Page images
PDF
EPUB

Mar 15 at 2 at

Vane, Esther, Evelyn st, Deptford, Provision Dealer.
offices of Lockyer, Gresham buildings, Basinghall st
Ward, Thomas Peto, Church st, Lower Edmonton, Builder.
2 at offices of Linklater and Company, Walbrook
Ward, William Henry, Melcombe Regis, Dorset, Farmer.
at offices of Howard, East st, Melcombe Regis
Wendt, Frederick August, Broadway, Ludgate hill, Tailor.
3 at offices of Cotton, Saint Martin's-le-Grand
Weston, John Henry, Margravine rd, Fulham, Builder.

Mar 15 at
Mar 15 at 11

Mar 15 at

Mar 24 at

3 at the Mason's Hall Tavern, Masonjs avenue, Basinghall st. Rumney. Walbrook

Wherrett, Thomas, Dursley, Gloucester, Miller. Mar 12 at 12 at offices
of Vizard, Wenden, and Macdonald, Dursley

White, Theodore Turpin, Windmill rd, Brenrford, Coal Merchant.
Mar 11 at 12 at offices of Lay, Townhall, Brentford

Whittles, George, Shefeld, Joiner. Mar 15 at 11 at offices of Porrett,
Bank st, Sheffield

Williams, Benjamin, Llandewy Ystradenny, Radnor, Blacksmith. Mar
18 at 12 at offices of Stephens, Presteign

Wisbey, John Thomas, Tolleshunt D'Arcy, Essex. Innkeeper. Mar 15
at 12 at the Queen's Head Inn, Tolleshunt D'Arcy, Essex. Crick
and Freeman, Maldon

Word, Frederic, Abbey Wood, Erith, Kent, Schoolmaster. Mar 18 at
3.30 at the Belvedere Hotel, Belvedere. Michael and Co, Old Jewry
Wood, Robert, Charles William Wood, and Frederick Wood, Batley,
York, Dyers. Mar 12 at 1 at the King's Arms Hotel, Market place.
Dewsbury. Walker, Batley

Worman, John, Easton, Lincoln, Farmer. Mar 17 at 1 at the George
Hotel, Grantham

[blocks in formation]

AW.-Advertiser is open to an Engagement as

to obtain his Articles for 3 years. Age 30. Fifteen years' experience in offices of leading arms. Salary moderate.-By letter, to X. Y. Z., Mr. Amer, Law Stationer, Lincoln's-inn-gateway, W.C.

MANAGING CLERK (admitted) WANTED.

A

Must be a skilled advocate and conveyancer, and able to con-duet actions in superior courts. A knowledge of Welsh useful. liberal salary will be given to a competent man.-Applications, with photograph enclosed, to be sent to Mr. WALTER H. MORGAN, Solicitor, Pontypridd (marked Private).

R. INDERMAUR (Clifford's Inn Prizeman, Works for Law Students) receives pupils for all legal Examinations, or reading both in class and privately, and also prepares students through the post. The number in each class is limited to 12. At the

SCHWEITZER'S COCOATINA, Final (Solicitors) lately, for five terms in succession, pupils have taken

Anti-Dyspeptic Cocoa or Chocolate Powder.

Guaranteed Pure Soluble Cocoa of the Finest Quality, with the excess of fat extracted.

The Faculty pronounce it "the most nutritious, perfectly digestible beverage for Breakfast, Luncheon, or Supper, and invaluable for Invalids and Children.'

Highly commended by the entire Medical Press.

Being without sugar, spice, or other admixture, it suits all palates, keeps better in all climates, and is four times the strength of cocoas THICKENED yet WEAKENED with starch, &c., and IN REALITY CHEAPER than such Mixtures.

Made instantaneously with boiling water, a teaspoonful to a Breakfast Cup, costing less than a halfpenny.

COCOATINA A LA VANILLE is the most delicate, digestible, cheapest Vanilla Chocolate, and may be taken when richer chocolate is prohibited.

In tin packets at 1s. 6d., 3s., 5s. 6d., &c., by Chemists and Grocers.
Charities on Special Terms by the Sole Proprietors,

H. SCHWEITZER & CO., 10, Adam-street, London, W.C.

[blocks in formation]

THE

ESTABLISHED 1689.

94. CHANCERY LANE. LONDON.

MONETARY ADVANCE COMPANY (LIMITED) advances £30 to £1,000 at a day's notice upon MORTGAGE of Furniture and other property without_removal, sureties, or preliminary fees. London and suburbs only.-T. INGLIS, Manager, 34, Southampton-buildings, Chancery-lane.

MONEY.-A Gentleman, totally unconnected with

lean offices or companies, is prepared to make immediate ADVANCES, from £20 upwards, to respectable householders on security of their furniture without removal. Repayable by easy instalments and at a much less rate of interest than charged by loan offices or companies.-Apply to Mr. BORBAS, 9, Walbrook, City, E.C.

Honours. During that time 68 sent up, of whom 61 passed, 10 of these taking Honours. For terms and further particulars apply, personally or by letter, to Mr. INDERMAUB, 22, Chancery-lane, London.

MR. T. BATEMAN NAPIER, late 1st Prizeman,

Winner of the Law Society's only (the Scott) Scholarship for the year 1876, and Conveyancing Gold Medallist, prepares for the Prelim-inary, Intermediate, and Final. Classes for the Trinity Final commence on Tuesday, the 16th of March. During the past year 28 of Mr. Napier's pupils passed out of 32 sent up. Students prepared through the post.-1, Mitre-court-buildings, King's Bench-walk, Temple.

TO PARENTS and GUARDIANS.-An excellent

opportunity is offered tc Article a Youth, age about 17, to arr established Land and Estate Agent.-Apply, by letter, to W., care of Room, Peirce, & Co., 15, York-buildings, Adelphi, London, W.C.

URNISHED OFFICE to be LET, suitable for a Esq., 1, Quality-court, Chancery-lane, W.C.

CHA

[ocr errors]

HAMBERS to LET.-Second Floor, 3, Lancaster- place, Strand. Bed, sitting, and dressing rooms, with w.c. en suite. Several excellent fittings if required by tenant.-Apply to Mr. GEO. CLARIDGE, 23, Harp-lane, City.

HE INDIAN GLENROCK GOLD MINING

that, in consequence of the large number of Applications for Shares in
this Company, the Directors will be unable to proceed to allotment
before Monday next, the 8th instant. The Letters of Allotment and
regret will be posted as soon as possible after the allotment is complete.
(By order)
J. A. MAYS, Secretary.
32, Queen Victoria-street, London, E.C., March 1, 1880.

REVERSIONARY and LIFE INTERESTS in

Landed or Funded Property or other Securities and ANNUITIES purchased, or Loans thereon granted, by the

EQUITABLE REVERSIONARY INTEREST SOCIETYTM 10, LANCASTER PLACE, WATERLOO BRIDGE, STRAND. Established 1835. Paid-up Capital, £180,000.

If required, Interest on Loans may be capitalized.

F. S. CLAYTON,
C. H. CLAYTON,

ESTABLISHED 1851.

BIRKBECK

Joint Secretaries.

BANK. —

Current Accounts opened according to the usual practice of other Bankers, and Interest allowed on the minimum monthly balances. No commission charged for keeping Accounts. The Bank also receives money on Deposit at Three and a half per cent. Interest, repayable on demand. The Bank undertakes for its Customers, free of charge, the custody of Deeds, Writings, and other Securities and Valuables; the collection of Bills of Exchange, Dividends, and Coupons; and the purchase and sale of Stocks and Shares. Letters of Credit and Circn!ar Notes issued for all parts of Europe and elsewhere. A Pamphlet, with full particulars, on application. FRANCIS RAVENSCROFT, Manager. Southampton-buildings, Chancery-lane.

MESSRS. DEBENHAM, TEWSON & FARMER'S

LIST of ESTATES and HOUSES to be SOLD or LET, including Landed Estates, Town and Country Residences, Hunting and Shooting Quarters, Farms, Ground Rents, Rent Charges, House Property and Investments generally, is published on the first day of each month,

MODEL SETS OF Oned secureign, 14 and 15, tion and may be obtained, frin return for two stamps. Particulars for inser

self-contained sets of

Union

court, Old Broad-street, to be LET. Strong-room and all conveniences. -Messrs. DEBENHAM, TEWSON, & FARMER, 80, Cheapside, E.C.

or sent by post

tion should be received not later than four days previous to the end o the preceding mouth.

UNIVERSITY OF

LONDON.

NOTICE is HEREBY GIVEN, that on WEDNESDAY, 28th of April next, the Senate will proceed to elect Examiners in the following departments:

PRESENT EXAMINERS.

Examinerships.

Salaries.

ARTS AND SCIENCE.

(Each).

£200

[blocks in formation]

Two in the English Language, Literature, and History...

£120

Prof. Henry Morley.

Vacant.

[blocks in formation]

The Examiners above named are re-eligible, and intend to offer themselves for re-election. Candidates must send in their names to the Registrar, with any attestation of their qualifications they may think desirable, on or before Tuesday, March 30th. It is particularly desired by the Senate that no personal application of any kind be made to its individual Members.

University of London, Burlington-gardens, W., March 2nd, 1880.

AN IMPORTANT CONVENIENCE TO LAW WRITERS AND SOLICITORS.

STEPHENS' SCARLET INK FOR STEEL PENS.

This new Ink supplies the demand continually made but never before met, for a Red Ink which is uninjured by Steel or other Metallic Pens. Steel Pens left in this ink for months do not impair the beauty of its colour, nor are the Pens in the least corroded by it. The existing Red Inks rapidly destroy Steel Pens, and lose their red colour if used with other than Gold or Quill Pens. This new colour is a very rich scarlet red of great beauty. The colour of this ink is not affected by use upon parchment, and is consequently of great value to Solicitors and Draughtsmen.

Sold in stone bottles, retail at 1s., 2s., 3s; and Imperial Quarts of 40 ounces at 6s. each. Also in glass bottles at 6d. and 1s. each.

PARTRIDGE & COOPER.
AND RETAIL

WHOLESALE

STATIONERS
192, Fleet-street, and 1 & 2, Chancery-lane, London, E.C.
Carriage paid to the Country on Orders exceeding 20s.
DRAFT PAPER, 5s., 6s. 6d., 7s. 6d., 7s. 9d., and 9s. 9d. per rear.
BRIEF PAPER, 15s. 6d., 17s. 6d., and 23s. 6d. per ream.
FOOLSCAP PAPER, 10s. 6d., 14s. 6d., and 18s. 6d. per ream.
CREAM-LAID NOTE, 3s., 4s., and 5s. per ream.

LARGE CREAM-LAID NOTE, 4s. 6d., 68. 6d., and 8s. per ream.
LARGE BLUE NOTE, 38. 6d., 4s. 6d., and 68. 6d. per ream.
ENVELOPES, CREAM OR BLUE, 38, 9d., 4s. 6d., and 6s. 6d. per 1000.
THE TEMPLE" ENVELOPE, extra secure, 9s. 6d. per 1000.
FOOLSCAP OFFICIAL ENVELOPES, 1s. 9d. per 100.

PARTRIDGE & COOPER'S VELLUM WOVE CLUB-HOUSE NOTE, 98. 6d. ream. This incomparable Paper has raised up a host of worthless imitations. Purchasers are particularly requested to observe tbat each sheet bears the fac-simile water-mark, "PARTRIDGE & COOPER'S VELLUM-WOVE CLUB-HOUSE PAPER," without which none is genuine.

INDENTURE SKINS, Printed and Machine-ruled, 2s. 5d.

doz., 135s. per roll.

ch, 288. per

SECONDS OR FOLLOWERS, Ruled, 2s. 1d. each, 24s. per dozen, 115s. per roil.

RECORDS OR MEMORIALS, 8d. each, 7s. 6d. per dozen.

Lodgers, Day Books, Cash Books, Letter or Minute Books.

An immense stock in various bindings.

[blocks in formation]

RESTAURANT PARISIEN
(LATE MADME. JANET),

10, CASTLE-STREET, HOLBORN (OPPOSITE THE PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE COMPANY). First-class Luncheon Bar for gentlemen in the neighbourhood. Public and Private Dining Rooms. Dinners for 3s. 6d., 48. 6d., 5s. 6d., 79. Cd., and 10s. 6d. Will be served in the Private Dining Rooms; no extra charge for room or pianoforte. Choicest Wines, Beer, and Spirits.Proprietors, DORER BROTHERS.

The Companies Acts, 1862 to 1879.

Every requisite onder the above Acts supplied on the shortest notice

The BOOKS and FORMS kept in stock for immediate use MEMORANDA and ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION speedily printed in the proper form for registration and distribution. SHARE CER TIFICATES, DEBENTURES, &c., engraved and printed. OFFICIAL SEALS designed and executed.

Solicitors' Account Books.

RICHARD FLINT & CO.

Stationers, Printers, Engravers, Registration Agents, &c., 49, FLEET-STREET, LONDON, E.C. (corner of Serjeants'

[blocks in formation]
[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]

LEADERS :

Names of Companies...

The Lord Chancellor's Land Bills...

REVIEWS

GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE...

CASES OF THE WEEK:

Griffin, Ex parte ..........

Nelson, Ex parte

..... 360

..... 360

361 362 ..... 363

....... 364
364

Ecclesiastical Commissioners for England, The, v. Kino ........ 364 Roberts, In re.. 364 364

Levy v. Lovell

Railway Accident Mutual Assurance Company, In re.......... 365
Gniese v. Cooper
......................................... 365
Solicitor, A, In re .................................................................................................... 365
Gledhill v. Hunter

.....................................

365

instance with reference to the practice of hearing counsel in chambers. According to the statement made to the court, one chancery judge allows counsel either before himself or his chief clerks; another allows counsel neither before himself nor his chief clerks ; another allows counsel before his chief clerks and not before himself; and yet another learned judge allows counsel before himself and not before his chief clerks. We do not say that this statement is as strictly accurate as it is epigrammatic, but it is true that the practice in the various chancery chambers is not uniform, and it would be to the advantage of the profession that some general rule on the subject should be adopted.

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER has at last acted on the resolution Mr. Gregory carried in the House of Commons last session, and has induced the House to assent to a resolution altering the progressive rates of probate and administration duty. The result will be that in future it will be no longer cheaper to die with a will than without one. Some of the more glaring inequalities are corrected; and it will no longer be the fact that while thirty estates of £1,000 each pay probate duty to the amount of £900 between them, a single estate of the value of £30,000 pays only £450 in probate duty. The amount payable in the latter case is proposed to be raised to £815. The rate of duty on small properties has been lowered, and on large properties raised-an act of justice whereby the revenue will profit to the amount of between £600,000 and £700,000. We regret that the Chancellor of the Exchequer has not seen his way to adopt Mr. Dodds' suggestion to substitute for probate and legacy duties a single duty to be levied at a uniform rate upon the value of the estate. The result of the CASES REPORTED IN THE WEEKLY REPORTER. adoption of that suggestion would have been a con

Fritz v. Hobson............................................. 366 COUNTY COURTS.

Probate and Admiralty Duties................................................. 366

OBITUARY......
367
APPOINTMENTS, ETC............................................. 368
COMPANIES .................................................................................................................................................... 368
LAW STUDENTS' JOURNAL
369
LEGISLATION OF THE WEEK.................................................................... 369
CREDITORS' CLAIMS

.......................................................

...............................................

372

NEW ORDERS, &C............................................... 373
LEGAL NEWS ....

...........................................................

LONDON GAZETTES, &c., &c. .....................................................

Bagshaw, Ex parte. In re Ker (App.)

373

...... 374

[ocr errors]

Chapman v. Midland Railway Company (Q.B.Div.)
Ditton, Ex parte. In re Woods (App.)
Emmet, In re, deceased. Emmet v. Emmet (App.) .............................. 401
Gill v. Dickinson (Q.B.Div.)

415

Kitto, In re. Kitto v. Luke (Ch. Div. V.C.M.).................................................... 411
Learoyd, Ex parte. In re Littman (App.) .
...................................... 402
Myers v. Defries (App.)

Norwich Provident Insurance Society, In re. Hesketh's Case
(App.)

406

...... 401

Orr Ewing & Co's Trade Marks, In re (Ch.Div. V.C.H.).......... 412
Pearce, Ex parte. In re Grieves (App.) ......... ................................... 404
Pellas v. Neptune Marine Insurance Company (App.) ................................ 405
Potter v. Jackson (Ch.Div. V.C.H.).

[ocr errors][merged small]

Queen, The, v. Truelove (Q.B.Div.) ............................ 413
Renshaw v. Renshaw (Ch.Div. M.R.).
Simmons v. Storer (Ch.Div. M.R.)............
Shelford v. Louth and East Coast Railway Company (App.)
Stirling v. Du Barry (App.) ·

Tottenham Local Board v. Rowell (Ch.Div. V.C.M.)....
Williams and Another v. Ellis (Q.B.D.).

CURRENT TOPICS.

"

405

416

siderable reduction of the Somerset House staff, and the saving of an immense amount of trouble and expense to executors.

THE EXISTING STATUTES relating to the dissolution of Parliament and summoning of a new Parliament are four in number. It was provided by 7 & 8 Will. 3, c. 25, after reciting that "by the evil practices of sheriffs, &c., as well the freeholders in their right of election, as also the persons elected had been greatly injured and abused," that, "when a new Parliament should be summoned there should be forty days between the teste and 407 return of the writ of summons." This period, which was originally fixed by Magna Charta, and which was extended to fifty days by the Act of Union with Scotland, was shortened to ". 'thirty-five days at least" by 15 & 16 Vict., c. 23, the above Acts " or any other law or usage to the contrary notwithstanding." A new form of writ was supplied by the Ballot Act, 1872, schedule 2, but resort must be had to earlier Acts to learn the mode of forwarding and executing it. By 7 & 8 Will. 3, c. 25, the writs are to be issued with all expedition, and "delivered to the proper officer to whom the execution thereof doth belong, and to no other person whatsoever." The Act 53 Geo. 3, c. 89, provides for the transmission of the writs through the post, and contains somewhat elaborate provisions for receipts by the PostmasterGeneral and postmasters of towns, and for notices by sheriffs, &c., to the Postmaster-General of the place where they hold their offices "as often as the place for holding such offices shall be changed," wilful neglect on the part of any official being punishable as a misdemeanour. The date of the election is regulated by the Ballot Act, 1872. With regard to counties and district boroughs this is, by schedule 1, part 1, to be "not later than the ninth day from the receipt of the writ," with an interval of three clear days, at least, between the day of public notice and the day of election. This notice is to be given within two days after the receipt of the writ, between the hours of nine a.m. and four p.m., and

MR. G. B. GREGORY will, on Tuesday next, call the attention of the House of Commons to the Consolidated Regulations of the Four Inns of Court of December, 1875,"as to the admission of students, the mode of keeping terms, the education and examination of students, and the calling of students to the bar; and will move, "That, in the opinion of this House, the said regulations are unnecessarily stringent in their operations upon the cases of persons who have been bonâ fide engaged for a given number of years in the study and the practice of the law as solicitors of the Supreme Court of Judicature, or as writers to the Signet, and who are desirous of being admitted as students of the Inns of Court and of being called to the bar, and that such regulations ought to be relaxed, with proper safeguards

against abuse."

IT WAS STATED before the Court of Appeal on Wednesday last that a strange diversity of practice prevails in the chambers of the four Chancery judges of first

duplicates thereof are to be forwarded to the various postoffices for further publication. In boroughs other than district boroughs the returning officer is to proceed to election within four days after receipt of the writ, giving two clear days' notice on the day he receives the writ or the day after.

It

WITH REFERENCE TO the recent proposals as to the county courts, two tables which we print elsewhere will be of interest as showing the common law and equity business of the county courts for the last thirteen years. will be observed that during that period the common law plaints have increased from 872,680 to 1,031,505, and that the cases in which the amount at stake was above £50, by consent brought before the county court, have increased from 9 to 418. The average amount for which the plaints are issued is very small, and considering that out of 1,031,505 plaints in the year 1878 no fewer than 1,015,715 were for £20 or under, there can be no surprise that the average is low. The return of the equity proceedings covers the whole of the time during which the county courts have had equity jurisdiction in matters up to the value of £500. There is no such marked increase shown here as on the common law side, and the average amount in dispute is so far below the maximum as to indicate that no proceedings are brought in the county court except such as are unable to bear the expense of the superior courts.

The Daily News understands that Mr. Charles Thynne has been appointed to the office of Assistant-Solicitor to the Board of Customs, in the room of Mr. James O'Dowd, recently deceased. The salary attached to this post is £800 a year, and that of the solicitor of the department, £2,000.

Among the handbooks of law for popular use with which we have been inundated of late years, says the Scottish Journal of Jurisprudence, we have not come across any one for the guidance of the public in the art of slander, telling us what nasty things you may say of your neighbour safely, and what nasty things you may not, and what expressions which may be used without money and without price on one side of the Tweed become expensive as soon as you cross the boundary. In England, to say that a man is a blackguard is not actionable (Addison on Torts, 3rd ed., 789); in the Scottish case of Brownlie v. Thompson (Feb. 11, 1859, 21 D. 480) it was held that it was. In Jameson v. Bonthron (June 13, 1873, 11 Macp. 703), the expression "d-d puppy" was held not to be actionable, even when used in open court to a person who in his pleadings described himself as "holding the honourable and exalted position of procurator-fiscal of Auchtermuchty." The lay mind must be greatly exercised on reading these nice distinctions, and we commend the subject to the attention of some of the great unemployed.

On Sunday last, says the Times, there died, aged 69, Dr. Edward Zimmermann, one of the Berlin members of the Reichstag, and a gentleman well known in England, where he lived for many years, a refugee after the events of 1848, practising as an English solicitor. He was brought up to the Prussian bar, and rose rapidly in his profession till 1848, when he was drawn into the political whirlpool. He was sent to the first German Parliament, and sat in it till it was broken up, As one of the members who followed it to Stuttgart, he was condemned for high treason and placed in a fortress, whence he escaped to England. In London he resolutely set to work rebuilding his fortunes, and by 1861, when the amnesty admitted him again to his native country, he was able to convey to Berlin an extensive practice in international business. With the revival of Parlia

ments in Germany he was re-elected by his old constituency as well as by Berlin, for one of the districts of which he had ever since sat. As an influential member of the small but very able group called the "Party of Progress" in the Reichstag, and an ardent admirer of England, whose institutions were almost a standard of excellence for him, he will be regretted by many friends in both countries.

NAMES OF COMPANIES.
I.

ON several recent occasions the time of the judges of the Chancery Division (in particular of the Master of the Rolls) has been occupied in considering cases in which one company has complained of the assumption of a particular name by another company, and has endeavoured to restrain the assumption of that name, on the ground that it was so closely assimilated to that under which the complaining company had for some length of time existed, as to be intended or calculated to attract to the more recent company business intended for the older one. And on such occasions the contention, of course, has been that the new company was not merely entering into a fair competition with the existing company in that line of trade, but that it was taking a name calcu-lated, by deceiving the public as to the identity of the company, to attract business intended for the complain-ing company in particular. It may not be out of place to offer some remarks on this subject.

The earliest reported case in which the matter appears to have been been brought before the court was The London and Provincial Law Assurance Society v. The London and Provincial Joint Stock Life Assurance Company (17 L. J. Ch. 37), in which the Vice-Chancellor of England, Sir Lancelot Shadwell, in the year 1847, expressed a very decided opinion as to the principles on which the court should act in such cases. "The principles, I apprehend, are clear," said he, "that the court will always have regard to this, whether there has been such an exclusive right to a name on the part of the plaintiffs as to justify the court in interfering in a summary way against the defendants; and the court will consider whether, taking all the names together, it is or is not apparent that there is such a deceptive quality as is likely to produce the injury complained of." Vice-Chancellor thought the court ought to have regard The points, then, to which the were two-first, whether the plaintiff company had an exclusive right in the name under which it was carrying on business; second, what was the degree of resemblance between that name and the name assumed by the de

fendant company. Whether the plaintiff company has or has not an exclusive right in its name appears to depend on two further inquiries-whether the character of the name is favourable to the acquisition of an exclusive right, and whether the name has been used under such circumstances as to have caused the right which could be acquired to have actually been so acquired.

While it would be too much to say that under no circumstances can a name, composed of mere common. beyond doubt that a fancy name, the more inappro and descriptive words, be capable of protection, it seems priate the better, is far more likely to acquire a special reputation for the company which is known by it. "One can well understand," said the present Master of the Rolls, in Merchant Banking Company of London ▼. Merchants' Joint Stock Bank (26 W. R. 847, L. R. 9 to a business as to indicate that business, and that Ch. D. 560), “a certain fancy name being so attached business alone, and that another man using the same fancy name in carrying on a similar business might be convicted of an intention to defraud from that circumstance alone." On the other hand, the court does not view with favour an attempt to acquire an exclusive right in a word in common use, used in its ordinary and appropriate signification, for if such attempts were frequently successful it might not impossibly come to pass that companies might exist whose line of trade could not be discovered from their already monopolized by other companies before them in names, the properly descriptive words having been the field. So in Colonial Life Assurance Company v. Home and Colonial Assurance Company, Limited (12 W. R. 783, 33 Beav. 548), Lord Romilly, M.R., refused to restrain the use of its name by the defendant company, on the ground that the object of the motion was

to obtain a monopoly of the word "colonial," which object his lordship declined to assist. And in the last case on the subject (Australian Mortgage, Land, and Finance Company v. Australian and New Zealand Mortgage Company. Court of Appeal, January 17, 1880), Lord Justice James stated that, in his opinion, a company could not appropriate to itself a name which, as in that case, merely described the nature of the business or the locality of the operations.

For a name to be protected, it is not sufficient for it to have been suggested, or advertised, or talked of, it must have been actually used. In the well-known common law case of Lawson v. Bank of London (4 W. R. 481, 18 C. B. 84), the omission of an averment in the declaration that the plaintiff had ever carried on the business of a banker at his bank, for which he claimed the monopoly of the title subsequently assumed by the defendants, was held, on demurrer, to be fatal to his success, though the court appears to have thought that, if the necessary averment had been made, the plaintiff might quite possibly have succeeded. And the decision appears to be not only law, but justice, for if the company had never done business with any one, the name could not be connected by the public with the company for business purposes; so that no one would suffer by the subsequent use of the name by a later company, neither the former company nor the public. In the earlier cases (London and Provincial Law Assurance Society v. London and Provincial Joint Stock Life Assurance Company and Purser v. Brain, 17 L. J. Ch. 41) the Court of Chancery appears to have thought that some length of user by the plaintiff company was required in order for it to be able to obtain protection for the name, but in Lee v. Haley (18 W. R. 181) Vice-Chancellor Malins said that, directly the name (of a shop or inn) is established so as to constitute a reputation, no person can adopt the same name (which, although not a copyright, is in the nature of a trade-mark), because, by doing so, he leads the public to believe that they are dealing with the party who has established the name, when, in truth, they are dealing with another person." This appears to be the rule which the court is disposed to follow, and so long as business has actually been carried on under the name in question, it does not seem that minute inquiries will be made with respect to the exact time for which the business has been carried on, or the dimensions to which it has attained.

[ocr errors]

From the terms employed by Sir Lancelot Shadwell in the case first cited, it might be supposed at first sight that the right to protection in respect of the name of the company was, in fact, a right of property in the name. But this has been decided not to be so. Lord Justice Giffard, in Lee v. Haley (18 W. R. 242, L. R. 5 Ch. 155), says, "I quite agree that the plaintiffs have no property in the name (Guinea Coal Company), but the principle upon which the cases on this subject proceed is, not that there is property in the word, but that it is a fraud on a person who has established a trade and carries it on under a given name, that some other person should assume the same name, or the same name with a slight alteration, in such a way as to induce persons to deal with him in the belief that they are dealing with the person who had given a reputation to the name." And in the same judgment the Lord Justice says again, "It is a fraud on the part of a defendant to set up a business under such a designation as is calculated to lead, and does lead, other people to suppose that his business is the business of another person."

However, although it is not a right of property which is protected in the name of a company, there is not much difference in the result; for it is not necessary for there to have been an actual fraudulent intention on the part of the defendants, so long as what they have done was calculated to produce the results of fraud, though unintentionally. "What the law did prevent was fraud; and it prevented, not only actual fraud-that is, fraud intentionally committed, but it also prevented a man

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

from carrying on business in such a way, whether he knew it or not, as to represent that his business was the business of another man (per Jessel, M.R., Merchant Banking Company of London v. Merchants' Joint Stock Bank). And the same principle was clearly laid down in the Supreme Court of Connecticut (Holmes, Booth, & Haydens v. Holmes, Booth, & Atwood Manufacturing Company, 37 Conn. 278, 9 Amer. Rep. 324), by Mr. Justice Carpenter, who expressed himself thus:-"The ground on which courts of equity afford relief in this class of cases is the injury to the party aggrieved, and the imposition upon the public, by causing them to believe that the goods of one man or firm are the production of another. The existence of these consequences does not necessarily depend upon the question whether fraud or an evil intent does or does not exist. The quo animo, therefore, would seem to be an immaterial inquiry." And see Singer Manufacturing Company v. Wilson, in the House of Lords (26 W. R. 664, L. R. 3 App. Cas. 376).

THE LORD CHANCELLOR'S LAND BILLS.

II.

THE impending dissolution of Parliament has deprived these measures of their pressing interest, and we do not propose to do more at present than complete our examination of the Conveyancing and Law of Property Bill, postponing a discussion of the other measures until it is seen whether they will be brought before the first session of the new Parliament.

The Bill proposes to alter the doctrine that as a general rule a purchaser may insist on having the conveyance to him either executed in his own presence or attested by a witness selected by him (Viney v. Chaplin, 4 Drew, 237, De G. & J. 468). The Bill provides that on a sale the purchaser shall not be entitled to require that the conveyance to him be executed by any other party in the presence of the purchaser or of his solicitor; but the purchaser shall be entitled to have, at his own cost, the execution of the conveyance by any other party attested by the purchaser's solicitor or by some other person appointed in that behalf. The rule which it is proposed to alter is not an invariable one (see 2 Dart. 655); and there seems to be no reason to object to the new proposal.

The next section makes the benefit of covenants for

production of documents of title run with the land in right of which the covenant is given, but the section is not to "be deemed to confer any right to damages for loss, or destruction of, or injury to, any documents of titie," and the rights conferred by the section are to be in addition to the general equitable right of production. The better opinion seems to be that the benefit of a covenant for production of deeds entered into by a purchaser would, at law, run with the land retained by the vendor (9 Jarm. Conv., by Sweet, 356), and considering the prevalence of the practice of indorsing notice of the covenant, so as to confer an equitable right to production, there does not appear to be any reason for objecting to a provision which will bring the law, in all cases, into harmony with the practice.

We come now to the provisions of the Act relating to leases. The first provision (clause 12) proposes to remedy the anomalous state of the law with reference to the effect of a grant of the reversion on a lease not under seal. It would seem that in this respect the rule as laid down in Smith v. Eggington (L. R. 9 C. P. 145) remains unaltered. The tenant is not bound to the assignee unless some act (other that of merely continuing in possession) has been done by him to recognize the continuance of a tenancy on the former terms. The assignee of the lease or tenancy is, of course, in like manner bound by the provisions of the lease or the terms of the tenancy. But the landlord is not bound by them to the assignee until he has done some act to

« PreviousContinue »