« PreviousContinue »
Policies are now being issued by this Corporation NORWAY:-First-class Passenger Steamer
HER Y de entidvertisementer Agent
Professional Men and Gentlemen of Limited In
come.-A few boys, sons of the above, are admitted AMOUNT OF CAPITAL SUBSCRIBED, £710,000
into a well-known School of high tone on greatly MILNER'S Strong, Holdfast, & Fire Resist
Offices of the Corporation
reduced fees.-For full particulars address, in strict Winchester House, Old Broad-street, E.C.
conäidence, “Mu." care of Messrs. Relfe Bros., 6, ing Safes & Banker's Strong Rooms.
Charterhouse-buildings, Aldersgate, City, E.C. Rt. Hon. E. PLEYDELL BOUVERIE, Chairman.
€ 9. MILNER'S DEED BOXES
Sir SYDNEY H. WATERLOW, Bart., Deputy-Chairman.
"NORGE" from NEWCASTLE to BERGEN every MILNER'S SAFES insuring Mortgages of Freehold and Leasehold
Tuesday evening; from Bergen every Saturday
evening. Fares: £3 single, £5 return (available any
time during the season), including all meals and terest. MILNER'S SAFES
steward's fees.-BORRIES, CRAIG, & Co., NewcastleThese Policies will be of especial advantage to For Books and documents 8 16
on-Tyne. Trustees who may be held responsible for losses MILNER'S SAFES
consequent upon their Investments. For Church Plate ...
19 5 Mortgagors insuring with the Corporation will SUMMER TOURS IN SCOTLAND
also be enabled to obtain Advances at the lowest MILNER'S SAFES For Jewellery
possible rate of interest.
Route via Crinan and Caledonian Canals). MILNER'S SAFES
holders insuring the return of the Amount invested Royal Mail Steamer COLUMBA or IONA from For Registrars, specially
at the expiration of their leases or at any fixed Glasgow Daily at 7 a.m., from Greenock at 9 a.m., fitted 16 0 periods.
conveying, in connection with his West Highland MILNER'S SAFES
For particulars and conditions of Insurance apply Steamers, passengers for Oban, Fort-William. InverFor Bankers... 52 5 to the Secretary.
ness, Lochawe, Skye, Gairloch, Staffa, Iona, Glencoe, JAS. C. PRINSEP, Secretary.
Stornoway, &c. Official Guide, 3d.; Illustrated, 6d. MILNER'S SAFES
and 1s., by post, or at W. H. Smith & Sons' Railway For Diamonds 68 4
Bookstalls. Time Bill with Map and Fares free from MILNER'S SAFE DEPOSIT3
SIX per CENT. GUARANTEED MORTGAGE ... 5,000 0
the owner, DAVID MACBRAYNE, 119, Hope-street, BONDS.
-Capital paid up, 1,000,000 dols.; Liability of
LONDON GAZETTE (published by authority) and
COUNTRY 250.000 dols.; Total, 2,250,000 dols. £450,000).
OFFICE.-No. 117, CHANCERY LANE, FLEET MILNER'S, 28, Finsbury-pavement, E.C.
Head Office-Boston, Mass., Mr. B. Lombard, jun.,
begs to direct the attention of the Legal Profession
notices, &c., and hereby solicits their continued support.The Company is prepared to receive money for in N.B. One copy of advertisement only required, and the
vestment in First Registered Mortgages of Freeholds strictest care and promptitude assured. Official stamped AUTHORITY.
in the States of the United States of America, for five forms for advertisement and file of “London Gazette" years, yielding 6 percent. interest, payable by coupons kept. Bvappointment.
half-yearly in London, principal and interest The Companies Acts, 1862 to 1883 guaranteed by the Company. For full information
as to these investments apply to the London Office, Every requisite under the above Acts supplied on the
and Fine Art Auctioneers, 47, Leicester-square shortest notice.
London, W.O., beg to inform Executors, Trustees, ORTHERN ASSURANCE COMPANY Solicitors, and the Trade, that their Season for the Established 1836,
disposal by Auction of Libraries of Books and Music, Tho BOOKS and FORMS kept in stock for immediate LONDON: 1, Moorgate-street, E.O. ABERDEEN: 1,
Engravings, Paintings, and other works connected 280.
with the Fine Arts, Musical Instruments, and all MEMORANDA and ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION
INCOME & FUNDS (1886) :
descriptions of Valuable Property, will commence on Bpeedily printed in the proper form for registration and
October 17, and that their warehouses are open daily distribution. SHARE CERTIFICATES, DEBENTURES,
for the reception of goods consigned to them for sale. &c., engraved and printed. OFFICIAL SEALS designed
Messrs. P. & S. will hold several important Sales and executed. No Charge for Sketches.
$3,297,000 during the Season, and will include small properties
in appropriate Sales, thus affording the same advanSolicitors' Account Books.
tages to small as to large consignments. Libraries
LIFE INTE. and other properties catalogued, arranged, and valued RESTS in LANDED or FUNDED PROPERTY for Probate and Legacy Duty, or for Public or Private or other Securities and Annuities PURCHASED, or Loans Sale.
or Annuities thereon granted, by the EQUITABLE RE(Late ASH & FLINT),
VERSIONARY INTEREST SOCIETY (LIMITED), 10,
Lancaster-place, Waterloo Bridge, Strand.
to announce that their Sales by Auction of 49, FLEET-STREET, LONDON, E.C. (corner capitalized.
Plate, Watches, Chains, Jewellery, Precious Stones,
F. S. CLAYTON, cf Sorjeants'-inn).
&c., are held on Mondays, Wednesdays, Thursdays,
C. H, CLAYTON, 1 Secretaries and Fridays. Annual and other Returns Stamped and Filed.
The attention of Solicitors, Executors, Trustees, ESTABLISHED 1851.
and others is particularly called to this ready means PARTRIDGE & COOPEH,
B A N K.
for the disposal of Property of deceased and other
clients. LAW AND GENERAL STATIONERS,
In consequence of the frequency of their sales THREE per CENT. INTEREST allowed on Messrs. J. & D. are enabled to include large or small 1&2, CHANCERY LANE LONDON E.C. DEPOSITS, repayable on demand.
quantities at short notice (if required). TWO per CENT. INTEREST on CURRENT Sales of Furniture held at private houses. ACCOUNTS celculated on the minimum monthly Valuations for Probate or Transfer. Terms on apbalances, when not drawn below £100.
plication to the City Auction Rooms (established
The Bank undertakes for its Customgrs, free of 1793), 38 and 39, Gracechurch-street, E.C. Deeds and Writings engrossed and copied on the Premiees Charge, the Custody of Deeds, Writings, and other Mesure. Johnson & Dymond beg to notify that with punctuality and dispatch, at the lowest scale of Securities and Valuables; the collection of Bills or their Auction Sales of Wearing Apparel, Piece charges. A good Discount allowed on agreed accounts Exchange, Dividends, and Coupons; and the purchase Goods, Household and Office Furniture, Carpets, LAW PRINTING.
and sale of Stocks, Shares, and Annuities. Letters of Bedding, &c., are held on each day of the week Credit and Circular Notes issued.
DAVITS, and other PLEADING, Printed at ls. por folio. lars, post-free, on application.
and Others. Lofty in form for Registration.
and Well-lighted Offices and Chambers to be Discount allowed for cash on agreed accounts.
Let at Lonsdale Chambers, No. 27, Chancery-lane LITHOGRAPHY,
MENTS THROUGHOUT on ABSTRACTS,
furnished Rooms for Meetings, Arbitrations &c.-BRIEFS,
MOEDER'S HIRE SYSTEM.
The original, best, and most liberal.
Apply to Messrs. LAUNDY & Co., Chartered Aécountat reduced prices.
Founded A.D. 1868.
ants, on the premises. PLANS OF ESTATES, SPECIFICATIONS, BUILD
Cash prices. No extra charge for time given. ING SOCIETIES' DEEDS, LEASES, &c., Lithographed with accuracy and dispatch.
F. MOEDER, 248, 249, and 250, Tottenham-courtPARCHMENT AND LEGAL PAPERS
CADAME TUSSAUD'S EXHIBITION,
BAKER-STREET STATION.- Latest addigiving an audience at the Vatican, surrounded by Cardinals, Monsignors, Nobles, Guards, &c.; the Royal Courts of Justice, Lincoln's-ina, and ithe
Official).- Adjoining the Temple, close to the
Boudoir Group of Fashion, containing the newest and Strand, and within five minutes' walk of the City;
central and quiet, with immediate rail and omnibus Conqueror to Queen Victoria ; magnificient and im
conveyance to all parts of town. Hydraulic lifts,
heating by steam - radiators,
arrangements, &c. Rents of remaining rooms to let,
from £20 to £90. Suites, £100 to £250.- Apply to the from 8 a.m. till 10 p.m,
Secretary or the Steward, on the premises, Temple
RICHARD FLINT & CO.
Established MESSRS. JOHNSON & DYMOND box
Law Copying and Engrossing.
Particulars, estimates postere opinions, testimonials CHAMBERS for CITY GENTLEMEN !
CHAMBERS and OFFICES COMBINED
CASES REPORTED THIS WEEK.
chancery business will take place every Wednesday, commencing In the Solicitors' Journal.
In the Weekly Reporter.
on Wednesday, the 17th of August. The chief clerks of Mr. Addy v. Blake
Justice KAY will take the chamber business, and Mr. Justice Avery's Patent, Re
Bluck, Ex parte, In re Bluck 720 KEKEWICH will, until further notice, sit in chambers Broad-street Station Dwellings and Board of Trade, Ex parte, In re
every Workshops Co., Re
719 Wednesday at 10.30, being half an hour before the time of his
Boswell v. Coaks Collinge's Settled Estates, Re
711 sitting in court. It is to be observed that the notice varies the
Guy v. Churchill
110 terms of_preceding notices by stating that “the chambers of Mr. Esdaile v. City of London Union .. 642 Hilleary & Taylor, In re.. Harvey v. Olliver ........
Lyon v. Morris
705 Justice Kar will be open during the vacation,” in place of on corHeron v. Heron.....
Morgan, In re, Owen v. Morgan 705 tain days in every week during the vacation. Whether this means
Nanney v. Morgan
an alteration in the practice remains to be seen.
709 Lea v. Facey
Reg.v. Northampton County Court Marcus, Re, Marcus v. Marcus ... 645 Judge
717 Munton v. Lord Truro
Richardson, In re, Shuldham v. ............ 645
Royal National Lifeboat InstituPalliser v. Gurney ................ 643 tion
THERE HAVE BEEN two satisfactory announcements this week in
710 Palmer v. Mallet ................. 613 Stoneham v. Ocean Assurance Co. 716 the House of Commons with regard to the Land Transfer Bill. It Postmaster-General v. Green...... 645 Topham v. Booth Troitzsch v. Rees
Watson, In re, Carlton v. Carlton.. 711 is not to be divided, and the Government are considering whether
Mr. Shaw LEFEVRE asked whether the Government would assent to The Solicitors' Journal and Reporter. the suggestion that the clauses of the Bill relating to inheritance LONDON, JULY 23, 1887.
sition from the Liberal side of the House," should be separated from the rest of the Bill, “which would give rise to much dis
cussion." Mr. SMITH's reply was that the Government were CURRENT TOPICS.
exceedingly anxious to pass the Bill as a whole, and that it was MR. JUSTICE DENMAN and Mr. Justice KEKEWICH will be the not desirable to take part out of it. In other words, the object of vacation judges, and Mr. CARRINGTON and Mr. Koe will be the the Government is, as we have thought all along, land transfer, chancery registrars in vacation.
and they are not disposed to give all the jam out of the tart to the Liberal side of the House this year in order to find the “dis
cussion" of the crust exclusively reserved for them next session. Mr. Henry SKIPPER RYLAND, solicitor (of the firm of CLARKE, he was aware that the Conveyancing Act and Settled Land Acts
In reply to Mr. H. FOWLER the next night, Mr. Smiju etated that Woodcock, & Ryland), of 11, Lincoln’s-inn-fields, has been ap; had been very carefully considered by a select committee, and that pointed an additional taxing master of the Supreme Court of it would tend to the advantage of the Land Transfer Bill if a Judicature, Chancery Division. Mr. Ryland was admitted a solicitor similar course could now be pursued also. The second reading in 1862.
(fixed for last Thursday) is accordingly put off for the Government
to consider the question. A select committee would be useful, bat THE APPOINTMENT of the additional chancery taxing master will the committee suggested by the Council of the Incorporated Law be hailed with satisfaction by the profession, partly on the ground Society would be much better. Meanwhile, it may be observed that Mr. RYLAND is a most suitable man to fill the post, and partly that this amending Act bids fair to outgrow its parent stem before because his appointment increases the number of the taxing masters it passes into law. Though its number of sections is only 69 and to nine. Mr. Ryland is a practitioner who has always been, as 2 schedules as against 129 in the Act of 1875, yet, if pages are he has described himself, “à working solicitor,” that is, he has counted, the 1875 Act is only 38, wbile the present Bill has got to given attention personally to the details of practice and procedure. 34, and is still growing. His figure has for many years been a familiar object in the offices, and he is well known to, and respected by, all the chancery officers. The satisfaction which will be felt on account of the increase of
IT WILL BE SEEN from the report of the Council of the Incorporthe number of taxing masters is somewhat marred by the fact that ated Law Society (ante, p. 631) that the Bill which the Council Mr. Walker, who was recently appointed from the District are promoting with a view to protect purchasers against Registry at Manchester, has already broken down in health, and is the danger disclosed in the case of Re Pope (34 W. R. 654, now absent from his duties on leave for several months.
693, 17 Q. B. D. 743), proposes to make all writs, processes of execution, and orders for enforcing judgments, statutes, or recog
nizances void as against a purchaser for value unless registered at LORD JUSTICE Fay has since Tuesday last been absent from court the Central Office, and also provides that a bankruptcy shall not No account of indisposition. The judges sitting in Court of Appeal affect a purchaser for value unless the receiving order is
The Bill also protects purchasers against statunot that day there was no sitting of Court of Appeal No. 1. There is tory charges for improvements, drainage, or other purposes, unless a whole day's work, so that the assistance of some of the presidents clauses of the Conveyancing Act, 1882,' as to official searches of divisions must be called in if the hearing of appeals is to proceed. shall apply to the registers and entries proposed to be created
and also provides for the making of general rules by
the judges and the presidents for the time being of the IncorMe Munton (who was backed by the Council of the Incor- porated Law Society and one of the provincial law societies, follow
in this respect the precedent of the Solicitors' Remuneration porated Law Society) is to be congratulated on having again Act, 1881. We regret extremely that the Lord Chancellor has not succeeded in clipping the wings of the Middlesex Registry. The seen his way to affording facilities for the introduction of this Bill rule nisi for a mandamus, obtained by him in May last, was on during the present session. We believe that, notwithstanding all Wednesday made absolute by a divisional court, and the result is the attempts which have been made to explain away Re Pope, the that town witnesses may now depose to a deed before a London remark with which our recent series of articles on Searches com. commissioner, instead of being required to attend at the registry. menced—-viz., that “no purchaser of land can safely pay his purThis result, besides the great convenience to witnesses, involves chase-money." —is now admitted to be correct. Surely this state again by the commissioners in fees of something like £3,000 or of things calls for immediate remedy, and we should have thought £4,000 a year. The action of the council in this matter of the that the effect which the amendment proposed by the Bill would registry will be warmly approved by their London constituents. have in facilitating the first registration of land under any land
transfer system would bave inclined the present Government to FROM THE NOTICE as to vacation business, which will be found in does it seem that no effectual provision should have been made in another column, it will be seen that the Vacation Sittings for the Land Transfer Bill for removing the difficulty as regards
registered land. Clause 24, providing for the registration of I were right, on the ground that, to constitute an offence of rights in or over land, enables provision to be made by rules for damaging real property within the section, there must be actual registering in subsidiary registers (inter alia)" (d.) any writ, exe- damage to the realty itself, and that mere damage to the product cution, process, or order affecting the land”; but the benefit of this growing upon the realty was insufficient. From the occurrence of provision is destroyed by the subsequent clause -" (2) Nothing in the word "spoil” in the section, we have some doubt as to the this Act, or in any rules under this Act, shall make registration correctness of the decision, and it is at any rate to be regretted that, under this section compulsory.” It would seem to be the simplest the case being a criminal one, no appeal lies. The offence apparmatter in the world to take (d.) out of this section and make a ently cannot be brought within any of the sections (ss. 31—37) of distinct section of it, providing that any writ, &c., affecting the the Larceny Act, 1861, which deal with “larceny of things land shall be registered. This would afford a satisfactory remedy attached to or growing on land,” those sections only applying to as regards registered land; but we hope to see the more general trees or shrubs or cultivated roots or plants. There is therefore proposals of the Council of the Incorporated Law Society passed apparently no criminal remedy for the farmer who has his mushinto law next session.
rooms gathered and taken away at once in the usual way, but he has a civil remedy, which will usually be practically worthless.
OUR READERS will find a case of Harvey v. Olliver reported in another column, relating to the costs which will be allowed last Saturday in a case of Story v. Story and O'Connor. The
A NOVEL POINT of divorce practice arose before Sir JAMES HANNEN on an appointment of new trustees. gular lack of authority on some of the questions involved in the petitioner sued for a dissolution of marriage and for damages, while decision, and disputes with regard to them have not been infre- the respondent made recriminatory charges of adultery against her quent. On the first point noticed by, Mr. Justice Kay, however, had been guilty of adultery, and they assessed the damages at
husband. The jury found that the respondent and co-respondent we apprehend there could be no doubt. The proper costs of appointing new trustees, under a power contained in the instru- £300; but they also found that the petitioner had committed ment creating the trust, always fall on the trust estate. This adultery, and thereupon the President, acting under the provision of seems to have been regarded as settled so long ago as 1859, for section 31 of the Divorce Act, 1857 (20 & 21 Vict. c. 85), that “ the Sir Joan ROMILLY, M.R., said, in Carter v. Sebright (26 Beav., at court shall not be bound to pronounce such decree if it shall find that p. 376), that, on an appointment of new trustees, "the costs are dismissed the petition. Then arose the question as to the effect of
the petitioner has, during the marriage, been guilty of adultery," paid out of the estate generally, or out of corpus.” tion of difficulty always is, What are proper costs? We should this decision upon the co-respondent, who, in his answer, had not have thought that the costs of the donee of the power, consisting denied the acts of adultery, but only the marriage between the of the bill of the solicitor acting for the donee, relating to petitioner and the respondent. There was no authority on the obtaining the consents of, and appointing, the new trustees, point, but it was suggested that, since section 33 of the Divorce were unquestionably proper ; and, except on the technical Act, 1857, enables a husband to claim damages from an adulterer, ground taken by the taxing master, we
“either in a petition for dissolution of marriage or for judicial
are at a loss to see how these costs (apart, of course, from particular items) separation, or in a petition limited to such object only," the cocould be said to be improper.
But the new trustees had respondent could not avail himself of the circumstances which had paid to the executor of the last surviving trustee expenses in- caused the court to dismiss the petition, the two issues being curred by him before the appointment of new trustees, in connec
independent of one another ; but the President held that the tion with the administration and proposed transfer of the trust refusal of the decree involved the failure of the petitioner's right estate. The executor refused to transfer the trust estate until
to damages. these costs had been paid. Mr. Justice Kay allowed these costs, saying that it was for the defendants to shew that they were not charges which the original trustees were entitled to make against
THE RIGHTS OF MIDDLEMEN. the trust estate, and the defendants had not shewn this. Again, Nothing illustrates better the mode in which the common law of the new trustees had incurred costs in examining by their own this country has adapted itself to the requirements of a mercantile believe, largely of investments on mortgage) and into the validity community than the treatment by the courts of the claims of of their appointment. These costs also were allowed, the learned commission agents or middlemen. To the bare employment to sell a new trustees to inquire into the condition of the estate of which implied terms and stipulations, which it would take very many judge remarking that it was not only the right, but the duty, of house, an estate, or a ship the law has attached a number of they were to be trustees. The case was one of great complication, has shewn to be necessarily involved in the transaction. Thus a
words to express, but which the daily practice of business men and we have not been able hitherto to ascertain the details of the from the decision some principles which will be of service to the and a corresponding promise, becomes in a court of law a complex costs ; but it seems probable that there may be ultimately extracted contract on the face of it simple, involving but one consideration advisers of new trustees.
and somewhat intricate agreement, with many stipulations on either side.
To illustrate this we will consider the ordinary case, of most FARMERS will be distressed to learn that mushroom-gathering is an estate agent to find a purchaser. Here, of course, there is an
usual occurrence, where the owner of a property simply requests not a criminal offence. It was held in the recent case of Gardner implied promise to pay for the services of the agent, and at first (Appellant); Mansbridge (Respondent), that mushroom-gathering sight this is all that the contract discloses. But the disputes was not within the Malicious Injuries to Property Act, 1861 (24 which have arisen as to the rights of the parties under an agree& 25 Vict. c. 97). The information was laid under section 52 of ment apparently so simple have been as numerous as, perhaps, the Act, which enacts that whosoever shall wilfully or maliciously have arisen in connection with any kind of transaction, and have commit any damage, injury, or spoil to or upon any real or resulted in the evolution of many implied stipulations which lay personal property whutsoever for which no punishment'is herein- dormant under the simple form of contract, until one by one they before provided” [i.e., in the preceding sections of the Act, which have been exposed in deference to the exigencies of justice or the embrace most imaginable specific injuries to specific kinds of acknowledged practice of the business concerned. It will not be property) shall, on conviction thereof, either be committed to out of place to state as briefly, but as exhaustively, as possible prison or forfeit and pay such sum, not exceeding five pounds, as what, according to well-known' and long approved decisions, is to the justice shall seem meet. In Mr. Gardner's case the really the engagement involved in the bare employment of an agent mushrooms grew in a wild state on his farm, and were à source of to let or sell property. profit to him. The respondent picked mushrooms to the value of two shillings, but did no damage to the grass or fences. The likes to do the same office, and if any other agent succeeds in perform
The employer is at liberty to employ as many other agents as he justices dismissed a summons under the section above mentioned, ing the service, with however little labour, there is no liability to and the court (A. L. Suitu and Wills, JJ.) has held that they him who was first engaged, however great the trouble and expense to
July 23, 1887.
641 which the agent first employed may have been put. As it is ex- through, provided he has introduced a person willing to fulfil the pressed, the agent or middleman is paid for the success of the conditions of the bargain which he was employed to negotiate services which he offers to give. In this respect the contract is (Fisher v. Drewett, 27 W. R. 12; Prickett v. Badger, 5 W. R. anomalous and in antagonism to the fundamental principle which 117, 1 C. B. N. S. 296). In the words of Lord Cairns in Green entitles, a man to remuneration, which he has undertaken at Lucas (33 L. T. 584), it would be forcing the liability of agents another's request.
if they were to be held liable for what happened after the introAnother respect in which the contract of the middleman is duction. If the contract goes off from the caprice of the principal anomalous is this, that he has no right to insist upon a continuance or the infirmity of his title, it is immaterial to the agent. of the authority given him, nor, if it is withdrawn, can he rely upon the averment that he was ready and willing to perform the contract entered into. In Simpson v. Lamb (4 W. R. 328, 17 C. B. 603) the defendant employed the plaintiff, a clerical agent, to sell an advowson for him for commission at the rate of five per cent. on
CORRESPONDENCE. the purchase-money. The defendant afterwards, without com THE INCORPORATED LAW SOCIETY'S ACCOUNTS. municating with the agent, sold the living himself to a person
[To the Editor of the Solicitors' Journal.] with whom the agent had had no communication. The agent sued for wrongful revocation of authority. It was held that he could by your reporter I did not state at the annual meeting of the
Sir,— Will you permit me to correct a serious error made last week not recover, as an agent's authority is not "coupled with an Incorporated Law Society that the society's income had increased, interest,” but it was intimated by the court that, had he incurred The reverse is the case. I stated at that meeting that it has decreased trouble or expense, he would have been entitled to compensation. £124 9s. 1d. These figures have been officially admitted to be correct. As we have seen, even this right would not have remained to him I will, with your leave, take this opportunity of saying that I rehad the principal sold through another agent.
gard Mr. Pennington's explanation of the increase in the expenditure Such being some of the more important stipulations attaching by on certain items from £2,936 10s. 8d. in 1884 to £5,503 2s. 48. in 1886 implication to the bare employment of middlemen, it is unnecessary council has spent a large sum of money over the distribution of
as most unsatisfactory and incomplete. Vague assertions that the to say that all or any of these may be excluded by express agreement rules are not sufficient. The finances of the society will never be of the parties. In the words of Lord Justice Bowen in a recent case in
on a satisfactory basis until the council recognize that it is their duty the Court of Appeal (Millar v. Toulmin,* 34 W. R. 695, 17 Q. B. D. to give much fuller details of their expenditure and to explain in 603): :-"Without special words in each particular case, the mere their report the reason for any abnormal disbursement. approach of the employer to the person who is employed, if the I will not now say anything about the duty of properly allocating person employed is a middleman, is sufficient to raise the inference the society's expenditure on "articled clerks” and “registration, that the contract is in the usual form, and the ordinary form has although it is remarkable that a similar allocation is always made
Are doctors better accountants been by habits of business crystallized into that form of contract; by the General Medical Council.
than lawyers ?
W. P. W. PHILLIMORE, M.A., B.C.L. but a person, even in regard to these contracts, may make a con
July 20. tract in a special form if he chooses : he need not adopt the ordinary terms of employment into which the habits of business men have moulded the implied contract. It is for a jury to say
THE PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION. what is the contract in such cases."
[To the Editor of the Solicitors' Journal.] In the great majority of cases which have come before the
Sir,-I am directed by the council to inclose to you for courts. it has happened that the contract was the ordinary one, publication a prospectus of the Preliminary Examination embodying resulting from bare employment without special terms. The ques- the new regulations which will come into force on and from thể 1st tion for decision has generally had reference to the performance of of January, 1888. it. It is of frequent occurrence for an owner who has property to The regulations as they now stand vary the former regulations sell, let, or pledge to deal with persons with whom he has been only to the following extent :brought in contact by the action of the agent, but with whom
(1) Candidates are given the option of taking, in addition to he negotiates directly. In the decision of such cases the courts elementary Latin, two languages as heretofore, or of taking one follow the rule that it is the introduction which is to be regarded, language only with algebra, inclusive of simple equations and the rather than the conduct of the negotiations or the completion of
first four books of Euclid. the contract.
(2) In the language examinations, instead of passages being set Thus, in the case of Green v. Bartlett (14 from books previously specified, as hitherto, passages will be set for C. B. N. S. 681), where an agent was employed to sell the translation at sight, with the assistance of a dictionary. Island of Herm "on the terms that he should be paid com
S. W. B. BUCKNILL, mission on the price if he sold it, but if he failed he should
Assistant Secretary, be paid £25 to cover expenses, it appeared that the agent, Incorporated Law Society, Chancery-lane, W.C., having failed to dispose of the property at the auction held for the
20th July. purpose, the principal afterwards withdrew the property from the The following is the prospectus referred to:agent's hands, paying him the £25. The owner subsequently
SUBJECTS OF EXAMINATION IN THE YEAR 1888. sold to a person who had heard of him and his property at the 1. Writing from dictation. agent's auction room. The court held that the agent, under these
2. Writing a short English composition. circumstances, was entitled to the commission on the sale price, rule of three ; and decimal and vulgar fractions ; (h) algebra up to
3. (a) The first four rules of arithmetic, simple and compound; the upon the ground that the relation of buyer and seller between the and inclusive of simple equations, and the first four books of Euclid. parties was really brought about by him. The effect of this case, 4. Geography of Europe and History of England. as stated by Willes, J., in Curtis v. Nixon (24 L. T. 706), is to 5. Latin-elementary. substitute the agreement made by the owner for that which the 6. And any two languages to be selected by the candidate out of agent would have made.
The case of Mansell v. Clements the following six-namely, (1) Latin, (2) Greek-Ancient, (3) French, COC. P. 139) illustrates how strong is the claim of an agent through (4) German, (5) Spanish, (6) Italian. whose action a purchaser has been put in treaty with his principal, obliged to take up algebra or Euclid (No. 36), but if any candidate
With reference to the subjects numbered 3 and 6, no candidate is and how little will entitle him to his full commission in such a efects to do so, he may take up these with one only of the languages
while from Wilkinson v. Alston (48 L. J. C. P. 733) it is to (No. 6). be gathered that his claim will not be defeated on account of the intervention of other persons between him and the buyer. The tions, but spassages will be given for translation at sight, with the branch of this subject, on which we refrain from comment until base of Hillar v. Toulmin involves an interesting question on one assistance of a dictionary;
The examinations will be held at the Incorporated Law Society's the decision of the House of Lords has been given. the remains only to add that the agents ein spot forfeit his right to the months oy February, May, July, and October of echo years in
Chester, Durbam, Exeter, Lancaster, Leeds, Lincoln, Liverpool,
Manchester, Newcastle-on-Tyne, Oxford, Plymouth, Salisbury, * This case is now being heard on appeal in the House of Lords.
Shrewsbury, Swansea, Worcester, York,
commission because the bargain between the principal parties in the Birmingham, Bristol, Cambridge, Cardir, Carlisle, Carmarthen
Candidates are required to give, at least 30 days before the day in a contract made by the commissioners under the authority of such Acts. appointed for the examination, notice to the secretary of the Incor- The defence set up was, inter alia, that the defendant had not received porated Law Society, of th3 languages in which they propose to be notice of action as required by section 264 of the Public Health Act, 1875, examined, the town at which they wish to be examined, and their and also that the plaintiff had not obtained the consent of the Attorneyage and residence, and place or mode of education.
General to the action, as required by the Public Health (Members and All notices should be addressed to the secretary of the Incorporated Officers) Act, 1885. By certain local Acts which incorporated the Com.
missioners Clauses Act, 1847, a board of improvement commissioners was Law Society, Chancery-lane, W.C. Candidates who fail to pass, or attend at the examination for which Health Act, 1875, became the urban sanitary authority within such
constituted for the district of Abergavenny, which by virtue of the Public they have given notice, may attend at any subsequent examination. district. The defendant was a member of such board, and had acted as A renewed notice must, in that case, be given fourteen days at least such by voting for the imposition of an Improvement Act district rate. before the date of such subsequent examination.
The expenses to meet which the rate was made, were, some of them,
expenses authorized to be incurred by the local Acts only, some of them Last Day for giving Days of Examination.
Last Day for giving re
authorized to be incurred by the Public Health Act only, and some of Notice. newed Notice. them authorized both by the local Acts and the Public Health Act. The
plaintiff alleged that the defendant, when so acting, was disqualified by Wednesday, Sth, and Thurs
reason of his being lessee from the commissioners of certain premises. day, 9th February, at 10. Monday, 9th January. Tuesday, 24th January.
The sole question dealt with at the trial was whether the restrictions Wednesday, 2nd, and Thursday, 3rd May, at 10. Tuesday, 3rd April. Tuesday, 17th April.
imposed by the Public Health Act on actions against members of urban Wednesday, 4th, and Thurs
sanitary authorities applied to acts done by a member of a board of day, 5th July, at 10. Monday, 4th June. Tuesday, 19th June.
improvement commissioners, being an urban sanitary authority, in the Wednesday, 24th,and Thursday, 25th October, at 10. Monday, 24th September. Tuesday, 9th October.
exercise of the powers of the local Acts. The defendant had not received any notice of action, nor had leave to bring the action been obtained from
the Attorney-General. Wills, J., held that the effect of the Public The fee payable on giving notice of examination is £2, and for a Health Act was to reconstitute the improvement commissioners as new renewed notice £1.
bodies under the Act, and that, therefore, such commissioners, when Cheques or Post Office Orders should be crossed “Messrs. Goslings subsequently acting in exercise of the statutory powers conferred by the & Sharpe.”
local acts, were acting under the Public Health Act, and were entitled to the protection and privileges given by that Act, and he gave judgment for the defendant accordingly. The plaintiff appealed.
The Court (Lord Esher, M.R., LINDLEY and LOPES, L.JJ.) dismissed
the appeal. Lord Esher, M.R., said that two points were raised, first, CASES OF THE WEEK.
that the defendant was at the time he acted in point of law not a member ESDAILE W. CITY OF LONDON UNION-C. A. No. 1, 14th July.
of the urban sanitary authority, in consequence of some disqualification,
and, secondly, that what he did was done under the local Acts, and not Poor LAW-RATING-TITHES - STATUTORY PAYMENTS IN THE CITY OF under the Public Health Act, 1875. As to the first point, the evidence LONDON.
was clear that, even if he was disqualified, the defendant bona fide believed This was an appeal from the decision of a divisional coart (Denman and
that he was a member of the urban sanitary authority, and acted accordMathew, JJ.), reported 35 W. R 497. The plaintiffs were the trustees ingly; That brought him within the case of Hughes v. Buckland (15 M. & under the will of E. J. Esdaile, and, as such, were possessed of his in
W. 346), which decided that a person acting under a bona fide belief was terest in the annual sum of £6,500, payable under the following circum- entitled to protection. As to the second point, section 10 of the Public stances. The Act 37. Hen. 8, c. 12, provided for the annual payment to improvement commissioners to the sanitary authorities appointed by that
Health Act, 1875, had transferred all rights and powers of a board of in respect of houses in the parish of St. Botolph Without, Aldgate. In Act, and, therefore, when the urban sanitary authority assumed to act 1881 E. J. Esdaile was the lay impropriator of those tithes or sums of under the local Acts, they were in reality acting under the Public Health money, and in that year, by the St. Boiolph Without, Aldgate, Act (44 & Act, 1875, and were entitled to the protection given by that Act and by 45 Vict.c. cxcvii.), it was provided that the annual sum of £6,500 should the Act of 1885. Lindley and Lopes, L.JJ., delivered judgment to the be paid to the lay impropriator instead of such annual tithes or sums of
same effect. —COUNSEL, Cunningham Gien, SOLICITORS, J. F. & G. F. money, and that such sum should be levied on the persons by law rateable Marshall, for Gabb & Walford. to the poor rates in that parish. In June, 1885, the plaintiffs were rated to the poor rate in respect of the sum of £6,500 as lay impropriators. It
CREARS v. HUNTER-C. A. No. 1, 12th July. was admitted that the tithes or sums of money had never been assessed PRINCIPAL AND SURETY--PROMISSORY Note—GUARANTOR-FORBEARANCE TO for the relief of the poor, and that no one had ever been rated in respect of them. The plaintiffs appealed against the rate, and the Court of
SUE-CONSIDERATION. General Assessment Sessions allowed the appeal, and their decision was Action on a promissory note for £200, payable on demand In 1876 the upheld by the Divisional Court.
defendant's father borrowed £200 from the plaintiff, and in 1877, when THE COURT (Lord Esher, M.R., LINDLEY and Lopes, L.JJ.) affirmed the defendant came of age, the plaintiff brought a blank stamped form of their decision. Lord Eshek, M.R., said that, in order to make this suin promissory note to the house where the defendant and his father were of money rateable, it must be shewn that it represented tithes within 43 living. There was no evidence as to what occurred then, except that the Eliz. c. 2 or payments in lieu of such tithes as were made rateable by promissory note was filled in and signed by the defendant and his father that Act. It was clear that the sums of money which were now repre as security for the above loan of £200 in the following form :-“We, sented by the annual payment of £6,500 were not tithes in the ordinary jointly and severally, promise to pay to W. Crears or his order £200, being sense of the word. They were not payable on land, but on houses. 10 iuoney lent, with interest on same, half-yearly, at the rate of 5 per cent. shew that they were payments in lieu of tithes, however, it must be proved per annum.' The father having died, the plaintiff now sued the defendthat tithes had existed and had been extinguished. There was no evidence ant upon the note, and the defence set up was no consideration. The jury that tithes had ever been payable in the City of London; still less was there any evidence that tithes had existed there and had been extinguished, plaintiff might give time to the father to pay the £200, and the plaintiff
were of opinion that the defendant signed the note in order that the more likely that these were personal payments for the support of the the Divisional Court entered judgment for the defendant, on the ground clergy which were not rateable, and this view received confirmation from that there was no consideration for the defendant's signature. The plain. the fact that these payments had never been assessed to the poor rate. LINDLEY, L.J., said it would be contrary to the intention of the Legis: 517), and Miles v. New Zealand Alford Estate Co. (34 W. R. 669, 32 Ch. D.
tiff appealed. Crofts v. Btale (11 C. B. 172), Oldershaw v. King (2 H. & N. lature to make the annual sum of £6,500 rateable if those payments in 266) were cited. respect of which it was given were not rateable. It was incredible, if those payments were rateable, that they would not have been rated before, the promissory note on its face did not delay payment of the £200, yet
Tue Court allowed the appeal. Lord Esher, M.R., said that though and it was a fair inference from that fact that they had never been considered as falling within 43 Eliz. c. 2. LOPES, LJ., said that these pay- by the parties that it was not to be sued on at once.
from the provision as to payment of interest, it shewed that it was intended
There was no agreements had none of the attributes of tithes, which were charges on land ment by the plaintiff not to sue the father, but the substance of the transit and recoverable by distress. If they were payments in lieu of tithes action was that if the defendant signed the note as surety the plaintiff there ought to be some proof of the existence at one time of tithes for would forbear from guing the father. which they had been substituted. - Counsel, Sir Edward Clarke, S.G., and forbear from guing the original debtor, and the creditor, though he does
If a person requests a creditor to John Henderson ; Sir R. E. Webster, A.G., and Sidney Woolf. SOLICITORS, not bind himself to forbear, does, as a fact, forbear from suing the debtor, Baylis & Pearce; Winters of Co.
that constitutes a good consideration for that other person becoming LEA v. FACEY.-C. A. No. 1, 15th and 16th July.
guarantor. It was not necessary that there should be a binding promise
to forbear. The case of Oldershaw v. King shewed that. The request to for. IMPROVEMENT COMMISSIONERS-PENALTI— Public Health Act, 1875.
bear need not be express, but might be implied from the surrounding This was an appeal from the decision of Wills, J., reported 17 Q B. D. infer such a request, and, as a matter of fact, the plaintiff did forbear
circumstances. In this case there was evidence from which the jury might 139. The action was brought to recover a penalty of £50 alleged to have from suing the father. been incurred by the defendant under sections 9 and 15 of the com reversed, and the verdict of the jury restored. Lindley and Lopes, Improvement Commissioners for Abergavenny undere certain locali Acts, and "Henry. SOLTCITORS, Speechly, "Mumford, & Landon, for Atkinson of when he was disqualified from so acting by reason of his being concerned Bennett, Whitehaven ; Helder & Roberts, for E. Åtter, Whitehaven.