very considerable item. The third item was with regard to the "other
expenses, including examination postage." Up till 1884 the item of
printing and stationery had appeared separately. It was now merged in
other expenses," and therefore that item was necessarily swelled. Then
there was the matter of "registration expenses, &c.," increased from
£419 18s. 4d. to £1,295 19s. 7d. That item included a portion of the cost
of the rules, and was, for the reasons he had already given, very
much larger than in 1884. Sundry bills "-the principal cause of in-
crease in this item was the amount paid to a painter for cleaning, which
it had been thought it was not proper to bring under the head of repairs.
Again, the council had paid £70 for a doctor, which was a special item
not likely to occur again. The increase in "voluntary subscriptions was
due to the fact that the council had made a special contribution of £52 10s.
to King's College Hospital.
Mr. PHILLIMORE could not understand still how the registration item
was increased.
Mr. PENNINGTON, whilst very glad to give every information, thought
it extremely inconvenient that he should be called upon to give explana-
tions of details at this meeting which could be readily afforded if Mr.
Phillimore would call at the cashier's office after giving him (Mr. Pen-
nington) notice. He should then have the completest information, and he
could then bring a motion before the society. That seemed the business-
like way to treat the matter. He (Mr. Pennington) deprecated the time
of the meeting being taken up in this manner upon mere detail items of
the account. The accounts had been carefully examined by auditors, and
if the auditors had been dissatisfied with any item they would have re-
fused to pass it. He had only to repeat that the expenditure in the
purchase of rules was the main cause of the large increase from £419 18s. 4d.
to £1,295 19s. 7d. The probability was that next year there would be a
corresponding decrease, unless, of course, the authorities chose to issue
rules upon every conceivable subject. The council circulated the rules
for the benefit of the members. They thought it right to give them every
possible information that came to them, therefore there could be no doubt
as to the propriety of the expenditure.

Mr. PHILLIMORE then moved: "That the annual account be referred back to the Finance Committee to supply to the members an amended account, shewing why the 3rd, 4th, 7th, 8th, 14th, and 16th items of payment, which amounted in 1884 to £2,936 10s. 8d., have increased in 1886 to £5,503 2s. 4d., notwithstanding that the society's income last year has diminished £1,039 13s. 8d., and the number of articled clerks has decreased." He said he thought this would be the most convenient way to get the accounts dealt with, and said that three years ago he had endeavoured to gain the information by going to the office but had been unable to do so. When items increased so largely it was the bounden duty of the council to refer to the increase. The long and short of Mr. Pennington's answer was that the society had spent a little more on rules, but it was not altogether satisfactory, because he had told them that there had been some turning about of expenses from one item to another. It was a prime necessity that their accounts should be given out with a great deal more detail. No sundries ought to appear for a larger amount than £20, but the items should be specifically mentioned. There was a very strong impression abroad that the £10,000 received from the articled clerks was not expended wholly to that account. He had ascertained since he had sent in his notice of motion that the society's income had not decreased, but it had increased by about £124. The number of articled clerks had decreased.

Mr. KIMBER seconded the resolution pro formâ, observing that to his mind the explanation of Mr. Pennington was not satisfactory, and he did not think Mr. Pennington had dealt with it with the dignity which became a member of the council. There was no reason why the members should not have a business-like statement. Why did not the council refer to the increased activity of the society as a reason for increased expenditure? He believed the society had been more active than usual, but it would be more satisfactory to see the accounts set out differently.

Mr. MELVILL GREEN (Worthing) agreed entirely with Mr. Pennington that it was most inconvenient to discuss these details at a general meeting. The convenient course to adopt would be to get an auditor who was critically disposed to give them a separate report, and if Mr. Phillimore had not withdrawn his candidature and had been appointed the society would have had the thing thoroughly brought before them and they would understand exactly what it would be desirable to have in the accounts, but they would never get it from these inconvenient debates which they had every year. He gravely doubted whether there was as much economy exercised as there might be in the matter of printing. He hoped they would not pass the amendment, because it implied a certain amount of slur upon the Finance Committee.

The amendment was put and negatived by a large majority. The PRESIDENT then put the motion approving of the account, which was adopted.

THE ANNUAL REPORT.

made both at Oxford and Cambridge." He said he gathered from it that the committee was limiting its inquiries to the universities of Oxford and Cambridge. He suggested that these inquiries should be extended to London, not merely to the existing university, but perhaps rather to those bodies which were at the present moment supporting and directing the movement in favour of a more close association of examining and teaching in London. It might be within their knowledge that a reform of the University of London was proceeding from within as well as from without, and that the Committee of Convocation had suggested a scheme, one section of which provided for the representation on the governing body of the university of this society. Convocation, of course, had only advisory functions, and not executive. The senate of the university had also appointed a committee to consider the reform of the university, which had drawn up a scheme which had been reported by them to the senate. That did not provide for the representation of the society upon the governing body of the university, and thereupon a resolution had been carried referring the scheme back to the committee, so that they might consider the desirability of the society being represented upon the governing body of the university. The Council of the University College of London, of which he was a member, and the Council of King's College, had taken up the work, and had adopted a petition to the Crown, having for its main object the power to confer degrees in several faculties, omitring for the moment the faculty of laws, because they had found some difficulty in associating themselves with the Council of Legal Education and the Council of the Law Society, who were practically at the head of the legal education of solicitors.

Mr. DODDS, M.P., said that he ought, perhaps, to have made the suggestion he was about to offer to the council when the report was under their consideration. He would suggest that there should be, if there was to be any extension at all, an extension to the universities generally. There was now in the North of England the University of Durham, which for some time had made very little progress, but now, under the genial influence of the Bishop of Durham, it was making very considerable progress, and he thought that any privilege which should be extended to graduates of Oxford and Cambridge should also be extended at least to the University of Durham.

Mr. N. HANHART (London) said that last year he had brought forward a motion proposing that some sort of co-operation should take place between the society, or the council, and the bodies or committees which were then attempting to perfect the reform of the University of London, and to infuse into that body a teaching element. It had been then thought that it was not for the society to shew any great avidity to assist the University of London in reforming itself, particularly as it was not a teaching body, and therefore the society could not co-operate with it in the sense of improving education. But he trusted, after the steps which had been taken to improve legal education at Oxford and Cambridge, they would also apply themselves to assisting in the scheme for making the University of London a teaching university, and shewing some readiness on the part of the society to accept the privileges proposed to be conferred upon it. Mr. F. K. MUNTON (London) referred to the paragraph of the report dealing with the Middlesex Registry, the concluding portion of which was: "Mr. Munton, with the approval of the council, is now testing the question judicially whether a commissioner to administer oaths in London has or has not a right to administer the oath verifying the memorial-the registrar contending that the oath can only be administered at the office of the Middlesex Registry by one of the officials there." He said his attention had been drawn to some correspondence which had taken place in the legal journals with regard to the course now adopted in the Middlesex Registry which would have to be brought before the society at scme time or other. Since the proceedings referred to had been taken and the fees fixed, the difficulties thrown in the way of the profession were very much greater than formerly, and they were exceptionally so as regarded the so-called lexicographical index to which one had to go for the purpose of making an ordinary search. He thought the society had better proceed with one thing at a time, and they had better dispose of the oath question before asking the council to take up other matters, however important they might be. With regard to the audience of persons other than solicitors in county courts, which was referred to in the report, it was known that a committee had been sitting at the Law Institution which had under consideration the subject of county courts. The last meeting of that committee had taken place that morning, and he was justified in stating that there had been a feeling on the part of the committee that they might meet the views which were expressed by the council and which were somewhat contrary to their previous report. He believed that by a little give and take on either side a satisfactory report would be arrived at, and that great benefit would arise therefrom. He then referred to the Selden Society, which, he said, had for its object to encourage the study of English law. About 100 eminent members of the other side of the profession were connected with it, and they were desirous of getting solicitors to unite with them in forming a good strong society. He hoped the

The PRESIDENT moved that the annual report be received, approved, and council would see their way to rendering assistance to the forwarding of entered upon the minutes.

Mr. J. B. BENSON (London) read the following paragraph, which appeared in the report with regard to legal education at the universities:-"This matter, which must always be one of great interest to the profession, was brought forward at the York provincial meeting by Mr. F. P. Morrell, and it was resolved that it was desirable that the facilities for obtaining a university education by solicitors should be extended, and that it be referred to a committee appointed by the council to inquire how that object could be attained. The matter was, in accordance with this resolution, referred to the Examination Committee, by whom preliminary inquiries are being

the society, and that many solicitors would be induced to join it.

Mr. KIMBER said no severer rebuke could have been given to the society than the observations of Mr. Munton. The object of the Selden Society was to encourage the study and advance the knowledge of the history of English law. He thought that was one of the objects of the Incorporated Law Society

The PRESIDENT reminded Mr. Kimber that as a matter of courtesy he had allowed Mr. Munton to refer to the Selden Society, but the matter was not mentioned in the report, and he could not permit a general dişcussion upon it.

Mr. KIMBER said there were certainly some observations in the report with reference to legal education, where it said that the subjects set and the standard required at the Preliminary Examination had for some time past been under the careful consideration of the council, and that with the view of increasing the efficiency of that examination certain alterations had been resolved on, including (1) the substitution of passages for translation at sight in the Language Examinations in lieu of passages from books set beforehand, (2) the addition of Algebra up to simple equations and the first four books of Euclid in the Arithmetic Examination, (3) a more stringent regard to spelling and English composition. He was very sorry to see this last statement, for he should have imagined that every gentleman who presented himself for the Preliminary Examination would have had beforehand a stringent regard to spelling and composition, but he supposed the council thought otherwise. It was a confession on the part of the council that the members were behind even the Matriculation Examinations at the universities. Considering the tendency of modern education, especially of technical education, the council ought to insist on a greater acquisition of modern languages. Two foreign languages at least should be insisted upon. With regard to the Agricultural Tenants' Relief Bill, the report contained the following:-"The Bill purports to protect the landlord by provisions which appear to the council to be inadequate. The proposal of the Bill as to the division of rates is that the tenant shall be entitled to deduct from his rent one-half part of all sums paid by him during the current half-year or year for poor and other rates assessed or leviable upon the tenant. If this should become law, it appears to the council that power should be given to the landlord to appeal against the assessments in the same way as the occupier may appeal.' The report also stated that the provisions for the protection of the landlord in the Act of 1883 appeared to the council to be reasonable and proper, and such as ought not to be repealed. He doubted very much whether the council would find themselves in consonance with the general opinion of the members of the profession. He should like them to give their reasons for the opinion they had come to. To his mind these provisions were unreasonable and improper, and the Govern. ment were perfectly justified in bringing in a Bill to repeal them. Mr. MARKBY: It is not a Government Bill.

Mr. KIMBER said that at any rate it was well supported on the Conservative side of the House. The report under the head of "Delays in the Taxation of Costs in the Chancery and Queen's Bench Divisions" had the following paragraph:-"The council suggest that the best course to adopt would be to assign three masters to each division (one each for cases from A. to F., from G. to N., and from O. to Z.), and that they should attend in the same division every sitting during the year. Further, that the masters should be required to attend at the opening of the offices at ten o'clock, and stay till four o'clock, and that there should be three masters in daily attendance during the whole of the Long Vacation. The taxation of costs by one particular master to whom the action has been assigned should be abolished, subject, however, to power being given in special cases where the sitting master may think it necessary to refer to the particular master to whom the action has been assigned any ques tion that may arise upon the taxation of the costs." He thought the council were entitled to the gratitude of the members for the suggestions they had made. It was also stated that during the past year twenty-one solicitors had, at the instance of the society, been struck off the roll, and two had been suspended, and that other cases were now pending. He was sorry the council had not thought proper to express their regret at this state of things. He urged that, where a solicitor was convicted of a criminal offence, power should be given to the judge to remove his name from the roll, and that it should be made a part of the sentence. He objected that there was nothing in the report about Sir Albert Rollit's Bill for compulsory registration or about the Criminal Evidence Bill, and that nothing was said about a court of criminal appeal or about judicial slander, with respect to which there had been an important case recently. Judicial slander did not always happen in the magistrates' courts, but sometimes in the High Court, and it ought to be put an end to. With regard to delays in the Chancery Division, he said there were 900 causes waiting to be heard, and insisted that there ought to be more judges.

Mr. R. S. FRASER (London) said that everyone must be struck by the great amount of attention given by the council to the subjects treated of in the report. With regard to legal education he said he felt that everyone applying to be inrolled, if he had not received a fairly liberal education was unfit to be inrolled, and the judges should have the power of veto in such cases. With respect to the Land Transfer Bill, he objected that solicitors' work should be handed over, as in the case of the Bankruptcy Bill, to gentlemen who were not solicitors. This the solicitors were threatened with, and it was proposed that they should practically be disfranchised, in the first place by the constitution of a Land Transfer Registry, which was to consist of certain gentlemen who were not solicitors. He felt that they should make a strong protest against the continuance of this in the Bill, and as far as they could that they should leave no stone unturned to insure that the work should be left to solicitors. Solicitors did not want to push their way into the courts, therefore barristers ought not to push themselves into the work of solicitors. He contended that solicitors only ought to be placed on the Land Transfer Registry. With regard to the rules he urged that the council ought to be asked to prepare them under the approval of the Lord Chancellor, and he hoped the council would consider this point. Mr. PHILLIMORE disagreed with what had been said by Mr. Kimber and Mr. Fraser with regard to the examination. He did not think it the duty of the society to raise the standard. In the report of the committee which had considered the accommodation in the library it was said that many students were in the habit of spending their days at the library instead of

at their principals' offices; and if the standard of examination was raised it would, he thought, be likely to aggravate the evil. He was also at variance with Mr. Kimber with regard to his observations on the Agricultural Tenants' Relief Bill. He indorsed what had been said with regard to the Selden Society, also with respect to the University of London and | legal education. The report was then adopted.

OCTOBER MEETINGS.

"That a

Mr. MELVILL GREEN moved, in accordance with notice: committee be appointed to consider and report on the arrangements of the October Meetings, and particularly as to choice of subjects; selection of readers and speakers, limiting length of speeches, and giving right of reply; time of distributing prints of the papers; previous publication of the programme of the meeting; admission to the debates of solicitors not yet members; and all other points likely to increase the interest and beneficial influence of these meetings." He said that, under the present arrangements, the discussions had the tendency to be of a desultory character, and therefore less effective than they might be. The papers contributed were contributed by individuals who took an interest in the subject on which they wrote, but which might not happen to be one of general interest. He referred to several of the papers at the last meeting as a proof of this. He did not think a committee would have selected some of the subjects which were brought forward. Further, the members did not know what subjects were coming on until they had previously made up their minds to attend. The Land Transfer Bill had been discussed last month on two days, but with much less vigour and effect than if it had been announced beforehand. But he only proposed that the mode of conducting the meetings should be considered. The PRESIDENT said he did not think any objection would be offered to the motion, which was a very reasonable one. Would he arrange as to the choice of the committee?

Mr. GREEN said he would be disposed to leave it to the council to nominate the committee.

Mr. S. DAY (London) said he was about to propose that a committee of the council and of such members of the society, not exceeding any number agreed upon, should be nominated by the council. Mr. GREEN was quite of that opinion. Mr. DAY then seconded the motion.

Mr. PHILLIMORE suggested an amendment: "That a committee be appointed to draw up rules of procedure and debate for all general meetings, and especially to consider and report on the arrangements of the October meetings, &c."

The PRESIDENT said Mr. Green's motion had reference to the October meetings and not to other general meetings.

Mr. PHILLIMORE moved his amendment, but it was not seconded. Mr. DAY observed that he rather objected to that part of the motion which suggested the admission to the debates of solicitors who were not members.

The motion was carried.

SOLICITORS AND AUCTIONEers.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN (London) said he had been deputed by Mr. Gribble to move the following resolution, of which he had given notice: "That the committee appointed at the general meeting held on the 28th of January, 1887, to consider and report to the council whether or not it is expedient to assimilate the practice in England generally to that which prevails in the North of England with reference to the employment and remuneration of auctioneers, be authorized to consider and report to the council upou any questions affecting the practice on sales of property by public auction, and the remuneration of solicitors and auctioneers for such sales." Mr. ELLERTON (London) seconded the motion, which was agreed to. REGISTRY OF TITLE.

Mr. E. K. BLYTH (London) moved, in accordance with notice: "That it is undesirable and unnecessary, for the purpose of establishing a system of registry of title, that the State should assume the responsibility of either declaring the title of land to be indefeasible, or of guaranteeing it." He said he was not proposing any new plan, but was simply asking the society to approve of the plan which was proposed many years ago by Mr. Cookson, approved by Mr. Buller, and supported by Mr. E. Wilkins Field, and with respect to which they had first converted a committee of the House of Commons and then satisfied a commission which reported in 1857 of the feasability of their plan. Had the various Lord Chancellors who had dealt with the subject since then adhered to this plan he believed the question would have been in a different position at the present time. In 1852 Mr. Cookson had brought forward his paper advocating an unwarranted registry of title. In 1853 a Bill had been introduced for the registration of insurances. Mr. Cookson, Mr. Field, and Mr. Buller had at that time given evidence, and they recommended that the Bill for registering insurances should not be proceeded with, but that a Royal Commission should be appointed to consider the question of registration of title. That had reported in 1857 in favour of the registration of ownership, and that a deed should be put on the registry without prejudice to any rights then existing, subject to all rights and interests attaching at the time of registration, but not to any rights and interests subsequent thereto. With this report before him Lord Westbury had entirely thrown over the question, and in 1862 with his Bill he had gone for an indefeasible title. Lord Westbury's Act contained the principle of indefeasible titles, and it was admittedly a failure. Only 411 persons had availed themselves of it, of whom 170 had taken themselves off the register. As regarded the unwarranted title, they had a perfect precedent for it in the system of court rolls, and he thought those with experience would say that they

MUNTON had undertaken to second:-(1) That, in the opinion of this meeting, more judges are required to deal with the current judicial work. (2) That, pending such addition to the judicial strength of the courts as may be necessary to meet the demands upon it, it is expedient that a Board of Arbitration should be appointed by this society, to consist of solicitors; and that it should be a recommendation to the members of this society to insert in contracts prepared by them an arbitration clause, referring all questions which may arise thereon to such board. (3) That it be referred to a special committee of members to frame such rules as may be necessary to carry out the second of these resolutions, and that such rules, when framed, be submitted to a special meeting of this society for confirmation. He said he thought there would be a large number of solicitors ready to give their assistance to the council in the way indicated. He would be quite content to accept the nominations of the council in connection with actions in which he was concerned. Anything would be better than that clients should be starved out as they were. How the lists were arranged under present circumstances it puzzled one to conceive. He felt, however, that the subject would be better discussed at a fuller meeting, and he would be glad if any of the members who thought the matter worthy of consideration would communicate with him with a view to arranging for a special meeting of the society to be called by requisition to the council. He would therefore withdraw the resolution. Mr. GREEN said that, as there was no provincial meeting this year, a very good opportunity would be afforded for calling a meeting in November, and it would not give rise to the inconvenience which might be felt in other years. The next ordinary general meeting would not be until January. Mr. NEWMAN (London) moved, and Mr. DAY seconded, a vote of thanks to the President, which terminated the proceedings.

acquirements of candidates, and securing that those who pass shall have had a sound training in the essential branches of an ordinary education. Final Examination.-During the past year the council has also made alterations in the distribution of subjects at the Final Examination and in the number of questions set in each.

In this re-arrangement the old classification of these subjects into "essential" and "non-essential" has been abandoned. It is considered that the new distribution will better secure that candidates should be examined (as provided by the statutes) in all branches of the law connected with " matters usually transacted by solicitors."

ment.

Trustees' Powers and Clauses.-This question, which was referred to in the reports for the years 1884, 1885, and 1886, has been again under the consideration of the council, and the draft of a Bill has been prepared to remove the difficulties under which trustees labour in consequence of the recent decisions relating to payment of purchase-money, depreciatory conditions, loans and purchases by trustees, and the employment of agents by trustees, and also to afford relief to trustees in other respects, but there has been no opportunity this year to bring the Bill into ParliaLand Transfer Bill.-The most important Bill of the session, so far as the legal profession and the large part of the public who are interested in land are concerned, is the Land Transfer Bill, introduced by the Lord Chancellor in the House of Lords. His lordship, immediately after the introduction of the Bill, sent a copy to the council for consideration, and a committee was appointed to carefully examine and report upon its provisions. Steps were, at the same time, taken by the council to ascertain the opinion of the country law societies, and in the meantime a preliminary report on the Bill was forwarded to his lordship. At a later period a fuller report was submitted, of which a print is sent herewith as the readiest mode of communicating to the members the views of the council on the Bill. The council will continue to watch the progress of the Bill, and to make any suggestions for its improvement which may appear necessary. It must, however, be doubtful, having regard to the state of public business, whether the Bill can become an Act in this session; and, if it should not do so, the council will suggest to the Lord Chancellor that much time and difficulty would be saved if the Bill were referred to a strong committee, upon which conveyancing counsel and solicitors (both London and country) were represented, who might report to his lordship during the interim. In connection with this subject the council desire to recall the attention of the members to the pamphlet on the land laws pub-House. In February a deputation from the council waited upon the lished by them in the early part of 1886, a print of which was then sent to each member of the society.

The Copyhold Enfranchisement Bill, 1887.-This is the seventh Bill on this subject which the council have had to refer to in their annual reports of recent years. The history of the previous Bills down to June, 1886, will be found in the annual reports for the years 1882 to 1886 inclusive. Last year's report (June, 1886) concludes with the statement that a report of the council containing their suggestions and proposed amendments was made, and placed in the hands of Mr. James, M.P., and Mr. Gregory, M.P. After this date and at the latter end of the session of 1886, the Bill passed through committee in the House of Commons, and was introduced into the House of Lords by Lord Hobhouse, but did not there reach a second reading. This session (1887) the Bill has been introduced by Lord Hobhouse in the House of Lords in the first instance. The special committee, of the council to which the several Bills have been yearly referred, made a special report on the present Bill in March last, which was adopted by the council and communicated to Lord Hobhouse. This communication was accompanied by a memorandum by Sir Richard Nicholson (a member of the council), dissenting from the council's report "so far as it may be held to imply any approval of the principles of this Bill." The committee's report and Sir Richard Nicholson's memorandum are set out in the appendix. The Bill has been referred to a special committee of the House of Lords, who have examined, or are engaged in examining, witnesses on the subject; a process to which none of the previous Bills have been submitted.

Settled Land Act (1882) Amendment Bill.-Prior to the Settled Land Act, 1882, the only mode in which a tenant for life having no resources other than the estates could execute drainage improvements was by borrowing money under the General Land Drainage and Improvement Acts, the Limited Owners' Residences Act, or the Improvement of Land Act, the scheme of which provided for repayment of the charge by an annual sum extending over a period of about twenty-five years, and calculated to repay principal and interest during that time. By the Settled Land Act, 1882, s. 25, drainage and similar works were included among the objects for which the application of capital was sanctioned, and a tenant for life desiring since the passing of the Act to lay out moneys for drainage or similar purposes can, under section 21 of the Act, call upon the trustees to apply capital for that purpose, but this section is not retrospective. The question was raised in the case of Re Knatchbull's Settled Estate (27 Ch. D. 349), in which Mr. Justice Pearson considered it to be a casus omissus, and decided against the construction for which the tenant for life in that case contended. The case was (in accordance with a suggestion of his lordship, made after the judgment had been given) carried to the Court of Appeal (29 Ch. D. 588), by whom the decision was affirmed. Inasmuch as the Settled Land Act now authorizes the execution of drainage and other improvements of that nature out of capital, the council considered the same principle should apply to the redemption of charges created for similar purposes prior to the passing of that Act. The matter is one of great importance to landowners at the present time, as, owing to depression in agricultural and other causes, rents are seriously diminished, while expenditure on estates is greatly needed. The council accordingly prepared a Bill on the subject, which they submitted to the Lord Chancellor, with a request that, if he agreed with them, he

would take steps for remedying the matter referred to. A clause similar to that suggested by the council has been introduced by his lordship into the Land Transfer Bill. Bills of Sale Bill.-In January last, the council called the attention of the Lord Chancellor to the decision of the Court of Appeal in the case of Ex parte Stanford, Re Barber (17 Q. B. D. 259), to the effect that a bill of sale is void if the grantor assigns" as beneficial owner," and urged that the decision is calculated to work very great mischief. By the Bills of Sale Act, 1882, a specific form is provided, and a bill of sale in any other form is rendered void. By the above-mentioned decision, the addition of the words referred to is held to be a departure from the form, and so renders the instrument void. The words "beneficial owner" have been used for the sake of brevity, and in order that the grantee might have the benefit of the implied covenants, which, by the Conveyancing Act, 1881, are given to a grantee in all cases where a grant is made for valuable consideration by a person who is expressed to transfer as "beneficial owner.' A form of bill of sale containing these words was given in various text books, and had been recommended for use by eminent conveyancing counsel, and until the case of Ex parte Stanford was decided such form had been generally adopted, and the decision took the profession by surprise. The effect of the decision is that in a great number of transactions where money has been lent on the security of bills of sale between the date of the last Bills of Sale Act and the date of the decision, the securities are rendered void, and thus great hardship may result. The addition of the words referred to, although no doubt a departure from the statutory form, in no way infringes the policy of the Bills of Sale Act, 1882, or the protection which it was intended to afford, and the council therefore urged upon his lordship that with respect to bills of sale which contained the words referred to, a statutory protection should be afforded in the same manner as statutory protection is frequently given in cases where a technical and innocuous departure from the law has happened. The subject has been urged upon the serious attention of this society by solicitors and others throughout the country, and with a view of securing protection for past transactions, and with that object the council framed a Bill, a print of which was submitted to the Lord Chancellor with a request that he should consider it, and if he was of opinion that the measure was a reasonable and proper one, that his lordship would introduce it into the House of Lords at an early period of the session, and give it the weight of his support in its various stages in that Lord Chancellor, and his lordship has recently, after carefully considering the Bill, informed the council that he did not deem it desirable to attempt to deal with the difficulty by legislation. The council have decided to make a fresh attempt next session. Searches before Completion-Equitable Execution-Re Pope.-The case of Re Pope (34 W. R. 654, 693, 17 Q. B. D. 743)—decided in the Court of Appeal in July last-disclosed a serious danger to purchasers, it being held that a judgment creditor who had obtained a receivership order, amounting in law to a delivery in execution, could defeat a purchaser for value, although the latter had no means of ascertaining the existence of the incumbrance. In the case referred to it was also decided that previous registration of the judgment was not necessary; and that the receivership order need not be registered unless or until a sale was desired. This decision naturally attracted much attention. The council referred the subject to a committee, who made a report of so much importance that it was forthwith communicated to the various provincial law societies in August last. The subject was discussed at the provincial meeting of the society at York in October last, and a resolution was passed recommending that legislation should be sought not only to amend the defect in the Act of 1864, brought to light in Re Pope, but also for the registration of drainage and improvement charges, and of the title of trustees in bankruptcy, and for the extension of the system of official searches to the new registers; and further, if possible, that one comprehensive list should be kept at the central office comprising every incumbrance or charge which might affect or concern purchasers or mortgagees. The council accordingly caused a Bill to be prepared providing for the above objects, which was very carefully settled after much consideration with Mr. Elphinstone. By this Bill it was proposed to enact that all writs, processes of execution, and orders for enforcing judgments, statutes, or recognizances should be void as against a purchaser for value, unless registered at the central office, and that a bankruptcy shall not affect a purchaser for value unless the receiving order is registered; and that statutory charges for moneys advanced or expended for improvements, drainage, or other purposes, should not affect a purchaser unless similarly registered. was proposed in the Bill as drawn also to protect a purchaser from land charges already in existence, unless registered before December 31, 1888, or, if this should be objected to, in the alternative, within one year from the first assignment, transfer, or devolution after the commencement of the Act. The Bill also provided that the clauses of the Conveyancing Act as to official searches should apply to the registers and entries under the Act; and for the making of general rules for the purposes of the Act, by the judges and the presidents of the Incorporated Law Society and of one of the provincial law societies, following the Solicitors' Remuneration Act, 1881. The Bill thus prepared was submitted to the Lord Chancellor in the hope that he would introduce it in the House of Lords. The council have lately learned with regret that his lordship, owing to the pressure of other legislation, will not be able to deal with the Bill during the present session, but the matter will not be lost sight of.

It

Solicitors' Remuneration Order.-The council have during the year had numerous further questions brought before them for adjudication or opinion, involving points of interest to the profession generally in the application of the new system of ad valorem remuneration, and at the end of the year 1886 they issued a revised edition of the Digest of Cases arising in actual