Page images
PDF
EPUB

herein. The "sacred wishes of the dead," "vested rights," the 66 poor man's inheritance," and the like appeals, will be paraded with great force; but a measure which shall wisely bring under proper control charitable bequests, must ultimately make its way into the statute book.

The laws affecting bankruptcy and insolvency were also brought under discussion. Mr. Hastings presented the report of the committee on mercantile legislation, appointed at the last meeting of the Association at Liverpool. The bill approved of by the Association is that introduced into the House by Lord John Russell and Mr. Headlam. Mr. Edward Fry read a paper on the subject, and Mr. Rayner, the solicitor, of Huddersfield, whose intimate practical and clear comprehension of this subject, entitles him to the greatest attention, addressed the meeting in support of the principal points in the bill. We have so recently dilated thereon, that we will not now pursue the discussion which ensued.

Mr. Daniel, Q.C., read a paper "On the effect of the recent reforms in the Court of Chancery, with reference to the transaction of business in the Judges' Chamber, the mode of taking evidence, and the mode of trying disputed questions of fact." It was a long but by no means uninteresting document; Mr. Daniel's object being to show that the reforms which had been introduced into the Court of Chancery since 1852 had been such as to afford greatly increased facilities to suitors, the business being disposed of under the present system with much less waste of time and of expense than was previously necessary. He pointed out at some length the objections to and the defects in the existing mode of taking evidence upon disputed points before the Masters in Chancery, mentioning as the chief evils the frightful quantity of useless and irrelevant evidence which was taken, combined with the absence of all control over it until the expense had been incurred, and the little value, not to say the worthlessness, of this evidence when the question turned upon the credit of the witnesses. The only course to remedy this difficulty appeared to be to ascertain beforehand whether the

case was one which required the proof by real evidence, and then to give the suitor the power to call the evidence before the tribunal which had to determine upon its effect.

Other papers were read in the section of jurisprudence, notice of which we must defer till they appear in the printed transactions.

The "section" which embraces the subject of punishment and reformation, and that which concerns itself with public health, are both more or less connected with the amendment and administration of the law, and we await the publication of the papers read in both these sections with great interest.

That part of the proceedings which excited the most general notice of the public, was the eloquent addresses by Lord Brougham. We may refer especially to that delivered on October 13th, in St. George's Hall. The daily and weekly newspapers have happily dispersed the report of it wherever the English language is spoken, and there is therefore the less need for us, at this period, to endeavour to give what would prove to be but an imperfect account of it.

There was one feature in the Bradford meeting which did not, we presume, form part of the necessary proceedings of the association and which we are loath to refer to, as it certainly produced an effect upon us the very reverse of what was intended. We allude to the meeting where the working classes were lectured. Certain of the speakers seemed to think they could not talk down sufficiently low to "the working classes," and there was an Exeter Hall-ishness, a platformitude and sabbath school teacherism, about one at least of the speeches, which, we dare to say, are now-a-days utterly unacceptable and nauseous to the British working-man.

It is a more agreeable duty to comment upon the moderation and mutual forbearance which were observed throughout the proceedings. Even with regard to questions trenching on politics, addressed to those whose opinions may be supposed to differ considerably from what were propounded, the remarks offered were received with attention and respect.

Before we conclude this inadequate notice of the Bradford meeting, we must express our opinion, that, even if it should accomplish nothing else, it will effect much towards annihilating the frightful corruption which prevails in our parliamentary elections. Lord Brougham's burning denunciation of the crime, followed by his proposition for making bribery felony, must produce a practical consequence. The cause of national morality demands that the most stringent enactment with relation to bribery, corruption, and intimidation at elections, should be devised and enforced.

LORD ST. LEONARD'S PROPERTY ACT.

THE act 22 and 23 Vict., c. 35, “to further Amend the Law of Property, and to Relieve Trustees," is the only measure of law reform passed in the last session of parliament. Unfortunately the bill (of which this act is but the skeleton, or rather the corpse), after it had passed the Lords without opposition, was subjected in its course through the Commons to a process of "amendment" by government officials, who possessed little or no knowledge of the matter of which it treated; and by others who, if they possess any such knowledge, certainly did not sufficiently weigh the effect of the alterations they proposed.

The official mind appears to be totally incapable of comprehending the injustice of fixing a bona fide purchaser of real property with liabilities to which he would not have been subject had the purchased property consisted of chattels personal. The clause whereby judgments and crown debts, entered up after 1st November, 1859, would no longer have affected purchasers for valuable consideration, unless the writ of execution should have been executed before the execution of the conveyance, and payment of the purchase-money, was, as we feared1 it would be, struck out of the bill. This was one of the most important provisions in the measure, and would have been a great boon to purchasers of land, who would have been spared not only a very considerable See M. and R., vol. 7, p. 467, (August, 1859)

[ocr errors]

risk, but also great expense. It is a matter of astonishment as well as of regret, that a few obstinate, narrow-minded, or ignorant persons should, in these days of conveyancing law reform, be allowed to force their old-fashioned and stupid notions upon the House of Commons.

It is not our intention at present to enter into the details of this bill; but we cannot refrain from giving an example of the effect which has ensued from one of the many ill-considered amendments. We refer to the striking out of one word in clause 9 of the bill (section 8 of the Act). The clause in the bill ran thus:

[ocr errors]

Where, on the bona fide purchase, after the passing of this act, of a leasehold interest under a lease containing a covenant on the part of the lessee to insure against loss or damage by fire, the purchaser is furnished with the written receipt of the person entitled to receive the rent, or his agent, for the last payment of rent accrued due before the completion of the purchase, and there is subsisting at the time of the completion of the purchase an insurance in conformity with the covenant, the purchaser, or any person claiming under him, shall not be subject to any liability, by way of forfeiture or damages, or otherwise, in respect of any breach of the covenant committed at any time before the completion of the purchase, of which the purchaser had not actual notice before the completion of the purchase."

In the Commons the word "actual" was struck out, and therefore a purchaser is protected, by s. 8 of the Act, only if he have no notice-i. e., actual or constructive notice-of a prior breach of the covenant to insure. But the wiseacre who proposed this amendment seems to have forgotten the probability of a court of equity holding, that the very fact of a new insurance appearing to have been entered into immediately before the completion of the purchase, would be constructive notice either that no insurance had previously existed, or that the previous insurance had not been made in conformity with the terms of the covenant. This section, therefore, will not effect the purpose it was intended to effect, and will virtually remain a dead letter, unless indeed it should happen first to give rise to dispute and litigation.

The legislative sagacity which operated in the House of Com

mons, to induce it to consent to the erasure of valuable provisions, and the cancellation of important portions of the measure, was in full force for the purpose of suggesting the addition of novel and quite original matter. This occurs in sect. 32 of the act, which is as follows:

-

“When a trustee, executor, or administrator shall not, by some instruments creating his trust, be expressly forbidden to invest any trust fund on real securities in any part of the united kingdom, or on the stock of the bank of England or Ireland, or on East India stock, it shall be lawful for such trustee, executor, or administrater to invest such trust funds on such securities or stock; and he shall not be liable on that account as for a breach of trust, provided that such investment shall in other respects be reasonable and proper."

Had this section been confined to deeds executed, wills proved, and administrations taken out after the passing of the Act, there would not have been much cause for comment or complaint, as all whose property might have been affected by it would have had the opportunity of neutralising its operation. But for the legislature to adopt a clause of this nature, embracing all existing trust property, is little else than committing a breach of faith with the public.

The clause has already given rise to doubt. It has been questioned whether the new stock, raised by the Secretary of State in Council for India, under the authority of the 22d and 23d Vict., c. 39, is comprised within the term "East India Stock," or whether that term must not be limited to the stock of the late East India Company. We are certainly inclined to think that the former is the legal interpretation to be put upon the words referred to. Had this clause emanated from Lord St. Leonards, no such ambiguity as that above-mentioned could have occurred.

We must, again, express our regret that the original measure of Lord St. Leonards has been tampered with and spoilt. The real property lawyer is well aware, though certain of the would-be real property reformers are ignorant, that the learned lord is the one out of the very few members of the legislature who know how to devise and apply suitable amendments to actual defects in the law connected with conveyancing, and to whom such amendments can be safely intrusted.

« PreviousContinue »