be termed an intermediate court, the solicitor is also heard. The Courts of Quarter Sessions may, perhaps, be classed in the same degree. I have already alluded to the idea of joining the two branches of the legal profession, and have given reasons for thinking that this will never be carried into effect. I hope that the question of the audience of solicitors will also remain unaltered. We have some advantages over the bar; in particular, the monopoly of direct communication with the client. The barrister must only act on instructions from a solicitor. If we want to encroach on the rights now enjoyed by them, they may require in return to encroach on our rights. I advocate the omission of this head of our Bill.

One more question is proposed to be dealt with in our Bill, that of the power of dispensing with the preliminary examination in general knowledge. This power is now vested in any one of the chiefs of the Queen's Bench, Common Pleas, and Exchequer Divisions, and in the Master of the Rolls. Its exercise has for the most part, if not altogether, been confined to the clerks of solicitors who have faithfully and honestly and diligently acted as such for ten years, and whose service under articles may, under the Solicitors Act, 1860, be for three years only. Numerous instances having occurred in which, in the opinion of the council, dispensing orders had been obtained without sufficient reason, a memorial was, in 1867, addressed to the judges, and a deputation had an interview with them. Their lordships intimated that at first some laxity was allowable, but that after ten years had elapsed dispensations would only be granted on very special grounds, and that in future the council should be consulted on doubtful cases. As dispensations continued to be granted with frequency, without reference to the council, the chiefs and the Master of the Rolls were reminded of the promise of 1867. The reply was that, as a general rule, the council should be consulted. This has been done occasionally, but out of 250 orders made in the last three years, the Chief Baron has granted 210 without any reference to the council, and, as they believe, almost as of course. There is a general feeling in the profession that a far too liberal construction has been put upon the power of exemption. It is considered that a preliminary educational test should be required in all cases. The prescribed examination is of a very simple and elementary character, and cannot reasonably be considered an excessive demand upon any one desirous of entering a learned profession. The general excuse of the ten years' clerk is that he has not the leisure for study. The reply is that if he cannot prepare himself

for such an examination he is not fit for admission. There may be individual cases where special circumstances may render some modification desirable-as, for instance, the dispensing with one of the required languages. The council think that they are best qualified to exercise such a power, with an appeal from their decision, and their Bill contains such a provision, the appeal being to the Master of the Rolls. Lord Chancellor Cairns, in the interview of February 1880, expressed a favourable opinion of the proposal.

I have as yet spoken of our profession generally. Let me now say a few words as to this our society. The calendar which we are about to publish will give a history of our origin and constitution. Union in all cases is a source of strength. Until the formation of the society there was virtually no union-certainly no general union. In London, I believe the only attempt to come together was made by the predecessors of the society called the Lowtonians. An old attorney named Lowton, so the story goes, sitting in the attorney's well, fell into conversation with the attorney on the other side, after the cause in which they were engaged had been tried. The talk soon got to the cause, and they agreed that if they had met together and had a friendly talk at an earlier period the dispute would have been settled without trial. Mr. Lowton, on this, founded the

Lowtonians, who, although their principal work was to dine, brought together those who had a common interest. Our society was formed about 1827. I can speak to dates, for our building was completed just before I was articled, and I was among the first who attended its lectures, and passed the final, then the only examination. And now it is a source of the most intense gratification to me, that having attained to the high honour of the chair, I can, as it were, grasp the whole of the society's existence into the compass of my own knowledge, and survey in memory the successive steps by which it has attained its present proud position. I here declare the deep obligation I feel towards what I venture to call my alma mater. Of one thing only do I express regret, and this is, that out of the 12,500 solicitors of England and Wales, a fourth only are members of the society. We do not want funds, and it is beneath the dignity of our position to make any canvass. So we merely say to the three-fourths who do not belong to us: You are not doing justice to yourselves or the society by keeping yourselves aloof. We are working for the common benefit-you reap the fruit of our labour, and yet do not join us.

After some observations on the increasing evidence of union between the town and country solicitor, the president concluded :

Gentlemen, I have thus endeavoured to glance at our system of education—at some of the duties of our profession-and at some of the rights which have not yet been accorded to us. My main object has been to help forward the tone of moral elevation which has long been in progress amongst us, and the tendency of which is still onwards and upwards. The solicitor, comprising in that now sole distinguishing word all that the attorney once was, used to be defined as the representative of the client, to bring and defend actions for him, and to be put in his place to manage his matters of law, using due care, skill, and integrity. This definition is still correct. But the opprobrium which once accompanied the name of attorney has vanished. All that is honourable remains. I doubt not but that in the future the position of the solicitor, and his services to the public, will be more and more appreciated.

Mr. WILLIAM SMITH (Sheffield) said he had been requested to take the place of the president of the Sheffield Incorporated Law Society and move a vote of thanks to the president for his admirable address. It had raised them to what he might call a higher atmosphere, and the president had maintained a steady flight throughout his discourse, which was the result of great and extended observ&tion, high principle, and great ability.

The motion was seconded by a gentleman in the body of the room, and was adopted unanimously. The PRESIDENT thanked the meeting for the way in which his paper had been received.

NEXT YEAR'S MEETING.

The PRESIDENT said the next matter for consideration was the place of meeting next year. It had been asual to mention this subject at this time, and it was competent for any one present who wished to invite the society to

do so.

Mr. HOWLETT (Brighton) said the Sussex Law Society had sent their ex-president (Mr. Williams) an! their president (himself) as a deputation to the meeting to ask the society to do them the great honour of holding their eighth annual meeting at Brighton.

There was no other proposition submitted to the meeting, and The motion was carried nem. con.

EXAMINATIONS AND THEIR REWARDS. Mr. G. R. DODD (London) read a paper entitled "Examinations and their Rewards." He first called attention to the preliminary examination, and proceeded:-I must confess that I should like the entrance to the profession to be exclusively through or after a public examination at one of our universities, but if nothing further can be done to in. duce the university authorities at Oxford and Cambridgeto

shorten the period of residence for a degree, as proposed at our meeting at Oxford, there is nothing whatever to prevent our raising the requisite examination, at least, to the standard of the "Moderations" at Oxford, or the "Previous Examination" at Cambridge, or the "Matriculation Examination" at the University of London. With respect to the last-mentioned examination, it can be, and most frequently is, passed by a youth at the age of sixteen or seventeen, when he is certainly young enough to enter a solicitor's office as an articled clerk. Surely this should meet the objection of some, that valuable time is now, in their opinion, lost by gentlemen about to enter our branch of the profession by the necessary residence at the old universities, whilst such examination is, on the whole, equal to what may be termed the intermediate examina. tions at those universities, or what are better known as the Moderations at Oxford, or the Previous Examination at Cambridge; and residence at the University of London being unnecessary, no objection can be taken to it on the ground of expense. Undoubtedly, both in France and in Germany the requisite examinations are higher than our In France anyone entering the legal profession must, after having had a liberal education, passes two examinations in one of the six faculties of law established in that country; whilst in Germany the law student, after having spent some years at the public school, must, on leaving, pass an examination in general knowledge, and then he is under the necessity of proceeding to a university. In Scotland also the examination is high; whilst in Adelaide, I am informed, no one can be articled to a solicitor who has not passed an examination at the university, which is understood to be equal to the Matriculation Examination at the University of London, and which I need scarcely add is far higher than our preliminary examination. Cught we to be content thus to be behind other countries, and even our own colonies, with regard to education ?

Own.

After referring to the dispensing power of the judges, he continued :-I am fully aware that some are of opinion that too much attention is bestowed in these days upon examinations, and others think that we are now ourselves pushing them too far. We must, however, keep pace with the times, and whilst to say nothing of the large amount both of general knowledge and legal preparation required from candidates for the Indian Civil Service-the Public Account ants, under their charter recently obtained, require from persons seeking membership both a preliminary and a further examination to be passed-the Institute of Actuaries has a high standard of examination, the Institute of Bankers also requires for membership the candidates to go through two examinations (in one of which some legal knowledge is required), and other professions are also instituting various examinations, we cannot stand still. It is certainly a matter for congratulation that the council now have arranged for an examination for honours at the final examination, but I sincerely trust that they will not stop there or in fact rest satisfied until the present standard of the preliminary examination is considerably raised. The first four books of Euclid, or Logic, should, in my opinion, certainly be added to the present requirements; some knowledge of chemistry and natural philosophy would also be useful; and something in the nature of prizes, or entrance scholarships, might fairly be awarded at the preliminary examination, for at present there is no inducement, either by classification or otherwise, for any one to attempt anything beyond a simple pass. At the intermediate examination some knowledge of Roman law might be required, and passages in Latin from the Institutes of Justinian and Gaius be given for translation. The reader then referred to the scholarships and studentships now offered by the Inns of Court to students for the bar, and to the number and amount of the scholarships and prizes the medical profesion offers to its students.

He then continued :-I have always felt how very inadequate were the prizes we offer for competition at the final examination, and as the expediency of our articled clerks giving more time and attention to their legal studies is admitted by the institution of examination for honours, it appears to me that it would be a favourable opportunity to encourage them to do so, by establishing scholarships and studentships to be awarded at the intermediate and final examinations, even if we are not at present quite prepared to found scholarships for the preliminary examinations. With an income of about £20,000 per annum, we could, I submit,

well afford to set aside a few hundred pounds a year for such purpose to begin with. It should be borne in mind that in round figures nearly a moiety of our income is derived from fees received in various forms from articled clerks, whilst not half the amount of such fees is expended upon lectures, examinations, &c. At present we are practically reducing the mortgage debt upon the Law Institution and the adjoining buildings with our surplus income; but I think it can scarcely be contended that this was the intention of the Legislature when section 8 was introduced into the Solicitors Act, 1877, which, after providing for payment of the fees of examination to the Incorporated Law Society, enacts "that all moneys paid to the society in pursuance of this Act, in respect of the preliminary, intermediate, and final examinations, shall be applied by the society in payment of the expenses from to time incurred by the society with reference to such examinations, and with reference to the lectures classes and other teaching provided by the society from time to time for persons bound or about to be bound under articles of clerkship to solicitors." It may be within the knowledge of some that I took an opportunity of bringing this subject forward at the annual meeting of the society, when our late president intimated that the council had never deliberately considered the matter. One member of the council suggested such scholarships might properly be founded by private individuals, whilst other members feared that the society could not afford to pay for the same. Even if there be anything in these arguments, which I cannot admit, there is nothing whatever to prevent our slightly raising the fees for the examinations, and a very small addition would produce a considerable income. Our fees are now lower than those required by other professions, and no one could reasonably object to the increase of the amount, say to the extent of £1 for each person, for the purpose of raising the fund, if the present income should be insufficient, for payment of the scholarships which I now propose to establish. I believe the three examinations can be now passed at the cost only of about £5. The studentships given by the Inns of Court are, as I am informed, paid out of the general income, and with the exception of Gray's-inn, they have no particular endowments. Whilst other professions hold out the inducement of scholarships and studentships, ought we alone to be content to have none, and should we be satisfied with simply awarding the most successful candidate for honours at the final examination a prize of books, of the value of ten guineas, being far less valuable than the rewards or prizes given at very many of our large schools ?

POPULAR FALLACIES ABOUT LAWYERS.

Mr. F. J. GRAY (Louth, Lincolnshire) read a paper entitled, "Popular Fallacies Concerning Lawyers." He spoke of the abuse to which lawyers had been subjected. Whilst the outside world had been willing to give law. yers credit for "learning," it had rarely been disposed to accord the term "noble." He readily acknowledged, however, that there had been a great improvement in this respect within the present generation; and he believed one of the chief benefits to be anticipated from annual gatherings in the provinces was the recognition on the part of the public of an importance and a social distinction attaching to this branch of the legal profession-a recognition which hitherto had scarcely existed to the degree which was desirable. He knew there still lurked in many circles a petty dislike, merging sometimes into an almost bitter hatred of lawyers. He admitted with sorrow that there had been instances of flagrant, dishonourable, and dishonest practices enough to make them blush for their order, but in this, experience taught that the many suffered for the faults of the few. The vast body of solicitors in this country were doing as much to benefit their fellows as any class of men. He believed almost the whole of the rooted antipathy existing in many minds towards lawyers as a race was grounded on the unfair amount of money which it was alleged was consumed under various pretexts, but all summed up and included in that uncertain word "costs." He believed much of this dread of "costs arose from the detail in which bills of costs were prepared, and he advocated a brief description on a halfsheet of ordinary note paper. In concluding, Mr. Gray urged as the best remedy for removing misconceptions the divesting themselves as far as possible of the mystery and darkness which some practitioners seemed to think so essential to their cloth to preserve; to take their clients more into their confidence and treat them more as intelligent, rational human beings.

DISCUSSION ON THE PRESIDENT'S ADDRESS. The discussion on the president's address and the papers read was commenced by

or

Mr. R. S. WATSON (Newcastle-on-Tyne), who called attention to the subject of examinations. He thought, after hearing the excellent observations of the president, that no one could for a moment be under the impression that there was any desire on the part of the members of the profession to lower the character of the examinations. He could not say anything about France, but he could say that it was entirely fallacious to endeavour to reason from the education of lawyers in Germany to the education of lawyers in England. The whole system was entirely different. There was nothing whatever in the education of lawyers in Germany to compare either with our "intermediate with our "pass" examinations. Again, he should like to point out that it was misleading to compare their examinations with those of other learned or financial bodies unless they had a strict statement as to the nature of the examinations which those bodies instituted. For example, taking the question of medicine, or of exhibitions from the public schools to the universities, in both these cases there were schools to which the scholars and the exhibitioners could be sent. Many of the legal profession hoped the time would come when there would be law schools in the big towns to which they could send their students; but until such schools were instituted there was not the same object nor the same reason for having exhibitions and scholarships connected with their examinations that there was for having them connected with the examinations for medicine, or with the exhibitions from the public schools to the universities. He should like to point out that supposing they had these law schools existing in the large towns, then scholarships and exhibitions might properly be attached to the intermediate examinations, but it did seem most undesirable to have any. thing of the kind in connection with the final examinations. What was the true reward of the good man who passed a good final examination? He had partnerships or good clerkships immediately open to him. To give him a mere money reward would be an altogether inadequate thing. It seemed most desirable that the man who was just going to become the member of a learned and honourable profession-that the value of his sign of merit should consist in the honour which should attach to it, and not in any mere pecuniary value.

Mr. M. D. OSBALDESTON (London) spoke in warm praise of the president's advice to articled clerks, and hoped the address would be printed and circulated amongst articled clerks. The sooner this were done the better it would be. The PRESIDENT said complaints had been made in previous years of the long period which elapsed between the meetings and the circulation of the papers. This year they had succeeded in printing the papers already, so that the delay would be hardly anything.

Mr. W. CHUBB (London) supported the proposal that the articled clerks should receive copies of the address, and he hoped they would follow the valuable suggestions of the president.

Mr. J. PERRY GODFREY (London) alluded to the restrictions on the call of solicitors to the bar. It was from the higher branch of the profession that the great offices were filled. That was higher branch of the profession; and a man becoming a one reason why they should be allowed to get into the member of the higher branch of the profession, after having had experience as a solicitor, must be better qualified for his post than one who had not the same experience. Lord Selborne had stated that the restrictions upon solicitors ought to be removed. Now that they had a Lord Chancellor and a Premier who were favourable to them, it was not too much to say that the time had arrived for legislation on the subject. He then moved, "That in the opinion of this meeting the time has arrived for the Incorporated Law Society of the United Kingdom to seek a parliamentary enactment enabling solicitors to be called to the bar upon passing the bar final examination."

Mr. F. R. PARKER (London) urged upon the council the desirability of circulating the papers before the meetings so that they could read them on their way to the meeting places. In reference to the suggestion as to articled clerks, he had to say that these clerks should not be driven. The clerks ought first to learn to guide themselves. Beyond

superintending the reading of the clerks he did not think solicitors could go much further. Their writing ought certainly to be improved. The council ought to insist that men who could not pass the preliminary examination should not be permitted to enter the profession. It was too much a matter of patronage at present. In the matter of payment he thought that they ought not to strive too much because the public would be against them. The public were of opinion that lawyers were well paid, but they were willing to pay the present fees. He then called attention to the Act of 1870, which contained very many admirable principles, which had already become dead letters. In taxing fees it was a positive fact that the skill of the profes sion was not taken into consideration. He did not complain of the manner in which the taxing masters performed their work, but he did complain of the fetters by which they were bound.

Mr. S. DAY (St. Neot's and Kimbolton) said, with regard to the printing of the papers and the suggestion that they would be very careful in accepting a proposal of that should be circulated beforehand, he hoped the council

kind.

Mr. T. M. GEPP (Chelmsford) said he was informed that the cramming for examinations could not be abolished. He thought it most desirable that articled clerks should be at least a year or a year and a half at conveyancing work. He was sure that the scale of fees laid down by the council was too high, and could not be adopted in the country. He condemned the practice of the selling of advowsons, and being himself the owner of a living he could inform them that it had been suggested to him when that living was vacant that it could be sold to great advantage. The council then adjourned to luncheon, and on returning to the Cutlers' Hall,

Mr. G. R. Donn (London), in seconding the resolution, remarked that with respect to articled clerks he found that it was a good plan to subject the clerks to occasional examinations, and to make them epitomize all letters in the letter-book. It appeared extraordinary that Lincoln's-inn had the greatest horror of solicitors. There, a man must be presented three times in hall, and sign declarations that be a butcher or a baker, but not a member of these learned he is not an attorney nor a writer to the signet. He may professions. Why they should be libelled in this way it was impossible for him to say. He thought the time had now come for the law to be altered on the subject.

Mr. J. T. WOODHOUSE (Hull) expressed the opinion that Mr. Godfrey's suggestion was out of place, seeing that the council actually proposed to introduce a Bill on the subject of the calling of solicitors to the bar, and on other subjects. It was surely, in these circumstances, out of place to pass a resolution setting forth that the time had now arrived to deal with these subjects, seeing that the council had announced that they were going to do so. He suggested that it would be more important for the meeting to express pleasure at the announcement of the council, and pledge itself to support them.

Mr. F. K. MUNTON (London) expressed his high opinion of the president's address. Without in the slightest degree suggesting that the papers which had been read by the presidents of the society in previous years had not been admirable, still this was the first paper of the character which the society expected would be delivered by the president at the annual gathering. He believed they would all agree with the president that the first matter to which they should give attention should be the attainment of a very high standard of legal education. They would all agree in that, but he asked whether the next most important thing was not the culture by which a man should understand mankind? He believed they would find that the most prosperous lawyers were not only those who understood the law of the land, but those who had been taught through their articles to mix with the clients and the business, so that when the business came to them they could at once tackle it. They often came across men who had little or no technical legal knowledge. but, from the admirable manner in which they understood their fellow-men, could manage their business in a more admirable manner than if they were full of learning and knew little of that art which was so useful. In the paper on Popular Fallacies" it was said that the public supposed lawyers derived very handsome profits from their business, and there would perhaps be few persons outside

66

that room who would be inclined to share the president's opinion that lawyers, right-minded lawyers, discouraged litigation. He would, however, assert that every well conducted office adopted the practice of advising as strongly as possible against litigation when it was thought proper to be so arranged. Apart from this being a moral and right thing to do, in the end it was the most remunerative. Every one knew that a client who was advised not to engage in litigation came again to the same lawyer. Adverting to the admission of solicitors to the bar he said that for ten or fifteen years he had advocated that some arrangement should be made by which solicitors who desired, as he had desired, should be able to go to the bar. He was afraid he was now too old to adopt that course, having been kept out of it so long, but for the benefit of those who still intended to go to the bar he hoped the society would speak almost as one man in favour of an alteration of the law and enforce the subject upon the benchers. He ventured to say years ago that the council had acted somewhat unwisely in allowing the passing of an Act of Parliament which enabled the barristers to come to them as lawyers without their receiving a quid pro quo. He hoped some legislative action would be taken by the council, and he suggested that each member should bring pressure to bear upon any member of Parliament with whom he might be acquainted to obtain the end they desired. His experience had been that men who had gone from their side of the profession to the bar had admirably performed their business, and this was a matter of public interest. In conclusion, he hoped some course would be taken other than the polite course of suggesting to the bar that they should do the solicitors justice. The bar never would do them justice, and he was glad to hear that the president intended to push this matter forward. He thought the resolution which had been moved should be withdrawn, and some such motion as this substituted, "That this meeting is pleased to hear that the council purpose to promote in the ensuing session of Parliament a Bill on the subjects mentioned in the president's address, and hereby pledges itself to use every endeavour to support

them."

Mr. JOHN COOK (Hull) seconded Mr. Munton's proposal. In doing so he took occasion to say that Mr. Gray's "popular fallacy" about solicitors was a fallacy in his own mind. The social status of a solicitor was just that to which he was entitled. If he was a man of culture and integrity, he would have all the respect which these qualities deserved. Solicitors need not trouble themselves with the idea that they were insufficiently appreciated, for they would have all the appreciation to which they were entitled.

Mr. T. H. BOLTON (London) adduced a case in which the dispensing power of the judges had been used most judiciously. A reputable and honourable gentleman, was, by the act of the judge in dispensing with the preliminary examination, thus able to take the position to which he was entitled. Still, he thought if the powers were transferred to the council of the Law Society, they would treat cases with more care than her Majesty's judges' many duties allowed them to do. He contended that solicitors not getting to the bar was a grievance to the solicitors and an injustice to the public. He also urged that the responsibility of solicitors should be extended to members of the bar. At present the solicitors were responsible to their clients for neglect of duty, whereas the bar could take plenty of business. The solicitors were the people who suffered, and the bar escaped scot-free. The council should support Mr. Lewis and other members who were advocating the responsibility of the bar, and making them equally responsible with the solicitors.

The PRESIDENT then put the resolution, "That the address of the president, containing as it does valuable advice for articled clerks, be published for their use, and circulated among them."-This was carried unanimously.

Mr. Godfrey's resolution was withdrawn in favour of the proposition of Mr. Munton which was carried.

COUNTY COURT REFORM.

Mr. F. D. LowNDES (Liverpool) then read a paper on The Improvement of the County Courts." He alluded to the improvements in the administration of justice, suggested by the Attorney-General in the House of Commons on the 21st of March, 1879, considered in conjunction with Mr. Cowen's scheme for district courts of the High Courts of Justice and Mr. Norwood's for the extension of the jurisdiction of county courts. In March last the present Attorney

court.

General drew the attention of the House of Commons to the improvements required in the administration of justice, suggesting that measures ought to be adopted to provide some peedy, efficient, and less expensive mode of administering ustice than now prevails. Mr. Lowndes said he believed that the scheme suggested by the Attorney-General, with some few slight additions, would not only give increased facilities for the dispatch of both civil and criminal business in the provinces, but would enable continual sittings of the Court of Appeal and permanent sittings at Nisi Prius to be held in London. He then considered the proposals by Mr. Norwood for giving unlimited jurisdiction to the county courts and by Mr. Cowen for the formation of district courts of the High Court of Justice. He then suggested that a complete scheme could be made if Sir Henry James's proposal were carried out, and parts of Mr. Norwood's and Mr. Cowen's schemes were added to it; if the county courts were constituted a division of the High Court of Justice, with the practice and procedure in all actions above £20, with a reduced scale of fees and charges in actions between £20 and £50. This, he said, has been in use in the Court of Passage of Liverpool for some time, and the rules were approved by three judges of the High Court. The scale of costs gives a fair rate of remuneration to solicitors. Above £50 the High Court scale might be allowed, and I would suggest that a suitor should be allowed to have a jury of twelve if he desired it. As a part of the measure, it might be provided that in all actions in other divisions of the High Court where the amount involved is under (say) £200, the court or judge, on application of either party, shall, after the close of the pleadings, have power to order any action to be tried in the county court division, thus practically finding in all the large towns a constantly sitting court to dispose of two-thirds of the actions at present tried in the superior courts. Another matter which, although one of detail, I think important, is that I think it would be desirable that the more important cases should be heard by the county court judge sitting in the Nisi Prius Court, when practicable, to remove any prejudice from the minds of solicitors, and to give increased dignity to the I understand the Attorney-General's scheme to include the abolition of divisional courts for the purposes of appeals, motions, for new trials, &c., and the substitution of the Court of Appeal. As it will be probably necessary_that a third division of the Court of Appeal should sit, I would suggest that the Lords Chief Justices, Lord Chief Baron (and the President of the Probate Division, if necessary), should sit in the Court of Appeal, and that the judges of the Court of Appeal for the future should not go circuit. I would suggest following out the Attorney-General's proposed scheme of centres, and that Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds, and Birmingham should be four centres, and that Cumberland and Westmoreland should be included in the Manchester centre, Chester and North Wales in Liverpool, and Northumberland and Durham in Leeds, and the counties of Stafford, Salop, Worcester, Derby, Leicester, Nottingham, Lincoln, and Rutland in Birmingham. In reference to the Attorney-General's suggestion as to whether the judges should hold a criminal sitting or not involves another question, to which, in conjunction with my colleagues, the late Mr. Ward Hunt, Mr. Bateson, and Mr. Hollams, we drew attention on signing the final report of the Judicature Commission-viz., whether the principle of a Central Criminal Court could not with advantage be extended to other parts of the country besides the metropolis. Mr. Ward Hunt suggested that quarter sessions should be so arranged that a judge of the High Court might attend them and the trial of the more important cases, leaving the chairman or recorder to dispose of the rest of the business. Upon this point, moreover, it should be borne in mind that the reason for adhering to the county divisions has been robbed of a good deal of its force by the Treasury now paying nearly the whole of the costs of prosecutions, as well as by the Prisons Act; and further, it may well fit in with the development of the office of public prosecutor, by leading to the appointment of a deputy public prosecutor for certain defined areas, and so tend to further saving of expense in the conduct of prosecutions. Now if this were carried out alternately by the judges, so that all the principal towns included in these centres were visited four times a year, the only circuits to be provided for would be the Oxford (deprived of Worcester,

Stafford, and Shrewsbury, for which might be substituted Aylesbury, Bedford, and Northampton, as the remaining places on the Midland Circuit would be included in the Birmingham centre), Western, South-eastern, and South Wales, at present requiring seven judges; but if the jurisdiction of quarter sessions were enlarged as suggested, and power given to send cases where the amount involved is under £200 to the county court, I should expect one judge on each circuit, or four judges in all, would be able to dispose of all the business. There are a few other suggestions which I would add to the Attorney-General's plan. To avoid the present complaint as to interlocutory appeals, I would suggest the establishment of a practice court, before which all questions of practice arising on interlocutory applications and reviews of taxations of costs, in whatever division, should be brought, and that this court should sit daily, the cases being called on in order; the judge who presided in this court being relieved from going circuit. This would lead to uniformity in practice and to the adoption of one scale of costs, so that at no distant date the taxation of costs might take place before one set of officers Instead of the present divisions being maintained. The Attorney-General did not allude to the trial of actions in the Chancery or Admiralty Division at the centres, but I presume he did not intend to exclude them. I would venture to go a point further, and to include probate and divorce cases, where the latter involve merely the issue of whether or not adultery had been committed. The objection of the possibility of prejudice is absurd where the community is so large as at the proposed centres; and whilst the punishment to the guilty parties it greater, the expense to the suitors would be greatly reduced by not having to take all the witnesses to London.

FIRE INSURANCE CONDITIONS.

-

A paper, entitled "Fire Insurance, Conditions affecting the Interests of Mortgagees and Lessors," was read by Mr. T. G. GIBSON (Newcastle-on-Tyne). He said: The late Lord St. Leonards gives the following advice: "Very few policies against fire are so framed as to render the company legally liable. Generally the property is inaccurately described with reference to the conditions under which you insure. They are framed by the company, who probably are not unwilling to have a legal defence against any claim, as they intend to pay what they deem a just claim without taking advantage of any technical objection, and to make use of their defence only against what they may believe to be a fraud, although they may not be able to prove it. But do not rely upon the moral feelings of the directors. Ascertain that your house falls strictly within the conditions." This advice, coming from such a high authority, may be considered by some to justify a stricter scrutiny of fire insurance conditions than they might otherwise deem necessary, having regard to the generally fair and honourable intentions of insurance companies and their directors. To others no such justification or apology will be deemed necessary for the following observations:-In the year 1876 the attention of the committee of the Newcastle Law Society was drawn to the following condition, which appears to have been adopted by the offices belonging to the Association of Fire Insurance Offices some four or five years previously, viz. :-"If at the time of any loss or damage happening to any property hereby insured there be any subsisting insurance or insurances, whether effected by the insured or by any other person covering the same property, the society shall not be liable to pay or contribute more than its rateable proportion of such loss or damage." Commenting upon this condition in their Annual Report, the Committee remarked that it had been suggested, and they feared with considerable show of reason, that a first mortgagee, whose security was insured by a policy containing the above condition, might find his rights seriously altered and impaired by the act of other

parties without his knowledge, and over whose actions he could have no control. For instance, suppose a property worth £1,000 be mortgaged for £600 and insured in the mortgagee's name for the amount of his mortgage, and suppose it to be subsequently further insured by the owner for £1,000 in another office, of which the mortgagee has no information, the mortgagee, it was then suggested, might find, in case of a total destruction of the property by fire, that instead of recovering £600 upon his policy, as he would naturally

expect to do, he would only recover six sixteenths of £1,000, or £375, whilst the remainder of the loss would be payable to the mortgagor or parties claiming under him, and entirely beyond the control of the mortgagee. The com mittee further observed that this was certainly not a result ever contemplated by the assured, and although it might be conceded that the majority of the offices would not in prac tice act upon the strict construction of the condition to the prejudice of an assured who could have had no knowledge of the subsequent insurance, yet this could not be considered any justification for a slovenly and imperfect expression of what was really intended as the contract on both sides. There might, it was observed, be difficulties in the expression of that contract, so as to meet possible and con ceivable frauds upon insurance companies, but it was surely the duty, and should be the object of the able lawyers who advise the companies, to exercise their foresight and ingenuity in devising terms which would accurately express the fair and legitimate objects of both parties, instead of contenting themselves with a confessedly imperfect expression, which placed the insured in the position of having to ask as a concession what they ought to be able to demand as a right. It was admitted, however, that the importance of the questions raised upon this condition depended in some measure upon the construction which the courts might put upon it, and as this was involved in a cause then pending, the committee considered that, attention having been called to the matter, it might be allowed to rest until a decision had been given in the case referred to. That case, the North British and Mercantile Insurance Company v. The London and Liverpool and Globe Insurance Company, was heard before the Master of the Rolls, and afterwards on appeal before the Lords Justices James, Mellish, and Baggallay, and is reported in 5 Law Reports, Chancery Division, page 569. It was decided on grounds independent of the construction of the condition above referred to; but the Master of the Rolls, in giving judgment, thought it right to give his opinion on the question raised upon it for the guidance of persons interested in these matters on future occasions. He stated that the policies were not well worded in this respect, and he construed the word "property" in the condition as meaning not the actual chattel, but the interest of the assured therein, although this compelled him to put a different meaning on the same word in different parts of the instrument, thinking it his duty to make it rational, and such a contract as persons would be likely to enter into, and not one which would be an utter absurdity. The Court of Appeal agreed generally with the Master of the Rolls' decision, and any danger of a different construction being held by a court of law is probably very slight, although, as the case was actually decided upon other grounds, the question might be again the subject of litiga tion. This, however, is not the only danger to be apprehended from the use of this ill-worded condition, for all persons who effect insurances are not so astute as the Master of the Rolls, and indeed it may well be said that few lawyers would have had the ingenuity to suggest, and still fewer the courage to advise a client to stand out for, such a construction as his lordship put upon the condition in the case referred to prior to that decision. On the other hand, it would appear that insurance companies ignore where they can the construction put upon the condition by the Master of the Rolls, and base their settlement of losses upon the, at first sight, apparent meaning of this condition. Thus, in a case which was brought to the notice of the committee of the Newcastle Law Society last year, where a mortgagee had insured a property for £1,000, and the mortgagor had subsequently insured it in two other offices for £500 each, a fire occurred by which the property was damaged to the extent of £525. Thereupon, in settlement of this loss, the mortgagee's office paid him £262 10s., and the other two offices paid the mortgagor £131 5s. each. advice, believing not unnaturally that he was getting all The mortgagee accepted this settlement without legal he could legally claim in the face of the above condition. Mention having been made of this case in the last annual report of the committee, they were instructed by resolu tion of a general meeting of the members to ascertain and inform the members what fire insurance com panies do not insist upon the condition in question. The result of inquiries addressed to all the known fire insurance companies in Great Britain is that seven of them do not insist upon this condition exactly, but two of these