the marriage, which decree was afterwards made absolute. On the 3rd of April, 1885, Mrs. Bosville gave birth to a son, who was the petitioner in this suit. Mr. and Mrs. Bosville had been cited to appear, and_ the former alleged in his answer that he was not the father of thepeiitioner. The Attorney-General traversed the allegations in thepet1tio_n, but took no active part in the proceedings. At the trial no medical evidence was called on behalf of the petitioner, but it was contended that, since the petitioner was born only 277 days after the cessation of cohabitation between the husband and the wife, there was an irrebuttable presumption in favour of his legitimacy, and that no evidence was admissible to rebut that presumption. Mr. Bosville’s counsel called evidence to show that at the time of Mrs. Bosville s elopement certain physical conditions existed, and two medical witnesses _ were called. who stated that the existence of such conditions within the 277 days would almost exclude the idea that the child_ was Mr. Bosville’s. The President, in summing up the case tothe jury,l_sid it down that the child of amarried woman must be presumed to be the child of her husband until the contrary was proved, although

the stringency of the rule had been somewhat relaxed in more modern

[ocr errors]

No medical evidence had been adduced by the petitioner, but the medical witnesses called on the other side had expressed opinions adverse to the probability of the legitimacy of the petitioner, while the whole course of conduct on the part of the mother pointed to the conclusion that Craven was the father of the child. A verdict against the legitimacy could not be found upon a mere balance of probabilities, but in the present case there was sufficient evidence to justify the finding. On both grounds the application for a new trial must be refused. Lord COLERIDGE, C.J., concurred. COUNSEL, Gully, Q.G., and Ram ; Gore; Sir C’. Russell. Q-C-i Imlerwick, Q,.C., and C. A. Middleton. Somcirous, Gzrdge, Kirby, & Jfillelt ,Gregory, Rowcliflhi, Rawlc, Q Johnslrme ; Collyer-Briatow, lVi'tlm's, Russell, Q Hill.

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

In this case the bankrupt appealed from the refusal of the judge of the Norwich County Court to grant him a certificate for the removal of disqualiflcations under section 32 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1883. Section 32 provides that where a debtor is adjudged bankrupt he shall, subject to the provisions of the Act, be disqualified for sitting or voting in the House of Lords or Commons, or being appointed or acting as justice of the peace, mayor, alderman, ardian of the poor, member of a school board, vestry, or in other ogdbs of a similar nature therein specified, but that “ (2) The disqualiflcations to which a bankrupt is subject under this section shall be removed and cease if and when— . . . (Ii) he obtains from the court his discharge with a certificate to the effect that his bankruptcy was caused by misiortime without any misconduct on his part. The court may grant or withhold such certificate as it thinks fit, but any refusal of such certificate shall be subject to appeal." In the present case the bankrupt was a printer at Norwich and editor of the Daylight newspaper in that town. In 1886, having been indicted for alibel, he gave a bill of sale over his property for the pupposes of his defence. At the Ipswich Summer Assizes he was found gu' ty and sentenced to three months imprisonment and to pay the costs of the prosecution. During the bankrupt's imprisonment the goods, including his machinery and plant, &c., were sold, and in August, 1886, while still in prison at Ipswich, lie filed his own petition. On application for discharge, the ofiicial receiver, after dealing with the criminal prosecution above mentioned, reported that the losses and deficiency appeared to have arisen through law costs and other expenses incurred in the defence of actions brought against the bankrupt, which had involved a heavy outlay. He also reported that the bankrupt had continued to trade after knowing himself to be insolvent, and that on a previous occasion he had made a private composition arrangement with his trade creditors. The discharge of the bankrupt was granted on consent being given that judgment be entered against him to pay the official receiver 5s. in the pound by instalments, under section 28, sub-section (6), but an application for a certificate for the removal of disqualificaiions under section 32 was refused, the county court judge holding that by the word "misfortune" _in the section something unforeseen which could not be guarded against was to be understood ; that the thing which had without doubt brought the greatest embarrassment on the bankrupt in the present case was the criminal trial, which, coupled with the fact that the bankrupt had continued to trade after knowing himself to be insolvent, prevented him from coming to the conclusion that the bankruptcy had been caused by misfortune without any misconduct on the bankrupt’s part. On appeal it was urged on behalf of the bankrupt that his position was attributable to the law costs and to the fact that owingto the forced sale his property had realised much below its real value, and that the bankruptcy was therefore owing solely to misfortune. It was also argued that a libel was not misconduct under the Act; that section 32 was a corollary to section 28 of the Act and must be interpreted in reference to it and to the “ conduct " therein specified alone (Ba: parts Board qf Trade, Re Betta Q Block, 35 W. R. 530).

Tun Couar (Ma-mew and (lava, JJ.) dismissed the appeal. M.\-riisw. J-1 said that as soon as the facts were brought to light it was clear there was no other possible way offdcaling with the case than that adopted by the county court judge. His lordship could see no reai3on_ Wll8t€V9€,ff)l' putting any such construction on the Act as that ‘ misconduct _iu section 32 must be interpreted with reference to section 28. The section meant what it said, pure misfortune as distinguished from and without misconduct. There was also no ground for a further distinction which was attempted to be made, that, although certain crimes against person and property might be misconduct, Libel would not be.C.i_\-s, J ., 881?, that there was no qualification in the section _the word misconduct. In implied blame, and his lordship thought it implied moral blame not of a trivial character. In the present case the sentence imposed showed considerable moral deliuquity on the part of the bankrupt. The bill of sale was traceable to the prosecution. 'l‘he bankruptcy was caused by the libel, the sentence, and the imprisonment. _It was caused by the criiiic of the bankrupt, and it was impossible to discuss the Yquestion that it was not caused by IIllsCOl1dl1(:t./COL'.\‘.<EL, E. ct/01.71‘? 7! ilhs, Q,.C.; H. Biqum , illuir Jim-kenzia. SOLICITORS, Storey 4* Crawlmul ; J. Slrmlry ; The Solivilvr $0 the Board of Trade.

[merged small][ocr errors]

594 THE soLic1TORs* IOURNAL. July 2. 5881 g



[ocr errors]

Watkin, Mr. R. E. Turner, Mr. A. W. Timbrell, Mr. S. Hall, Mr.
Boyle Thompson (medical officer of the society), &c.
The CHAIRMAN having proposed the loyal toasts, which were received
with the customary enthusiasm, gave the toast of the evening, “Pros-
perity to the United Law Clerks’ Society.” He said ho had been looking
at the report of the society for the past year, and he thought that
in many respects he might congratulate himself in being able to
address them upon an occasion on which such a report came before
them. He congratulated himself both on what was in the report and
on what was not there. For iii all the reports which he had had the
privilege up to this time of reading and on all the occasions on
which he had had the pleasure of being present on occasions like this
there had always occurred a paragraph, there had always been a sen-
tence or two in the speech of the chairman devoted to a recognition of
the losses which the society had sustained in the course of the past year.
No such paragraph occurred this year in the report of the society, and no
such sentence was required from him. That did not arise from the fact
that there had been during the past year no professional changes,
but apparently none of these changes had been occasioned by the removal
from amongst them of the friends of the society. One venerable form had
disappeared from the bench at the Royal Courts of Justice, but the Vice-
Chancellor, for so they must still term him, was yet amongst them, and if
the weight of years prevented him from longer taking an active part in
the administration of justice, it had not deprived him of the capacity of
cultivating those tastes and enjoying those pleasures which had alleviated
the trials of a long professional career and were now the solace of his
green old age. In the House of Lords, again, an unforeseen and sudden
failure of health had deprived the public and the profession of the benefit
of the services of Lord Blackburn, than whom he might safely say that
during the last quarter of a century no greater expositor of the English
law had sat on the bench; but he was sure they would all rejoice to learn
that entire relief from the strain of judicial work had abated those
symptoms of failing health which had alarmed his friends and led to his
resignation, and that he was now enabled to look forward to a life which
would be at least as long as those of his contemporaries, and it was hoped
that with returning strength he would be able, occasionally at least, to
take his place in the House of Lords and to add to those numerous judg-
ments of his which had already enriched the law reports. He (the chair-
man) would now turn to what was in the report, and he observed that in
it a distinction was drawn between what was termed the provident
character of the society and its benevolent operations. With respect to
provident societies they knew that they were beset by numerous dangers.
Some of them came before the courts of justice occasionally in a distres-
sing form. They had heard of cases in which such societies had, through
the bad management, or the negligence, or perhaps something worse, of
those to whom their affairs had been entrusted, become unable to fulfil their
contracts or hays had them reduced, and that was an operation which was
accompanied with great distress onthepart of those who had looked forward
to the provision which they thought they had made out of their hard earnings
for their old age, or for those who were to remain after they were gone.
No suggfistion of any such want of care, he was sure, had ever entered
the min of any of thpse who had known of the operations of the society.
Its trustees and administrators were far beyond the suspicion of any-
thing of the kind. In was not in that direction at all that any danger
had been apprehended _for_ the society, but another source had been
looked on as that to which it was most exposed; for he remembered that
on previous occasions its actuaries and its auditors had warned the
members of this, and the last time when he had dined with the society he
could remember that the learned judge who had then occupied. the chair
and seyeral speakers had dwelt with some apprehension on the danger
to which It was exposed from being so old an institution. It was sug-
gefleil Willi With Bgc came a decay in the zeal of the members and when
they SM?hat they had accumulated considerable capital they no lon er
e-“fled themselves t° bring in younger members but it was {minted gut
bi the 1'eP°"'5ind by the speakers on these occasions that therein la
me great dllflger for the society and that it mi ht become ' ty
¢°mP°5°d°i °1d!11%mbBrs who rbsted on what thg h d d a soclfhy
fundwhichWY hid Bwumulatcd. There was a vify a t ?1ne_0n th 0
we °°'1."\§‘€““°"s mishtdwp on while the iiabnitieelliefiged adllgflfllillatad
time 1111.5 come when the ~ . - “ ‘
the comribunonfi of y0ung;0n<;\:$$¥ednc.ip€tgl,filo ginger supP0rted bY
the demands upon it. Ho rejoiced ’g=e,.‘i, ih°"n insuflieieut to meet
Y. erofore, to find a clear

statement in the report that not only had the accumulated capital
largely increased, but that the society had now a greater number of
members than it ever had before. And he trusted that those who would
preside over its future anniversary festivals would have from year to year
to call attention to an improvement in this respect. It had always been
the case, as he had said, that the members of the society had been warned
against allowing their zeal to abate, and in common with those who had
preceded him he now expressed a hops that tho_members of ths_ society
would not be content with annually making their personal contributions
to the funds, but that they would exert themselves with the zeal they
seemed to have displayed during the last few years to procure further
members and so strengthen the society in every respect: The sole note of
regret which he found in the report was that which related to_t_ho
benevolent operations of the society. He found it said that the adminis-
trstors of its funds had found themselves straitened in the means of
fulfilling their benevolent desires in this respect. It was deeply to_be
regretted that this should be the case, and he trusted that this evening
they would be able to shew by substantial contributions to the fun_d that
they regretted, not only by word, but by deed, the deficiency in this
respect during the past year, and that they had taken the means of
supplying the committee with_funds which should be adequate to the
operations with which they desired to engage. No one who had taken an
active part in the labours of the profession could have failed tgdhage
come into contact with many most admirable men who fulfill t e
duties of law clerks. All of those present at his end of the table he gas
sure had known many whose worth _in their station had been equal tout at
of those in much more exalted positions. He could recall, amongst 086
who were gone and those_wliom he knew to be llvillg. 111°“ "1ha parstively humble position in theprofession_ of law clerks wt? In
acquitted themselves in their station and discharged their duhee
regard to the interests of the clients and the interests of truth aiidcoiiourl
in a way which would be no discredit to any one of her Majesty s houiisd
arguing at the bar of any court in the kingdom_. With manly B?‘ the
come in personal contact, and, speaking for himself, h_e f_et
regard and esteem which was due _to_a long comrndcshlp 11} the Plillé
fession. He trusted that the subscriptions received this evening Wggli
shew adesire that the committee should _no longer be hampered but mil
wish to discharge the benevolent operations of the society, buii 15 51 ti’)
should have suc funds placed in their hands as would cnab of 61:0“
meet the claims of misfortune: The _members _were menu? do "ed
worthy class, and who had by their exertions in their own beh um egoem
well of the community, and they had deserved that they shot h t me
this mark of their sympéithy from the guests present as a pro0thl; nliwhesl
considered the law cler s members of the same profession as e ~
The toast was drunk upstanding, and with three times_threo. b “in
Mr. T. H. Fiscusu. Q..C., gave the health of_ the chau-man»d° 59°“ g
that one of the first duties a newly-made judge was collie flliesem
perform was to preside at one of these annual festivals, and i E86 P d Wm
had had the opportunity of witnessing with what coi-diality an gggm the
the duty had been discharged by the chairman this evening. be! of the
courtesy and patience with which he also listened to every mlzimfee in his
bar, Mr. Justice Stirling made the discharge ofviprofessional _u_1 mm
court a real pleasure to those who had the pr! P89 °f P\"*%h"“%Ied It was his earnest hope that their chairman might long 9 BP
adorn the bench. _ _ Ts
The toast was drunk with great enthusiasm and musical honoud tlhwka
The CHMRMAN, who was received with loud applallfly. Temme reside 0,;
observing that he felt it a great honour to be permitted I90 P “age in
such an occasion. He need not tell them how much everyil omen
England owed to those who practised before him, and._“b°'€tbM “peril
how much he, coming to the bench in early years, and withou d u on the
ence which her Majesty's Counsel acquired, hsd_ had to d¢p811himPby an
forbearance and the help which had been cordially given tgh nked them
those who had practised in the front bench before him. H; £61 he had
all most heartily, juniors, solicitors, and law clerks fort 6 lguondayy
received. He cou d not forget the law clerks, because, 6Y61'gndu0ed So
he had to sit in chambers, and he could say that nothln8_t°h which the
much to the speedy despatcb of business as the acouraci Wt of bush“,
law clerks laid their cases before him. That, for the amoulad he tw_e_
he had to get through, was the heaviest day of the week‘; liked the 1“
fore spoke with the utmost sincerity when he said he t B1-\ on they had
clerks no less than the Queen's Counsel for the help and BHPP
alike given him. -t mid
Mr. F. O. CRUMP, Q,.C., in proposing the _next toast, said ggtlgeuchy
been usual at these anniversary festivals to give the health Ow“ the only
the Bar, and the Profession, but to-night their chairmflnoum thflefow
representative of the bench present, and he (Mr. C1'\1mP)h“'u1d hue been
Prop use the health of the Bar and the Profession. He Show support the
glad if there had been present member! °§ the benc h- h“-ibute hfld
chairman, because he knew on similar occasions what Rh ‘Essifltflnce the!
been paid by judges to the law clerks on account of *5 ecome upon one
had derived from them, and he wished they could have made by the
evening of the year to express their sympathy and 5‘: the wished to
Presence. But they must not sll-911058 for one moment? lb“ Se sympathies
detract from the bench, who he believed to be mop ‘:1 °0cwfi°n mg
were, and always would be, with the society, _&1\d If iii? gymp,,;hy,it
when it was necessary for them to give erpression 5° teglthem cordialll
would be shewn in the most practical form. Ho "Bk . included the
to drink the health of the bar. The toast of the professioucwk befliiusa.
great body of English solicitors and it included tl1§_1l“' “lei; micro!"
whether they were clerks to barristers or clerks to 50llCliD1?iw clerks were
were identical with those of their principals. and the zest profession
entitled to say that they were members of one of the gm

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

that England could boast of. He did not single out the bar and put it
alone as apart from the profession. He was proud to belong to the pro-
fession of which they were all members. He would like before sitting
down to refer to an incident which had taken place in the Temple-gardens
on the preceding day as shewing what ought to be done by all of them
as n profession in taking part, not only in helping each other, but in help-
ing those less fortunate than themselves. He had seen in the newspapers
this morning a record that upwards of 2,000 little children taken from
the gutters of the East End of London had been entertained in the
Temple~gardens by the Benchers and Queen's Counsel. That was only
one phase of their common existence. They might look upon those un-
happy gutter children and say they were very unfortunate, but it was in
the profession of the law, as in other avocations, that times came when
great moral courage was required. He did not care whether it was the
judge who had just gone to the bench, and who had to brave the ordeal
of the position; or that individual who, emerging from a stuff robe,
launches on the waters of speculation in silk and does not know whether
he is going k) the dogs or wheth er he is to make for himself a high posi-
tion ; or the solicitor from the country who had come to London to take a

ractice, in the purchase of which he had ventured all his capital; or the
Raw clerk whose interests were bound up with those of his principal, and who
has to look to the future of himself and his family. From the judge to
the humblest law clerk, each required that greatest of moral attributes—
moral courage. And he asked the members of the society in the times of
adversity not to be hasty in looking to the society, but to combat the
evils they had to meet in life. He urged them not to be ready to have
recourse to these splendid funds accumulated during the last fifty-five
years. For a great many years he had had the pleasure of being present
on these occasions. He took the greatest interest in the society, and
hoped its success would go on increasingly.

Mr. GAI!\‘SI~‘()RD Biwciz, Q.C., returned thanks for the bar. He said they were all proud of their profession, and well they might be proud of it. It had been said by an old writer that the voice of the law was the harmony of the world, and all things felt her power. The greatest felt her power, and the least was not exempted from her cure. It was on occasions of this kind that one was forcibly reminded of the great brotherhood of the law. What a great brotherhood it was, and how they all gained strength by recognizing the great brotherhood to which they all belonged. It was a very busy and active brotherhood. In all branches of the profession men were busy working. He hoped, he believed, he was sure, that it was an honourable profession, that unless men in the profession devoted themselves to their work from high principle, and were actuated by honour in every act, they were unworthy of the profession, and they could never have the confidence of those with whom they came into contact. It was not only in the higher branches, but in every branch, and this was carried out to a remarkable extent, and he did not know any profession in which the members were on better terms with one another. The reason was that they were so busy fighting their clients‘ quarrels that they could not afford to have any quarrels of their own. He hoped the characteristics of which he had spoken would continue to prevail, and that they would always be an active, busy, honourable brotherhood, and that they should remain on good terms with one another, ‘and so discharge their duties to their own credit and to the advantage of those for whom they were concerne .


l\Ir. J . R. ADAMS responded for the profession, expressing his belief that
solicitors did not take so much interest in the society as the members of
the bar, which was much to be regretted.

Mr. Lswis COWAIID, in a humorous speech, gave the toast of the ladies,
and the proceedings terminated.
£3§(l)lbBCl'1ptlO!1B and donations were received to the amount of upwards of

' d .

During dessert a programme of music was excellently performed under page direction of Mr. Gregory Host. assisted by Madame \Vorrell, Madame

orence Winn, and Mr. Franklin Clive. Pianiste, Mr. Charles H. Keinpling, R.A. M.

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

On the 24th ult. the Prince Regent of Bavaria paid a visit to the Royal Courts of Justice, and was conducted over the building by the Superintendent. The Prince Regent, it is understood, contemplates erecting new 15' 00ll_rts in Munich shortly, and his Highness evinced the greatest lnterestin his inspection of the various courts and the mode of conducting business in them, which was explained to him.

In the House of Commons on the 23rd ult., in answer to Mr. Ohilders, Mr. Matthews said that answers had been received from a. large majority °3_ the court-house authorities with reference to the accommodation of Pllsouers awaiting trial. Most of these bodies had appointed committees 0! were otherwise considering the question. Some had entirely adopted £119 alterations and improvements suggested by the committee of the right Him- Eelltlenian. Very few—not more than one or two—hacl refused to

°PI those suggestions, and these he hoped might be induced to take a g1°l'e ljeflsonable _view, and on the whole he trusted that there would be no

°°°"1"§' for legislation on the subject. ,

[ocr errors]

Br FREDERICK E. SAWYER, F.S.A., of Brighton.

[ocr errors]

' Read at the London Meeting of the Incorporated Law Society.


r Pulling, Laws of London, p. W.

[ocr errors][graphic]

nobility. This inferiority continued until the seycntcenth century ; as in 16;»; it was provided that no person should bc admitted as an attorney unless he had practised for five years in the courts as a com_mon solicitor. The growth in the jurisdiction of the chancery courts, causmg the two (professions of attorney and solicitor to he united in the same person, results I111 thc latter term gradually superseding the former. The word “ solicitor ’ is from the Norman-French aolliciteur, derived from the Latin eollieitare : to agitate, urge, or solicit. _ _ _ _

3. (}Iironology.—For convenience in considering the_ various points in the history of our profession, I have prepared the followmg brief chronological table :—

1235. 1285.


1606. 1654.

Attorneys allowed in minor courts.

General attorneys allowed to act.

Roll of attorneys required to be kept.

Some legal training required. _
Attorneys ordered to join inns of court and chanccry. Service as

clerk required by rules of court.


1785 1795 1801 1831

1836. 1843. 1860.

Articles of clerkship required by statute.

Annual duty imposed.

Stamp duty on articles imposed.

First ofiicial Law List published.

Law Society incorporated by Royal Charter.

A final examination first required.

Solicitors Act passed; Incorporated Law Society made registrar.
Preliminary and Intermediate Examinations required.

1873. Attorneys abolished and called solicitors.

4. Regulation by Law—(a) ll/umber allowed -Some limitation in the number of attorneys seems to have existed at an early date, as we find tho Statute 4 Henry 4, o. 18 provided that “as any die or cease, the justices shall appoint others being virtuous, learned, and sworn." The eastern counties appear to have suffered from an excess_of attorneys, as we find in an amusing manner from the Act 33 Henry 6 [I455], c. 7, which recited that “not long before, within the city of Norwich and the counties of Sufiolk and Norfolk there were but six or eight attornies at most, in which time great tranquillity reigned there; but that now in the said city and counties there were above fourscore attornics, the greater part of whom, having nothing else to live upon, spent their time in fomenting and encouraging little, trifling, and vexatious suits, to the no small damages of the said city and counties. Wherefore, it was enacted that, from thenceforth, thcre should be but six common attornies in Norfolk, six in Suffolk, and two in the city of Norwich, who should be approved by the chief justices, and that the election and admission of all other attornies by the justices above the said number should be void, and if any other should presume to practise he should forfeit £20." It is suggested that the imposition of the heavy stamp duty on articles of clerkship was due to a desire to limit the number of attorneys; but having regard to the date (1795), it is more probable it was to help in thc enormous taxation required for heav foreign wars.

(b) Control by Statute and I/w Cu/n'ta.—lVhen the Incorporated Law Society first took in hand the subject of consolidation, there were no less than seventy Acts affecting solicitors,‘ whereas there are now only three Acts in force older than the present reign. The first statute 20 Henry 3, c. 10 (passed indeed before there was a Parliament, but entered on the Parliament Roll, 1 R_ot._Pai'l. S-l) provided that “ every freeman that oweth suit to the county, tithing. hundred, or wapcntake, or to a -court baron, may make an attorney to dp his suit for him.” The Statute of \Vestminster 2 (13 Edw. 1, c. 10) in 128;? enacted that “ every person may make a general attorney to sue for hiin_in all pleas in the circuit of tho justices.” The 4 Hen. 4, c. l8_providing for a roll and examination by the judges I have before mentioned. An Act, 3 Jae. 1, c. 7 provided that “none shall be admitted attornies in courts of record but such as have been brought up in the same courts, or otherwise _w_ell practised in soliciting of causes, and found skilful and of honest disposition." It is unnecessary to follow through the various Acts one by one affecting attorneys and solicitors. The profession was controlled also by rules of court, an accordingly we find in 1654 an order that “all attorneys be admitted of some inn of court or chancery by Hilary Term next, crm the term _next after that in which they are admitted as attorneys. Another order in 1704 declared that “ many attorneys were not admitted of some inn of court or chancery according to ancient usage, the neglect whereof was to the detriment and decay of tho said societies," and proceeded to require all to he admitted by Trinity Term next.

(c)_Roll rf Attvrneys and Solicitors.-—The first Act which required the keeping of a roll was the _4 Hen. 4, c. 18 (already mentioned), and, until the Act 2 Geo. 2, c. 23, this was the chief Act on the subject. The latter Act directed that rolls or books of admissions should be kept by the masters of each common law court, and in chancery by the clerk of the Potty Bug Olfice. I have made inquiry as to what rolls of attorneys are now fqrthcommg, and learn from the Deputy-Keeper of the Public Records that in lgis ol'l1ce.they have oply got the admissions of attorneys from 1729 to this “*1”-91 W1111“ Ft 17119 1 "WY BB-g Qfiioe they have the solicitors‘ 11d1'l'11eB10l1S for

c same period. _Both these series seem to start with the Act 2 Geo. 2, c. 23 V111?"-dY mentlfined), but I am at present unable to traoe the records of fzdmzballfls 1°!t_11l1_;eo centuries and a quarter (Le. 1402 to 1729), though I dd“! ese ma? B 1°P"‘11 89 no explanation has yet been offered as to their

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

- Introd. lit Calendar (1832), ,1, 25, '


sioners of Inland Revenue should be primd facie evidence of the payments of duty by any attorney or solicitor whose name appeared therein.” [Many of these facts are kindly supplied hv the Commissioners of Inland Revenue] The courts of law and chancery have always possessed the power to strike ofi" the roll any attorney or solicitor guilty of dishonest or unworthy conduct.

(ri) Tmcation of Costs.—The charges of solicitors are and always have been subject to a process called “ taxation," though why, it is somewhat difiicult to say, seeing that we have not now an Assize of Bread, and that doctors’ bills and barristers’ fees are not subject to these inconvenient disabilities, and auctioneers and house agents can charge what they _please. '_1‘he historian of our profession will, of course, direct special attention to this head and its possible connection with “ the Plan of Campaign.”

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

Mr. Jess ru Hana! DART, barrister, died at his residence, Beech House, Ringwood, Hampshire, on the 27th ult., at the age of seventy. Mr. Dart was the eldest son of Mr. Joseph Dart, of Tidwell, Devonshire, and was born in 1817. He was educated at lilxeter College, Oxford, where he graduated second class in Mathematics in 1838, and he obtained the Newdigate Prize for English Verse in the same year. He was called to the Bar at Lincoln’s inn in Hilary Term, 1841, and he had for many years a very extensive practice as a conveyaucer. His well-known treatise on the law of Vendors and Purchasers has gone through many editions. Mr. Dart was for many years one of the conveyancing counsel to the Chancery Division. He was a bencher of Lincoln’s-inn and a magistrate for Hampshire. He was married in 1842 to the daughter of Mr. Richard Humber

Mr. SAMUEL LILLEY, barrister, died at Southsea on the 22nd ult., at an advanced age. Mr. Lilley was the eldest son of Mr. Samuel Isaac Lilley, of Peckham, Surrey. He was educated at J esus College, Qrford, was called to the bar at the Middle Temple in Trinity Term, 182i,_ 8115- P156" tised on the South—Eastern Circuit, and at the Central Criminal Court. Mr. Lilley had for many years a large criminal busmess, and he had long been the leader of the Surrey Sessions. He was also much engaged at the various licensing sessions in and near the metropolis, and for the 188% '"'° years he had been one of the revising barristers for the county of S1111?"-‘iii

Mr. Faaosnrcu ALBERT Lswm, barrister, died suddenly on the 2ot 8 from disease of the heart. Mr. Lewin was the_fourth sou of Mr. R0 e: Lewin, of Cuddington, Surrey. He was born in 1842. He _was f0Im9l£ y fellow of Caius Co lege, Cambridge, where he graduated _as sixth wraug gr 111 1864. He was called to the bar at Lincoln's-inn in Hilary Term» 13$ Q; and he practised in the Chancery Division. He was the ¥§}1l'11°T_ 1‘: on treatise on “ The Law of Apportionment,” and he had edited Lewlf MI Trusts." Mr. Lewin was married in 1869 to the eldest daughte€1030thWilliam Robert Baillie, W.S., of Edinburgh. He was buried on 1? B ult.

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

,St. George. Mr. Smith is the fourth son of Mr. JO

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

Mr. SAMUEL Bcrnsa Paovis, Assistant-Secretary of the Local Govern-
ment Board, has been created aCiv1'.l Companion of the Order of the Bath-
Slr. Pi-ovis is the eldest son of Mr. Samuel Provis, of Bath. He was
educated at Queen's Colle C b ‘d d all d 1: sh
the Middle Temple in Easte€'e:.l‘e:nT: , an was c e 0 6 bu at

lilr. Joi~i.\'_liI_.1ii.coi.ri FORBES LUDLOW, barrister, Chief Registrar of Friendly Societies, has been created a Civil Companion of the Order of the Bath. Mr. Ludlow is the only son of the late Lieutenant-Colonel John Ludlow, C.B., was born in 1821. He was called to the bar at Lincoln s-inn m Michaelmas Term, 1843, and he formerlv practised in the

gzIgt1cg’75Chancery. He has been Chief Registrar of Friendly Societies

Mr. Casarss EDW{iI_iD Gaizoo PHILLPPS, barrister, has been created a Baronet. Sir C. Philippe is the eldest son of Mr. Edward Fisher, of Huddersfield. He_ was born in 1840, and he assumed the name of _Phlllpp_s by Royal license. He was called to the bar at the Middle Temple 1n‘_I‘rmity Term, l8o8, and formerly went the Midland Circuit. Sir C. Philipps is amagistrate for Pembrokeshire und Oarmarthenshire, and a deputy -heutenant for the latter county. He was High-Sherifi of Pembrokeshire in 1882, and he has been Lord-Lieutenant of the town and county of Haverfordwest since 1876.

lllr. Hrsnr Caori. Gasaz, solicitor (of the firm of Gears, Son, 8: Pease), of oi, Lincoln’s-inn-fields, has been appointed a Commissioner to take Afildavits for the Supreme Court of the Province of South Australia.

Mr. J OHN Roiiizar Ronnnrs, solicitor, of Halifax, has been appointed Clerk to the Justices of the city of N ewcastle-on-'Iyne. Mr. Roberts was admitted a solicitor in January, 1879, and during the last seven years has practised at Halifax in partnership with Mr. Walter Storey.

Mr. GEORGE Ros:-Isxas jun. solicit/or has been appointed UnderSheriif of London and Middlesex for the yedrs 1887-8. He is amember of “*5 firm °f B-0564111198. S011, 6: Crick, of Billiter-square, E C , and was

[ocr errors]

Mr. Cnsntss MALCOLM Hizxizv Swan, solicitor (of the firm of Stollard & Swan),_of 485, Oxford-street, London, has been appointed a Commission er $0 Bdminister Oaths in the Supreme Court of Judicature.

Mr. Fasmr RICHARDSON solicitor of Wigton has been appoint=d
Clerk to the Local Board Jr Health fbr Wigton, Cllmberland. U

[ocr errors]

Mr. Gsoaox Rvsr has been elected Chairman of the Huntingdonshire Quarter Sessions.

T119 Rlght Hon: Gannon SCLATBR Booi-ii, barrister, M.P., who has been mated Lord Basing, is the eldest son of Mr. William Lutley Sclater, of H°dd"18ton House, Hampshire. He was born in 1826, and in 1857 he Blrumcd the additional name of Booth by Royal license. He was educated at Winchester and at Balliul College, Oxford. where he graduated Eecond class in Classics in 18-17. He was called to the bar at the Inner ch°"1P1° 111 Trinity Term, 1851, and he formerly practised in the Court of h Emery. He was M.P. for North Hampshire from 1857 till 1885, when

9 was returned for the Basingstoke Division of that county. He was '°°1'el581'.Y to the Poor Law Board from March, 1867, till February, 1868, gid financial secretary to the Treasury from February till December, B063. In 1874 he was appointed president of the Local Government 188*?» and was §w0r_n in as a Privy Councillor, and he held that office nu

- Lord Basmg is a magistrate for Ham shire

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]


LUH-uii.1s Fasnanicx Siiirii, THOMAS DISNEY Lrmvna, and EDWARD
JLANPAII Lawns, solicitors, Lancaster House, Savoy, Strand, London.
M33954-_ The said Charles Frederick Smith will in future carry on the

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

the Chingford Station Estate, Chingford, Essex; the West Stonebriclge Park Estate, Stonebridge, Willesdsn; the property of the London Laud Company, in Liquidation; the following prices were realized for each estate:—Southgate, £7,811; Ohingford, £1,025 ; Willesden, £5,117; total, £13,953.

It is stated that considerable anxiety is felt at Croydon for the safety of

Illlr. G. W. Biiiiis, a member of the firm of Messrs. Binns, Lincoln, is . Marsh, solicitors of that town. The missing gentleman left Croydon on the 18th ult. for Southampton, where he had some important business to transact. He took up his quarters at the South-Western Hotel, and at seven o'clock the next mornmg went out for the purpose of having a bath, ordering his breakfast for half-past nine. At nine o'clock, however, his clothes were found on the beach, and although diligent search has since been made no further trace of him has been discovered.

At Bow-street on Saturday (says T/ti! Timu) Francis Hill and Charles

Thomas Hill, solicitors, of Chancery-lane, carrying on business as Messrs. Head S: Hill, appeared to adjourned summonses charging them ,with wilful and corrupt perjury, alleged to have been committed in an action brought by Montague Mowbray Ballinger to recover money he alleged to be due under an agreement to share the profits of an action brought by Mr. and Mrs. Broughton against the Pall Mull Qazette in connection with the Armstrong case. The case against Mr. Francis Hill was proceed ' ' ' He became acquainted with the Brouglitons, and introduced them to the defendants with the object of commencing an action against the Pall Mal! Gazelle for libel. He alleged that it was agreed that lie should sharo the , profits equally with the defendants. He averred that he had done so in other actions. The action was eventually settled by the payment of £450, and the defendants were represented to have stated that £250 was for costs and the balance for damages. Witness had several interviews on the question of sharing the profits, and eventually he received a statement of account of moneys advanced to him, and, after allowing him five-tenths of the profits, a cheque for £24 12s. was sent. He afterwards commenced an action to compel the defendants to render an account, and for the recovery of half the profits under the alleged agreement. A summons was taken out in the ordinary course, and in answer the defendants filed an afiidavit repudiating the statement that there had been any agreement to share the profits. In consequence the action was stayed, and this was the perjury complained of. In cross-examination by Mr. Kemp, witness said he had been on the stage, and at the time he introduced the case to Messrs. Hill he was a correspondent for American newspapers, though he could not now give the names of any paper. He admitted that ho had borrowed moneyfrom Mr. Charles Hill, and had writtenlettersexpressinghis gratitude for the kindness he had received. Mr. Kemp produced a letter written by the witness to the defendants in which he urged his claim, and counsel particularly drew attention to an extract with reference to the alleged bargain. The extract read as follows:—-“ With you I did not think it necessary, for you always gave me to understand that you would treat me on agency terms, and the few ‘spec.’ actions have been to our _mutual liking.” Mr. Bridge asked if this was consistent with the witness's assertion that there had been a special bargain. It was an absolute contradiction. The magistrate iurther stated that anything more disgraceful than this case he had never heard, and he trusted that the Incorporated Law Society would take it up to prevent bargains between solicitors and clerks. It was absolutely unprofessional, and brought the profession of the law into disrepute. Mr. Kemp asked the magistrate not to assume that his clients had acted in the manner suggested, as they had several letters from the prosecutor to shew that they had treated him with every kindness. Mr. Bridge: They are not guilty of p8l‘]l1!'y, but I hope the Incorporated Law Society will make some inquiry. The summons was dismissed.

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
« PreviousContinue »