Page images
PDF
[graphic]
[graphic]
[graphic]

not necessary that representation should be taken out to_the executor, and that service of the petition on such a representative might be dispensed With.—CoUNsn1.,1Jutc7m'. SOLICITORS, Fllitliome, Currey, <_§- Villiws.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

This was a inortgagors’ action for the redemption of the mortgaged property. The mortgagees had been for many years in possession of the property. The judgment at the trial directed an account of what was due to the defendants for principal and interest in respect of their security, and for their costs of the action, and an account of rents received by them, &c., and that, on payment by the plaiiitifis to the defendants of the balance (if any) found due to them, within six months of the date of the chief clerk's certificate, the defendants should re-convey the property to the plaintiffs, and that, in default of payment, the action should be dismissed with costs. But, in case it should appear on taking the accounts that the defendants had been overpaid, the further consideration of the action was adjourned. The chief clerk by his certificate found that the mortgage debt had been paid off as long ago as 1866 by means of rents which the defendants had received, and that there was a sum of £618 due from them in respect of rents which they had since rleceiveil. The defendants had insisted that a large balance was due to t em.

Noara, J ., held that an account must be taken against the defendants, with annual rests from the date at which they were fully paid ; and that, as they had made an unfounded claim, they must, notwithstanding the form of the original judgment, pay the costs of the action.-—(Joi'a'sa1, Oozens-Hardy, Q.C., and E. S. Ford ; Eon-itt, Q.C., and Inglo Jo;/ca. SouCITOBS, Bolton, Robbins, Burk, if Co. ,' Gregory, Rowclifes, 5 U0.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

The question in this case was whether the will of an Englishman resident in Scotland, executed there in the form required by Scotch law, was effectual to pass his leasehold estates in England, the will not being validly executed according to English law. The testator bequeathed his whole means and estate of whatever kind and denomination, or wherever situated, to a trustee to pay certain pecuniary legacies, and all the rest of his means and estate to be divided equally amongst certain godchildran of the testator. The testator had some leasehold estates situate in England. Section 2 of the Act 24 8: 25 Vict. c. 114 provides that “Every will and other testamentary instrument made within the United Kingdom by any British subject (whatever may be the domicil of such person at the time of making the same or at the time of his or her derth), shall, as regards personal estate, be held to be well executed, and shall be admitted in England and Ireland to probate, and in Scotland to confirmation, if the same be executed according to the forms required by the laws for the time being in force in that part of the United Kingdom where the same is made."

Noiirn, J ., hold that the words “personal estate " were not confined to movable property, butthat they included leaseholds, and that the English leaseholds passed by the W111.-—COUNflEL, G. Hmdsrmi ,- 8. Hall ,- R. F. Noétorz; Jlfarkaskis. SOLICITORS, Miller Q Miller; Cole Q Jackson ; _r\'1'('Il0[§0n Q ra am.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

This was a special case stated by Income Tax Commissioners on an appeal brought by the St. Andrews Hospital at Northampton against an assessment of £7,000 made under Schedule D. of the Income Tax Act, 185}, for the year ending the 5th of April. 1884. The obj ect of the hospital, whicli_was founded by voluntary contributions and was opened in the year 18-3§, is the care and treatment of persons suffering from mental diseases. It is registered as required by 8 & 9 Vict. c. 100, and is managed by a cgmmitf-ea_of subscribers whose services are gratuitous. The intention of t e committee is to provide for the treatment and maintenance of poor patients who are unable to pay or can only pay a portion of the cost of thle treatment _and maintenance afforded; and in order to enable themse ves to do this, they also receive richer patients, from whom they receive payment at various rates, according to their ability to pay, above the actual cost of their treatment and attendance ; and this excess of payment, together with yoliintary contributions, is applied towards the support of fig? ($0813; P8-Silfilgts. 1< rom the opening of the hospital till the 1st of July,

_ - _° PW"! 1? BY-id pauper patients were received, the original proportion being one-third of the former to two-thirds of the latter ' but in later X91115 tllfife W8! 8 tendency for the pauper class to exceed its ‘due pro orn°“~ Othe 1°‘ °t Juli’. 1876, the pauper atients were rem v d t pth New O°“ntY A971“!!! near N ortham tonp The comm'tt ohe obe 6 °bged °f 1“? 795", at the instance opf the Commissioners(ii31 Ldhic tn €£e“gr€::,’i‘;5;:“t,§’“7i':, hzudbin the proximity of the hospital to preyvjentt

o _ e pa ien s sing interfered with- d L11

has necessarily been in d ~ . Y P“, fl" 91' °!11§e during the argument thaiutlli n‘L;§::(gi.£lll€“116: buildings. It was said 320, of whom 240 pay various sums exceecl1)in'1s;;,s at the present time was and maintenance, and 80 are assisted pat-lent? .116 cost of their treatment ‘mm the wealth," patients, cflcuhted on an. he annual profits derived

[ocr errors]
[graphic]
[graphic]

ihe assessment subject to this case. It was argued on behalf of the appellants, first, that there were no profits at all within the meaning of the Income Tax Acts, and, secondly, that the sums received from the wealthier patients were exempt by section 105 of the Income Tax Act, 1842, which applies to Schedule D. the exemption given by section 88, sub-section 3, in the case of Schedule C. On the part of the Crown it was contended that the sums received were not the less profits because they were spent in charity, and that section 105 did not apply, as it did not refer to profits.

Tun Couiir (Lord COLERIDGE, C.J., and Fiatn, J.) gave judgment for the Crown. This hc=pital was conducted on the principle of the richer patients paying sums in excess of what their treatment cost, to enable poorer patients to be also treated. The question was whether, under these circumstances, when there was a profit derived from the richer patients, that profit was assessable to income tax. P-rimii fuvic, these profits were clearly assessable. And they were not exempted by section 105 ; for, assuming the appellants to be such a corporation as mentioned in that section, this £7,000 was not an annual payment applied by the committee to charitable purposes only. So long as the committee received these patients, they received profits; and, though they were practically obliged by the Commissioners in Lunacy to spend those profits in a particular manner, and did use them for a wise and beneficent purpose, they were none the less profits, and therefore liable to income l',&X.——-COUNSEL, Sir H. James, Q.C., and Graham ; Sir E. Clarke, S.G., and Dicey. SOLICITORS, Hmsman 5- Illa»-shall, for Housman 6- Sons, Northampton; The Solicitor of Inland Revenue.

[ocr errors]

CASES AFFECTING SOLICITORS. CRAY v. WRAY—Field, J ., in chambers, 2nd December, 1886.‘

[ocr errors]

In this case a London agent sued a country client (a solicitor) for the amount of a signed bill of costs for less than £50 delivered in oomphance with the provisions of the Solicitors Act, 1843. Appearance was entered and application for leave to defend was made under_order14, with the result that leave to defend was obtained on payment into court as to part of claim, and unconditional leave to defend as to the remainder. Subsequently the defendant, on application to tax the bill, withdrew the issues raised on the afiidavits in defence. The costs were taxed. The plaintiff then applied for judgment on allocatur, and to ta! the costs of the action. The order having been made, the plaintiff carried in his bill on the superior court scale. The master refusedto tax. The plaintiff issued a summons before the judge, and cited Jones v. Brown (i Ex. Rep. 329). _

Firim, J ., held that a plaintiff, when a solicitor, was still entitled VJ proceed in the High Court, notwithstanding that the amount claimed Ya! less than £50, and to recover costs on that scale, on the ground of pl"!lege, as held by Pollock, C.B., in Jams v. Brown, the Judicature Acts and rules made thereunder not in any way affecting the qL\8Bl'-l0l\.——s0LlCl1'035: Francis §- Johnson ; Aaron Wruy.

[ocr errors]

LAW STUDENTS’ JOURNAL. ‘t INCORPORATED LA.\V SOCIETY. FINAL Ex/uiii<.irio:r.

The following candidates, whose names are in alphabetical older, Wm successful at the final examination held on the 14th and 15th of June, 1887 :

Adams, William

Adlington, Jonathan

Agnew, Harold, B.A.

Aizlewcod, Albert Percy

Allen, William Edward

Alpe, Frederick

Anderson, John

Armstrong, Richard

Auden, Thomas Edward

Auty, John Charles

Badcock, Frederick

Bainbridge, Robert William
Balden, Samuel Dinsdale
Bantoft, Guy Cyril V
Barlow, Richard Llewellyn
Barlow, Thomas Marriott
Bartlett, Edward Henry Hewitt
Bartlett, George

Batley, Ralph Cecil, B.A., LL.B.
Beaumont, Henry _
Beaver, Frederick

Becher, Howard Percy

Bell, Edward Albert

Benjamin, Arthur Joseph

[ocr errors]
[graphic]
[ocr errors]

' We have been furnished by a correspondent with a HOW

July 9,1887. THE SOLICITORS’ JOURNAL. 609

[graphic]
[graphic]
[graphic]
[graphic]
[graphic]
[graphic]
[graphic]
[graphic]
[graphic]
[graphic]
[graphic]

Olapham, Herbert
Clarke, James
Clench, Sidney Augustus
Clifton, Harvey
Close, Charles John Ward
Cobb, Thomas _Hugh
Colbeck, Hoggitt
Coleclough, William Herbert
Comer-ford, Hugh
Cook, Walter Ainsworfh
Coomba, Richard Samuel Gurney
Col-en, John William
Ciulmaii, Edward
Court, William Henry
Cowan, Thomas Galloway
Crocker, William
Ci-ow, John Henry
Ci-owe, Edmund George
Currey, Harry Erskine, B. A.
Cuat, Robert Henry Hobart, ‘-I-A
Dabbs, Arthur Henry
Dale, Richard Reuben
Davies, Robert Walker, B A.
Dawson, Albert Edward
Dawson, Percy
Denman, William
Dennis, John Herbert
Dewing, Maurice
Dixon, Albert Edward
Dixon, Herbert Griflith
Dixon, James
Decker, George Dudley
Druitt, John
Duke, William Grifiiths
Dunkerly, Charles William
Dwyer, Frank
Earle, Francis George
East, Frederick John
Eastley, Thomas Bcckley
Ellaby, Arthur James
Emanuel, Arthur Henry
Emsley, Robert Garside
Evans, Samuel Dnvld, B.A.
Evelyn, Edward Clement
Evershed, Herbert Evans
Fllrdell, John
Farrar, J oaeph Barraclough
Fernihough, George
Fernyhough, Samuel
Ferrington, George William
Ffinch, Heneage John
Firth, Thomas Williams Staples
Fischer, Max Temple, B.A.
Floyer, Sydenhain Ernest
Follett, Walter George
Foster, Walter Henry, LL.B.
Fowler, Archibald Robert
Francis, Earley Christopher, B.A.
Freeman, Arthur
French, John William
Gsbb, Richard Frederick Baker
Gaby, Ralph Hale, B.A
Gnllaher, homes Henry
Gardiner, George Charles
Gardner, Robert Henry
Gascoigne, Walter
Gaskel . Thomas Frederick
Getty, William Henry Carzer
Ginn, Thomas William
Glasgow, Richard Pike
Gordon, Eric .
Gr-indrod, John Townley, M.A.
(ruscotte, Leonard John
Hale, David, B.A.
Halliday, Jameg
Hammond, Albert Victor
Harcourt, Clarence
Harland. Cecil, B.A.
I1_1Ill'l'_1s, Charles Benjamin
“"1188. Henry Augustus Ward
Haywood, Joseph
Heap, Henry
Help, John Edward
Heston, Guy, B.A.
gfilliry, James Jocelyn 0031,31
e ertson, Robert Elliott
llvwison, Arthur Edward
Hldglns, Alexander Pearce
Hmdl Everatt
H°d8|fl'11son, Edward Dhon
H°ds@<>n. Henry
gollowell, Alfred
°1"=°§i Frank Henry

[ocr errors]

Horne, Benjamin William
Hughes, Thomas, B.A
Jackman, James Ci-come
Jacobs, Isaac Frederick
James, Ebor Riley

James, Willnm Charles
Jarratt, William Otley

Jelf, Henry John

Jones, Alfred Lewis

Jones, Douglas Hurst, M.A.
Jones, John Piers Lloyd
Jones, Robert Bertram

Kent, James George

Kerr, Francis James

Kite, Ernest Acton

Knight, Thomas Joseph
Lambert, Joseph Edward
Lane, Horace Houlton
Latham, Charles Frederick Grafton
Lawton, James Haclfield
Leach, Ralph Cecil

Lear, Arthur James

Leavers, Herbert Fothergill
Lee, Francis Edward

Lewis, Francis Ball, B.A.
Lewls, Fred Lawson

Lewis, George Herbert
Lewis, George Hilton
Leyshon, William Thomas
Lightfoot, Ernest William
Lilley, George Trice

Lingsrd, Frank Chorlton, B.A
Litchfleld, Herbert
Livingston, John Alexander
Locks, Frederick Robert
Lockwood, Arthur Carden
Longland, Josiah

Lucas, Edward

Lucas, William Bernard
Mackay, Josiah Kipping
Maggs, Edwin John Quintius
Markham, Christopher Alexander
Matthews, Marmaduke Capper, B.A
Maudesley, Laurence Long
Meredith, Walter William
Michelrnore, Henry William
Mitchell, Harry

Monks, Hugh Samuel

Moore, Charles Edward Arthur
Mullock, Richard Arthur
Munro, Glanville Dcios May
N esbitt, Thomas Thorburn
Neve, William

N ichola, John '
Norris, Charles Herbert
Nunn, Edward Westby

N ursaw, Thomas

Ogden, Francis

Oldham, James Bertram, B.A.
Oi-feur, Norman

Palmer, Thomas Joseph Mills
Parker, Alan Montague
Parkes, Francis

Parkyn, Alfred Howard
Paull, Henry John

Pearce, James Alfred
Phillips, Cleavelaud John
Phillips, Frank

Phillips, James

Pierce, Ernest Wilson
Pillera, Ernest James
Pilling, Albert Bamford
Pinniger, Thomas Clare
Pollard, John Empson Toplis
Pollock. Charles Frederick
Poole, Francis Joseph
Preston, Sydney Elliott
Price, Walter Jones
Pritchard, Arthur Ernest Guy
Ralph, Richard Christian
Rawlings, Frank, B.A.
Rawlinson, Charles William
Rawsthorn John James
Rayner, Wilfred

Richardson, Harry Leo Sidney, B.A
R LL.B.

idley, Hen Dou las

Rigby, Georg Deagan

Riley, George Marvell, B.A.
Robinson, Edward

Roche, Charles Hubert

Roll, Hugh Winfield, B.A.
Rorke, George Samuel

Russell, William

Sanderson, Stephen Goodman
Scales, William Johnston
Scholefleld, Joshua

Sear, Merton Lane

Sharp, John Joseph

Sheppard, George

Simonds, John Edward
Simpson, John Percy, B.A.
Sinclair, Norman Macleod, B.A.
Sixsmith, Richard Massey
Smith, Charles Barnby

Smith, Francis George

Smith, Harold Seton

Smith, Henry

Smith, Hugh Hippisley Ayscough
Smith, Robert Tweedy

Snelling, Percy \Villiam

Soames, Edgar, B.A., LLB.
Scares, Ernest José, B.A., LL.B.
Spsckman, Bertram J chn
Spearman, John Gustard
Spencer, Charles St. David, B.A.
Spencer, John Wilson

Sprigge, Frank Au stus
Stammers, Sidney gt;-‘seph Richard
Stansfield, William Ashton
Stapley, Frederick Henry

Steele, Charles Deans

Stockdale, John Henry
Stockton, Oliver James

Stokes, Edward John
Stonehouse, Samuel Embertou
Symonds, Christopher Barker
Swains, William

Sweet, Arthur Francis
Swinburne, Henry, B.A.
Swiuhoe, Rodway Charles John

Tanfield, Arthur George
Taylor, Alfred William
Taylor, Charles Alfred Innes
Thomas, Thomas

Thomson, William Archer
Tomlin, Horton James Baring, B.A
Tottenham, Loftus Dacre, B.A.
Tozer, Edward J ohu Francis
Tratman, Alfred Saunders
Travell, Joseph Jackson
Turnell, Roland

Turner, Richard John
Upton, Charles

Vau han, Ernest

Walger, John Leonard
Walsh, James Henry

Ware, Christopher Henry, B.A.
Warren, Frederick Arthur
Watson, Harry Crawford
Webb, Edward Hunter
Webb, George Ernest
Webb, William Herbert
Welsh, Frederick Gibson
Whately, Thomas Percival
Whitaker, John Lawrence
White, John

Whytt, David

Williams, Henry James
Williams, Robert

Williams, William Albert
Williamson, Frederick John
Williamson, Walter
lVinnall, Charles Pears
Wise, William Henry
Wood, Arthur Herbert
Woodhouse, Victor Harry
Wyson, Ho

M
I NTBEM EDIA1-E EXAMINATION.

The following candidates (whose names are in alphabetical order) were successful at the intermediate examination held on the 16th day of June,

1887 :—
Amphlett, Charles Edward
Ardagh, Russell Drapes
Arkwright, Sidney John, B.A.
Armitage, Henry Allen
Armstrong, Alfred Cameron
Attenborough, Thomas
Barker, William Chalmers
Bedwell, Hugh

Beevor, Rowland

Bennett, Norman

Blackston, Frederick

Bland, Alexander Frederick
Bone, Edward Henry

Bower, Thomas Holcne
Braby, Percy

Broadbsnt, Benjamin
Brooks, Frederic

Carr, George Frederick

Case, Robert Henry

Cannce, John Caunce Linney
Chamberlin, Alfred Ernest William
Chapman, Henry William
Charnley, William Stewart George
Chilton, Stanley

Clode, Tracy Percy

Collis, Frank Neild

Cooper, Thomas

Creeke, Herbert Buck
Cronin, Arthur Knox

Cullen, Alfred Joseph
Dauney, Arthur William
Davies, Albert Orlando
Davies, Charles Frederick
Davies, Edward William
Davies, Herbert Maddock
Davies, Willie Arthur

[ocr errors]

Dent, Ernest Freshficld, B.A.
Di-inkwater, George Frederick
Eaton-Evans, William George
Ellis, Sydney James

Fearon, John Francis
Fovargue, Henry West
Fowle, James Rogers George
Fox, Robert Floud, B.A.
Fryer, Charles Arthur

Govett, Lionel Arthur, B.A.
Gregory, Herbert Edward
Gribble, Alfred Wingyett

Habgood, Robert Tanner
Hanna, Robert Henry Waterloo
Harding, Lansdown

Hurling, Allan Owen

Harris, Harry Leonard
Hartley, Charles Edward
Hawes, Charles Edward
Hawley, George

Hay - Chapman, Francis Frederick

Angustein

Henderson, Arthur
Henderson, William
Herrtage, Alfred Robert
Hewitt, Edgar

Holbrook, William John
Holland, William Thomas, B.A.
Hollinshead, Hubert Rowaon
Holt, Herbert James Whittell
Houchen, Alan Willis
Howard, Francis Stuart
Howell, Ernest Albert
Hughes, Arthur

Hunt, Edward Frederick
Hutchen, William

Jolly, Lewis, B.A.

Jones, Griilith . _
Jones, John David Valentine
Knowles, Frederic

Lee, Charles William

Legge, Robert Oliver

Lewis, Lionel Smithett
Liddle, George James
Lowden, Charles Edwin Stuart
Lowe, John Henry

Lush, Herbert

Marks, James Jones

Martin, Alan Scott

Mason, Barry Willicombe
Mason, Herbert

Menicraft, Richard Hankinson
Monks, John Thomas

Moore, Robert

Myatt, Herbert William
Myers, Solomon

Mylchreest, Claude Wathcw
Nixon, Charles Wv_i-il

Noble, Emeat William

Pearce, William 4
Pearson, Edward Francis Sidney

l

[ocr errors][subsumed][graphic][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][graphic][ocr errors][ocr errors][subsumed][graphic][ocr errors][graphic][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][subsumed]
[graphic]

]ulY 9. 1887. TI-IE SOLICITORS’ JOURNAL. 611

[graphic]

It is stated that in the reign of Edward III. the number of attorneys in all England was under 400, and the number practising in 1872 was said to be 13,824.‘ The number of annual certificates issued by the Registrar in 1881 was 12,594.

(c) Abolition of Sprcial Courts, Proctors, 1i-c.—During the present reign many courts with special and peculiar jurisdictions and practitionels have been abolished or a tcrod so as to throw them open to the entire profession, whilst new courts have been established. These will all require historical notice. We mag mention the Marshalses Court ; ecclesiastical jurisdiction in probate and 'vorce; the abolition of proctors; local small debt courts; county courts; the Bankruptcy Court, &c. In many cases the intervention of our society has secured us valuable rights of audience, kc.

(f) Grneral Growth..—The general facilities afforded for the transaction of business b the innumerable aw reforms during the present reign, together with a relluction of the difficulties and cost of litigation and conveyancing, have resulted in n. largp increase of legal business, and there is no reason for supposing that the en ess complications necessarily arising out of our present high state of civilization will ever render it possible for the public to dispense with the assistance of well-trained legal advisers, although in moments of temporary irritation they may “ want to do without 'em."

7. Taxation and Stamp Dul1'i?s—(r1 .01») Articles of Clcrkship and Annmzl Duty/.——Ths first Act imposing .1 duty on articles was tho 34 Geo. 3, c. 14, which required a stamp of £120. The amount now payable is, however, £80, and £25 on admission. The annual duty was imposed by the 25 Goo. 3, c. 80, making London solicitors ay £5 ye.a1'Iy', a11d country solicitors £3. This has since been altered to £9 for the former and £6 for the latter, though solicitors not admitted three years get a reduction of £3. I have made the following calculation as to the approximate amount thus early id py qui-8 profession, basing it on the figures given in the society's balance-shlaet

or 8 1:

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

Office in 1868. There is in m possession aroll dating from 1848, which, however, contains comparatively few enrolments, the practice of being separately admitted a solicitor of the County Palatine being now quite obsolete. Iam unable to say when attorneys of the County Palatine were first instituted, but lpresumo it would be about the some time as the institution of attomoys 0 the courts at Westininstcr. The latter could at any time be admitted attorneys of the County Palatine u n signing tho roll. The palatinate attorneys required sepprate admission at \$gstn1inster in order to practise _1n the courts there." The istory of these courts should be collected.

ome brief particulars of the “Great Sessions of Wales," which a pear to have been principally established by Henry VIII., will be found in 'Fomliu's Law Dictionary.

12. Ofiees held by Solic1't0rs.—I'ulling mentions " five—viz. , clerk of peace, undersherilf, clerk to justices, vestry clerk, and clerk to board of rdians. He does not mention town clerk or coroner. There seems, Tiarever, to be nothing making solicitors exclusivel eligible to these offices.

18. Vocations connected with Solicitors.-—PulIing again mentions five-viz., convcyanccr, scrivener-, notary, proctor, and Parliamentary agent, but these are now to a great extent followed by solicitors.

14. List of Admi.m'ons.—I am hopeful that it ma be possible to compile (und perhaps publish) a complete list of attorne 's and solicitors from earliest times. Even if tho rolls, prior to 1729, are hopelessly lost, other records might help to iuako a list, and particularly tho registers of tho Inns of Courts an chancery.

15. Biogm hkal and Gencalog1'cal.—-This is an important branch of the subject, and fikely to rove of general interest. Biographies, pedigrees, &c., can be obtained, and we shall perhaps find that man la ers of great eminence are descended from attorneys or solicitors. “yo shlill, of course, require to know what members of our profession have been distinguished in the paths of poetry, art, science, literature, or archaeology. Lord Campbell, I believe, laboured to stamp Shakespeare as an attorney's clerkfil

16. General .Hislory.—Careful search in contemporary literature appears veil-y desirable, so as to ascertain the status of our profession at various periods, an any s ial habits and customs of its members, and the calendars ol State papers willpilcow yield much useful information. The causes of the unppfiularity of the profession must, of course, be examined, and the historian w" determine whether it is due to the “ Law being a terror to evil-doors " (a numerous body), or to the proverbial fate of those " who intci-pose in quarrels," or to n general spirit of parsimony or meanness.

17. Oolleetimt or lllaterial-t—(a) Bt'bl1Iagra.phy.—Information on all the heads alread mentioned requires collecting, and the compilation of a bibliograph of the subject is most desirable, and I trust that it will be found possible to make a collection of satires, poems, and caricatures relating to the profession. The whole work can be most conveniently undertaken by the societ , and when the necessary materials are obtained, I hcpc we shall get a good histo . Lastly, my thanks are due to the Coiniuissmneis of Inland

avenue, the Registrar-General, the Deputy-Keeper of the Public Records, Mr. Gaiusford Bruce, Q.C., Mr. A. O. Smith, and particularly to Mr. T. Laue for their kind help in the reparation of this paper, which, though somewhat long, I hope may be found not unprofitable.

[graphic][merged small][merged small]

Loan Com-zninoa has addressed the following letter to the Lord Chancellor :—Royal Courts of Justice, June 21, 1887.—-My dear Lord Chaucellor,-You are good enough to desire me to make any observations which may occur to mo as to the proposed Order in Council relating to the circuits. As you are aware, I was not present when the committee was appointed to draw up the scheme for altering the circuits; nor was I a member of, nor in any wsy consulted by, the committee which drew it up. I am not, therefore, objecting to anything which I ought to accept. I never saw it until it was complete, and, as you know, I at once objected to it. My objections, I am sorry to say, remain, and they are threefold. First, I object to the scheme as altogether and unnecessarily revolutionary. It almost, except in the instances of the Northern and N orth-Eastern Circuits, destroys the circuit system. What has maintained that system, as we know, has been the civil business. For criminal business on] y a set of able and competent men will not leave London and go round the circuits; and I feel sure that to destroy such places _as Winchester and Lewes, for example, and force all the civil suitors within seventy or eighty miles of London (as the scheme does) to come for justice to the Strand, will destroy almost entirely the (:i!c\1its which at present are concerned with such business. It is not an affair only or even chiefly of the pr_ofess_|on. Important as, in my view, the profession is, it must, of course, yield if it interferes with the general good. But in this case the suitors will suffer grievously ; and certainly the strong remonstrances which have reached me from places (such as Brighton) not essize towns affected by the proposed change convince me that my objections are largely and widely shared. _ Next, I object to doing what is proposed _by Order_1n COUDCII. ‘xou have, no doubt, fully considered the objections of Field, J ., and _four other judges to the course proposed when it was contemplated, I believe, by Lord Cairns some years ago. If you feel sure there 1s nothing in those objections and that the thing can be done, I will not dispute the matter with you. I remain of opinion that it cannot. But, whether it can or no, I feel very strongly that it ought not. The clauses of the Judicature Act

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

referred to in the proposed order I am confident were never intended to authorize so sweeping and so various a _chango. Lord Selborne is away and Sir George J essel is dead. I remain the only other ofilcial _who conducted the first Judicature Act through ‘Parliament. For centuries, under the authority ct two old Acts of Parliament, every county in England has bad civil assiaes twice a year. In thirty-four counties, I think, civil assizes are absolutely abolished; in others they are reduced to one. I cannot think this ought to be done by a majority of the judges and the Lord Chancellor (I speak practically) without any consultation of the counties to be affected, and apart from the votes oi their representatives in the House of Commons. All magistrates and various other ofiicials have, for _a very long period of time, had the right to have actions brougtht against them for acts done in their ofiice tried in their own counties. his is aright resting on statute. By Order in Council it is proposed absolute? to abolish all this in 34 counties, and seriously to afiect it in others. must think that privileges expressly created by Parliament ought not to be taken away without Parliament being first consulted. The enactment that anything inconsistent with the udicature Acts is to be taken to repea ed will hardly hear the strain put upon it, iirst, of altering the circuit system_ so as, in tact, to abolish it, and, next, oi destroying important Parliamentary privileges involved in the circuit system, and, I take leave to say, never in the contemplation of Parliament as liable tobe repealed by the passing oi the Judicature Acts. I am sure that we in the House oi Commons never dreamed of such a consequence following from the general provision above referred to.

These are my objections to the proposed scheme as a whole, and to the mode of giving efiect to it. In detail—which is my third head of objection—there is much to be said. You have probably received, as I have, strong remonstranoes from Brighton and other corporations against the abolition of Lewes as a civil assize town. I have also received very strong remonstrances from Hampshire and the Isle ot Wight against the like abolition oi Winchester. I enclose you a paper, we l-reasoned, I think, and signed by all the leading members, Queen's counsel and others, ct the Western Circuit pointing out the practical hardships and inconveniences of this abolition. These are at specimens ot other strong protests which have reached ine from other quarters. 1! Parliament passses the scheme, oi course we have no more to say; but it seems a little strong to pass so serious a measure, interfering with so many rights and interests, really by a majority of the judges only. It is to my mind no real answer to say that it must lie on the tables of the Houses before it becomes law, and that ihoy may address the Crown against it. Oi course they may; but it is a very different thing to reject a whole scheme by address—as must be done it it is to be rejected—a.nd to amend a scheme in committee when the scheme is part of a Bill in Parliament. The power of the Government is generally suiiicient in both Houses to carry a scheme in block, whereas it it had to be debated in detail the most powerful Government is obliged to give and take.

I have expressed my objections to the scheme; but I do not wish to be thought desirous of standing on the present system without any alteration. Except in Yorkshire and Lancashire and a few other counties, I quite agree with the authors oi the scheme in thinking that three assizes in the year are abundantly sufiicient. I think some systemjof grouping not so trenchant as the one proposed by the scheme, and so arranged as to give every county or almost every county one civil aseize in the year, would be unobj ectionable. I think the abolition of grouping for criminal business perfectly right. Iwas chairman of a committee which strongly recommended this to Lord Cairns many years ago, and I am very glad to find our opinions entertained by so powerful a body as the judges. I am sure that the scheme has been most carefully and ably worked out. But I object to it as a whole; to some details of it, and to the method of carrying it into efiect, for the reasons which I have given. They are very hastily and imperfectly expressed, but time presses. I hope you will not object to my making this letter public if I should think it useful to do so.—Yours always very sincerely, Coy,gmog_

Let me add that I object also strongly to the Easter Circuit, as going back to the bad (practice of disregarding the time when everyone else keeps holiday,_and as estroying for nine times out of ten for judges, the bar, the sohcitors, suitors, and everyone engaged in litigation, the whole or the Easter Vacation.

[ocr errors][graphic]

LEGAL NEWS. APPOINTMENTS.

_Mr. Eiisssr Baoeanrar, Q.O., M.I’., who has been appointed Stipendiary Magistrate for the borough of West Ham in succession to the late Mr. John Roland Phillips, is the third son of the Right Hon. Sir Richard Bflggflllflyi lute Judge of the Court of Appeal, and was born in 1850. He was edllcated at MflT1b0l0ugh College and at Caii-is College Cambridge

He was called to the bar at Lincoln's-inn in Easter Term 18,73 and he is {I member Oi the South-Eastern Circuit. He was for a sliort time a revising hamster. He was secretary to the Boston Election Commission in 18 I5, and to the Sandwich Election Commissionin 1880. He is one ot the

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[graphic]

ated as a junior optima in 1839, and be was called to the bar at the Inner Temple in Hilary Term, 1841. He became Solicitor-General of Barbadoes in 1847, Speaker of the General Assembly in 1861, and Chief Justice and Judge of the Vice-Admiralty Court in 1874. He received the honour oi knighthood in 1879.

Serj eant Paras. O'BRIEN, who has been appointed Solicitor-General tor Ireland, insuccessionto Mr. John George Gibson, Q.O., M.P., who has been appointed Attorney-General for Ireland, was called to the bar at Dublin in 1865. He became a Queen’s Counsel in 1880, and a serjeaiitat-law in 1885. He is a member of the Munster Circuit.

Mr. JOHN ATKINSON’, Q.O., has been appointed a Prosecuting Counsel for the County and City of Dublin, in succession to Mr. Serj cant O’ Brien, who has been appointed Solicitor-General for Ireland. Mr. Atkinson was called to the bar at Dublin in 1865, and he became a Queen's Counsel in 1880. He practises on the Munster Circuit.

Mr. Enwix Foiiniis J srrarss, solicitor (oi the firm of Wartnaby, Gilbert, 8: Jeifries), oi Market Harborough, has been appointed s. Commissioner to administer Oaths in the Supreme Court of Judicature.

Mr. Haaiisar WILLIAM Lusi-i WILSON, barrister, has been appointed a Magistrate for Herefordshire. lilr. Wilson is the second son of the Right Hon. Sir Robert Lush, a judge of the Court of Appeal. He was born in 1850, and he assumed the additional name of Wilson by Royal licence. He was educated at Westminster and at Trinity Hall, Cambridge. He was called to the bar at the Inner Temple in Easter Term, 1873, and he is a member of the South-Eastern Circuit.

[ocr errors][merged small]

JOHN RICHARD BLOXIIAM and J oiis CHARLES Broxnaii, solicitors (Bloxbam & Son), G, Bennett's-hill, Birmingham. June 30. The said John Charles Bloxham having retired from practice in Birmingham.

Gaoiioa WINCH and J AMBS Aarnuii. Taasii, solicitors Winch 8: Trask), Chatham. J une 30. éGa:me, July 5.

[ocr errors]

GENERAL,

The Albany Law Journal says that Mr. David Dudley Field, at the age of eighty-two, sails for Europe to attend a convention oi the Association for the Reform and Codification of the Law oi Nations, to be held at the Guildhall, London, on the 25th oi July.

At the conclusion of the county business at the Sussex Sessions at Lewes on the 27th ult., a presentation was made to Mr. ',G. B. G330?!’ who for many years represented East Sussex in Parliament oi a silvergilt cup, bearing a suitable inscription, and subscribed for by Ml’Gregory's former constituents.

A correspondent of the Americcm Law Review calls attention to the following heading in the indexto “ Beach on Contributory Negligence" :“Daikie—stealing chickens by a.” We think that investigation of the indices to some recent English law books might be commended to till! correspondent.

The “ Masks of Flowers " was produced, “ in celebration oi the J ubi1ee.' at Gray's-inn Hall on Thursday afternoon, in the presence of the Duke and Duchess of Connaught, Princess Louise, and the Duchess of TeckTlie Bar Musical Society supplied the orchestra, Mr. Prendergast conducting. The morris dance and minuet were encored.

i The Montreal Legal News says that the Supreme Court of the Unlltd States is about to adjourn for the summer with over a thousand cm! unheard. Between three and four hundred cases are disposed of annusllii so that there is work enough on hand for three years at least» "Q mes put on the roll now will have to take their turn at the end of that time.

On Tuesda the R0 al Assent was iven b Commission to the Customs and Inland gevenue gill, the Consolgiated Pond (No. 2) Bilthe T.““‘; Bishopric and Chapter Acts Amendment Bill, Pensions (Colonial Servwqi Bill, Hyde-park Corner (Street Maintenance) Bill, and about iortyYB1' way, local government provisional orders, ti-amways, water, P19‘: hubom’ and other Bills. '

l ilillnfl

The Mrmrlmter Courier announces the death of Mr. Samue the‘ Barton, clerk to the Manchester city justices, which_t00k P1“? at in suddenly on Tuesday afternoon. Mr. Barton was admitted R. solicit we 1846, and for u wards of thirty years acted as assistant clerkhome magistrates at the City Police Court under his brother-in-law. t e Ht Mr. T. Higson. On the death of Mr. Higson, some flv6 YWago’ ' Barton was promoted to the post of clerk. H Tm

,-1..

On the 30th ult., in the House of Lords, Lord Coleridge l!1°'_@ d to the this House should direct its judgments to be formalli “°“fiealwhi,,h Divisions of the High Court of Justice and to the Court of APP‘? owe, may be afiected thereby.” He said that the House of Lords had 11° £15 Sm to enforce its own decrees, and that the parties were put t-vibe lluljfcw th, °x11Be °1 mllkillfi B motion in the court below in order W 1? ex. judgment of the House carried into efiect. The Lord Chalwéld 10 rd in pressed his entire approval of the object of the noble and 16"“ making this motion, and it was agreed to. the In the House of Commons this week, lllr. G. O. M018“ “skedhope Secretary of State for the Colonies whether lie could li0ld_°“tya M that a Bill dealing with colonial judgments and kindred snbJ°°“ npged by lines approved at the recent Colonial Conference would be blind

[graphic]
[graphic]
« PreviousContinue »