« PreviousContinue »
Richards, Frederick Henry, Shoreditch, Mantle Manufacturer. March 7 at 2 at offices of Goldberg and Langdon, We8t st, Fins
Feb 28 at 3 at offices of
Smith, William Henry, Bradford, York, Stay Maker. March 5 at 11 at offices"
bury circus Richmond, Samuel, Nottingham, Baker.
Belk, Middle pavement, Nottingham Rickards, James, Park st, Camden Town, Umbrella Maker. March
0 at 2 at offices of Kennedy, Warwick ct, Gray's inn Robinson, James, Walton-on-the-Hill, Lancaster, Grocer. March 8
at 2 at offices of Gibson and Co, South John st, Liverpool. Tom
Robinson, John, Warkworth, Northumberland, Brewer, March 10
at 11 at offices of Tate and Percy, St Michael's lane, Alnwick Rnfflc, William Fitch, Portsmouth, Commission Agent. March 7 at
3 at offices of Blake, Ordnance row Portsea Bavrry, Alfred, Taunton, Somerset, Ironfounder. March 4 at 11 at
offices of Kite, East st, Taunton BaviU, Charles, jun, High st, Camden Town, Cheesemonger. March
8 at 2 at offices of Kennedy, Warwick ct, Gray's inn Sawyer, Henry, TunHtall, Suffolk, Blacksmith. March 11 at 2 at
offices of Pollard, St Lawrence st, Ipswich Bcott. Nathaniel Latham, Hoxne, Suffolk. Farmer. March 14 at 2
at White Lion Hotel, Eye. Gudgeon, Stowmarket Shaw, Thomas, and not Straw, as erroneously printed in Gazette of 15th inst, Hanley, Stafford, Tripe Dresser. Macrh 12 at 11 at offices of Stevenson, Cheapside, Hanley Sbesrd, Edwin, Bailey, York, Oil Merchant. March 7 at 2.30 at the
George Hotel, Wellington st, Bailey. Law, Batley Smith, John, Moton nr Gainsborough, Lincoln, Innkeeper. March
3 at 11 at offices of Bladon, Gainsborough Smith, Joseph, Braceborough, Lincoln, Farmer. March 4 at 10 at offices_of Law, St. Mary's pi, Stamford llliam Henry, Bradford, York, St 1 of Wright, Darley st, Bradford , William Job, St. Martin's court, St. Martin's lane, Licensed Victualler. March 3 at 3 at offices of Norman, Great Marlborough st, Regent s t Stead. Levi, Batley, York, Baker. March 7 at 2 at offices of Wooler
and Wooler, Exchange buildings, Batley Stratford, Francis Henry, Gloucester, Publican. March 3 at 11 at
offices of Henderson, Berkeley st, Gloucester Sudbury, Samuel, Ormskirk, Lancaster, of no occupation. March
8 at 3 at offices of Parr and Sadler, Railway rd, Ormskirk Sutherland, Eric, Berkeley sq, Fanner. March 10 at 2 at Lombard House, George yd, Lombard st. Vallance and Vallance, Essex st Swann, William, Scarborough, York, Saddler. March 2 at 3 at
offices of Appleyard, Newborough st, Scarborough Taylor, Alfred, Stoke Ferry, Norfolk, Farmer. March 0 at 12 at
offices of Copeman, Downham Market Taylor, George Henry, Horbling, Lincoln, Farmer, March 2 at 10
at Nag's Head Inn, Bourn. Law Thomas, Abraham Dolamore, Fortis Green, Hornsey, Carman.
March 9 at 3 at offices of Chamberlain, Basinghall st Tucker, John Francis, Southend, Essex, Plumber. March 9 at 2 at
Railway Tavern, Southend. Wood and Son, Rochford Turner, James, Horton, Bradford, Cabinet Maker. March 8 at 11 at
otlices of Moore, Albion chambers, Hustlergate, Bradford Urry, William, Aston, Warwick, Builder. March 3 at 3 at offices of
Simmons, Bennett's Hill, Birmingham Wallbanks, Henry, Burslem, Stafford, Beerseller. March 7 at 3 at
offices of Alcock, Market st, Tuns tall Watson, Edward Albert, Reading, Painter. March 5 at 10 at 24,
Friar Bt, Reading. Newman Way, James Joseph, Bristol, Cork Cutter. March 2 at 2 at offices
of Benson and Carpenter, Bank chmbrs, Corn st, Bristol Wells, Jane, Leominster, Hereford, Proprietor of a Ladies' School.
March 8 at 3 at Moore, Com sq, Leominster Weston, William Edward, Leicester, Cabinet Maker. March 8 at 3
sat offices of Wright, Belvoir st, Leicester Whitiug, John, Brookshot rd, Brentford, Carman. March 4 at 3 at
offices of Lay, Townhall, Brentford Williams, Edward Richard Johns, Sheerness, Kent, Navigating Lieutenant, R.N. tMarch 7 at 1 at Law Institution, Choncory lane. Copland, Sheerness Wi]*on, George, West Hartlepool, Journeyman Butcher. March 5 at
3 at Brunswick Hotel, West Hartlepool Winn, John, Horseferry rd, Westminster, Contractor. March 9
at 3 at offices of Taylor and Jaquet, South st, Finsbury sa Winter, John Hampton, Middlenam, York, Trainer of Race Horws. March 4 at 1" WaisteU
10 at the Railway Hotel, Northallerton.
Young, James, and Edwin Tarrant, Walthamstow, Essex, out of business. March 3 at 2 at offices of Hawkins, New Broad st
Anti-Dyspeptic Cocoa or Chocolate Powder.
Onuuteed Pare Soluble Coco* of the Finest Quality, with the ocas of fit extracted.
Ths Faculty pronounce it " the most nutritious, perfectly digestible -<Tcrue fcr Brenkfa-t, Luncheon, or Supper, and invaluable for I"«lidi «od Children."
Highly commended by the entire Medica lPress. B"ii>K without near, ipice, or other admixture, it nuts all palates, uepi better In all climates, and is four times the strength of coc
:d yet Wbakkmko with starch, &c, and Ik Hkautt cusirxa uaa suca Mixtures.
Usee instantaneously with boiling water, a teaspoonful to a Break's" Cup, coating less than a halfpenny.
CccoiTu* A La Vahlli Is the most delicate, digestible, cheapest *>r*.i[4 Chocolate, and may be taken when richer chocolate is pro
la tin packets at Is. 6d., 3s., 5s. 6d., 4c, by Chemists and Charities on Special Terms by the Sole Proprietors, H. BCI1WE1TZER k CO., 10, Adam-street, London, W.C.
LAW PARTNERSHIP WANTED, by a Solicitor, admitted upwards of eight years, who has capital. Been accustomed principally to Chancery and Conveyancing.—Address,.
G. H., care of Duviea & Co., Advertising Agents, Finch-lane, Uornbffl.
LAW. — Wanted, Situation by Advertiser (unadmitted). Competent to manage Common Law and Bankruptcy without supervision, Conveyancing with slight supervision^ Twenty-five years* experience.—Address, C, care of Mr. Benson, Law Stationer, 13, Postern-gate, Hull.
A"" S SECRETARY to a SOLICITOR.—The Advertiser, son of a Solicitor, 27 years of age, a good Accountant« and Correspondent, and possessing the faculty of order, offers his services in above capacity.—Address, B. Z., 29, Mark-lane, B.C.
JUNIOR CLERK.—A well-educated Youth (18), wants a situation as above in a Solicitor's Office. Can be well' recommended for steadiness and industry.—Apply, by letter, to
H. A. L.t care of Messrs. Tucker A Lake, 4, Scrle-stroet, Liucoln'sinn, London.
ASOLICITOR (B.A., London), of many yeara' standing, who passed his examination with honours, and has had some experience in preparing candidates for legal and other examinations, is willing to read privately with Gentlemen desirousof passing the Preliminary, Intermediate, or Final Examinations. Terms moderate.—Address, B.A., H. Home, Law Stationer, Warwick-crmrt, Holborn, W.C.
TBATEMAN NAPIER, LL.B., London, Clif-
ROYAL INSURANCE COMPANY.
pEOYIDENT LIFE OFFICE
60, REGENT STREET, and 14, CORNHLLL, LONDON.
Existing Assurances exceed £6,500,000
Invested Funds 2,124,711
Annual Income 279,352
Claims Paid exceed 6,600,000
Bonuses Declared 2,342,000
During the past year (1890) each main item has shown improvement upon the preceding year.
New Premiums £16,172 £18,846
Income 273,684 279,852
Invested Funds 2,077,215 2,124,711
CHARLES STEVENS, Secretary.
g U N FIRE 0 F F I 0 E .
THSIArirsintE Stbext, E.C. Chabikg: Cross, S.W.
REVERSIONARY and" LIFE INTERESTS in
F. S. CLAYTON, ) Joint
"IDE AND SON
Bt srioiiL arroiHTKBsrr, To Her Majesty, the Lord Chancellor, the Whole f hi Judicial Bench Corporation of London, Ac.
SOLICITORS' AND REGISTRARS' GOWNS. Barristers' And Queen's COUNSBL'3 Ditto. CORPORATION ROBES UNIVERSITY I CLERtT BOWNS,
94, CHANCERY LANE, LONDON.
BOROUGH OF BIRKENHEAD.
TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE.—Wanted, an efficient General Clerk, who can attend Meetings of Committees and lias a knowledge of Municipal and General Law. Salary, £160 per annum. Also, a Shorthand and Writing Clerk. Salary, £80 per annum.
Applications, accompanied by testimonials, to be sent in, stating experience of applicants, on or before the 1st of March next.
ALFRED GILL, Town Clerk, Birkenhead. Town Hall, 10th February, 1881.
Periodical Sale of Reversions, Policies, &c., at the Mart, on Thursday next.
MESSRS. MARSH, MILNER, & CO. will SELL by AUCTION, nt the MART, B.C., on THURSDAY next, MARCH 3, at TWO o'clock precisely, the following interests:—
1. The ABSOLUTE REVERSION to ONE-FOURTH SHARE of the following:—£0,700 on mortgage of freehold and leasehold property at Liverpool; £320 cash in Bank; £8,000 value of unsold portions of the Arnsidc Estate, Westmoreland; £270 Furness Railway Five and Six per Cent. Preferenco Stock; £180 Furness Railway Four-and-a-half per Gent. Preference £10 shares; £450 value of furniture—less certain legacies, receivable on decease of a lady now in her 54th year.—Solicitor, F. W. Watson, Esq., Kendal.
2. Tho LIFE INTEREST of a gentlomnn, aged 60, in a freehold house, 167, East India Dock-road, Poplar, let at £36 per annum, but worth £40; and £3,000 New Three per Cent. Annuities, invested in tho names of two trustees, and together producing £126 per annum; also a policy for £100 in the Law Union Assurance, 126, Chancerylane.—Solicitor, John Bryan, Esq., Gloucester.
3. The REVERSIONARY INTEREST in FREEHOLD PROPERTY, situate at Pyworthy, near Holsworthy, Devon, in the occupation of the tenant for life, and let at a gross annual rental of £350 per annum, receivable on decease of a lady now in her 54th year, provided a gentleman aged 30 survives her.—Solicitors, Messrs. Truefltt & Gane, 54}, Bisbopsgate-strcet Within.
4. The ABSOLUTE REVERSION to a FOURTH PAST of a SUM of £2,000, standing in the names of two trustees and invested upon a Debenture Bond of the Metropolitan Railway, receivable on decease of a lady now in her 79th year.—Solicitor, T. Bradley, Esq., 75, Mark-lane.
6. A POLICY of ASSURANCE for £1,600, effected in 1858in the British Equitable Assurance Company, 4, Queen-street-place, B.C., on tho life of a gentleman now in his 61st year. Original annual premium £3114s. 8d., reduced by bonuses to £23 5s. 2d.—Solicitors, Messrs. Stibbard, Gibson, & Co., 21, Leadenhall-street, E.C.
6. A valuablo POLICY for £1,000, effected in 1866 in tho Scottish Provincial Assurance Company, London and Aberdeen, on the life of a gentleman now in his 64th year. Annual premium £31 5s., together with bonuses accrued amounting to £355 18s. lid.—Solicitor, G. C. Sherrard.Esq., 11, Lincoln's-inn-flelde, W.C.
Particulars at 54, Cannon-street.
Auctions, Season 1881.
TVIESSRS. HARVEY, DAVIDS, & MORRIS,
It I beg to announce that thoy have arranged for their SALES by AUCTION to tako place at tho MART, Tokenhousc-yard, Bank, E.C, on the following dates throughout the ensuing year, com. mencing at TWO o'clock precisely each day:—
Date. Floor. Room.
Wednesday, March 2 .. .. Ground ., .. C.
Wednesday, March 16 Ground .. .. B.
Wednesday, March 30 .. .. Ground .. .. B.
Wednesday, April 20 .. .. Ground .. .. B.
Wednesday, April 27 .. First .. .. E.
Wednesday, May 11 .. .. First .. .. E.
Wednesday, May 25 •. Ground .. C.
Wednesday, June 8 . „. ... First F.
Wednesday, June 22 .. .. First • « .. F.
Wednesday, July 6 First .. F.
Wednesday, July 20 .. .. First F.
Wednesday, An crust 3 .. .. Ground .. .. C.
Wednesday, August 10 .. First .. F.
Wrednesday, October 26 .. First „ F.
Wednesday, November 23 .. Ground .. .. B.
Wednesday, December 7 .. First .. .. F. These sales will include landed estates, town and country houses, ground-rents, reversions, and shares. Owners, solicitors, and trustees desirous of including properties, are respectfully requested to give instructions as early as possible, as it is of the utmost importance that sufficient time should be allowed to bring the sales prominently before tho public—Auction and Survey Offices, 117, Bishopsgate-street E.C.
MESSRS. HARM AN & MATTHEWS' HOUSE PROPERTY LIST for February is now ready, and maybe had gratis by post, or on application at35, Walbrook, E.C. Desirable properties of every class wanted for numerous buyers.
REVERSIONS, ANNUITIES, &c, SOLD by Auction or Private Treaty, or Mortgages arranged. Expenses if not sold £2 12s. 6d., including printing and advertising.— Mr. Altbed Beat., 82, Queen-street, London, E.C.
FOR SALE, to pay 7 per Cent., House Property in tho West End. All well let and in good repair.—Apply to F. Rogers, Esq., 48, Guildford-strcet, Russell-square.
fj'OR SALE.—A Conveyancing and General Prao
F tice in largo Town on tho East Coast of Yorkshire, capnblo of great development. Solicitors only need apply. — Civis, "Solicitors' Journal" Office, 52, Carey-street, W.C.
NEW LAW BOOKS JUST PUBLISHED BY
WATERLOW BROTHERS & LAYTON.
23, 24, Akd 25, BIRCHIN LANE, LONDON, B.C.
BANKRUPTCY LAW and PRACTICE: being a Treatise on tho Law and Practice of Bankruptcy, up to the present date; with the Act of 1869; Orders, Rules, Forms, 4c.; with an Introduction and Copious Notes on the Law, as regulated by the Leading Cases and Decisions.
By Hr. WYATT HART, B.A., Barrister-atrLaw.
I^HE LAW of the EMPLOYER'S LIABILITY for NEGLIGENCE of SERVANTS, with the Act of 1880, and Rules issued thereunder, with Notes and a Sketch of the History of the Law.
Fork Tor Coktractiitg Out or The Act.
THE BILLS of SALE ACT, 1878, with an Epitome
By HERBERT REED, Barrister-at-Law. LONDON: WATERLOW BROS. & LAYTON, 23, 24, and 25, Birchin-lane, and 30, Lime-street, E.C.
Just Published. Price 7s. 6d. Port VIII. Vol. H.
THE STATUTES of PRACTICAL UTILITY in the Civil and Criminal Administration of Justice passed43 i 44 Victoria (1680), Alphabetical! v Arranged, with Notes thereon, and a Copious Indox. By HORATfO LLOYD, Esq., Judge of County Courts. A General Index to all the numbers of Vol. II. of. LLOYD'S STATUTES is given with this Part, to enable subscribers to bind them into One Volume, in continuation of tho Four Volumes of CHITTY'S STATUTES by WELSBY and BEAVAN'. London: Hots Swert, 3, Chancery-lane; Stpvexs & Sols, 119, Chancery-lane, Law Publishers.
Just Published. Royal 8vo. Price 38s., cloth.
WOODFALL'S LAW of LANDLORD and TENANT; with a full Collection of Precedents, and Forms of Procedure; containing also an Abstract of Leading Propositions, and Tables of certain Customs of the Country. The Twelfth Edition, in which tho Precedents of Leases havo been Revised and En* largerl with the assistance of L. G. G. ROBBINS, Esq., by J.M. LELY, Esq., of the Inner Temple, Barrister-at-Law; Editor of "Chitty's Statutes of Practical Utility" and "Hodges on Railways," and Joint Editor of the *' Licensing Acta " and the " Judicature Acts."
London : Heitey Sweet, 3, Chancery-lano; Williah Maxwiu. t Sow, 29, Floot-street; Stevens & Sons, 119, Chancery-lane, Law Publishers.
Just Published. Demy Svo. Price 18s., cloth.
THE COMMON AND STATUTE LAW RELATING TO HIGHWAYS IN ENGLAND AND NORTH WALES; with an Ap-iendix of Statutes. By R. H. SPEARMAN, Esq., of the Inner Temple, Barrister-at-Law.*
London: Hsztrv Sweet, 3, Chancery-lane, Law Publisher.
Second Edition. Ono Shilling, or 13 stamps by post.
SKIN DISEASES TREATED HOMCEOPATHI-
Just published, post Svo, price 3s.
THE LIABILITY of EMPLOYERS, with the Act of 1880, and Rules thereunder. Bv W. HOWLASD ROBERTS and GEORGE H. WALLACE. Esqs., Barristors-at-Law.
"All the necessary materials seem to bo supplied, and tho com. mentary shows a good grasp of the subject."—Law Journal. Rrevrs & Tusker, 100, Chancery-lane, London, W.C.
PRELIMINARY, INTERMEDIATE, FINAL (Pass and Honours) LAW EXAMINATION.
MR. ALBERT GIBSON'S Classes and Postal Preparation for these Examinations continue tbjroughoiit the year, except during one month in summer. Two Residential Pupils received. Terms on application to 35, Southampton-build* ings. Chancery-lane, or to St. Mary Cray, Chislehuxst.
[JV.2?.—At the Michaelmas Examination, 1880, out of 26 pupil* tent up for the Final 22 passed, out of 17 sent up fbr the Intermediate 10passed, and all Opupils sent up for the Preliminary passed. At seven out of thelast eight Examinations Mr. Gibson's pupils have taken Honours; the successes including First, Second, Third, Fourth, and Fifth Prizemen, besides many Certificates of Merit, Second and Third Class Honour*. In last June Four and in last November three pupils secured Honour* ]
CASES REPORTED In The WEEKLY REPORTER.
Bowen v. Hall and others (App.) 307
Chsuerton v. Watney (Ch.Div. V.C.B) 373
Gothenburg Commercial Company (Limited), In re (App ) .... 358 Jones v. The Swansea Cambrian Benefit Building Society
Latter v. Braddell and Wife and Suteliffe (App.) 368
Lewis v.Hoare(H.L.) 357
Markwick v. Hardingham (App.) 301
Merchant Banking Company of London, Ex parte The. In re
Dtirham (App.) 363
Metropolitan Bank, The, v. Heiron (App.) 370
N«viUT. Snclling (Ch.Div. Denman, J.) 376
Scottish Petroleum Company (Limited), Re (Ch.Div. V.C.M.) .. 372 Wellsv. Chelmsford Local Board of Health (Ch.Div. Fry.J.) .. 381 Worth, In re (Ch.Div. M.R.) 371
Yice-chancellor Bacon rose yesterday (Friday) for a »hort interval and will not sit again until Friday, the 11th inst.
Ir is Understood that one of the judgeships recently vacant was offered to and declined by Mr. Cohen, Q.C., MP.
The Medical Advisers of Vice-Chancellor Malins have enjoined complete rest for the present, and although his lordship is progressing favourably, three weeks hence is the earliest date suggested for his probable return to his court.
Is The Meantime an order has been made, transferring all Vice-Chancellor's Malins's business, until further order, to Mr. Justice Fbt, who will devote Friday and rkturday in each week to hearing short causes and interlocutory applications. Motions for judgment and further considerations will not, for the present, be heard except so far as they are urgent, and then only on special application.
The Appointment of Mr. J. C. Mathew and Sir Henry Jackson to the vacant judgeships will, we believe, be received with general approval. Both of the new judges are men of experience, sound judgment, and common sense; and these are qualities for which to be grateful in the case of occupants of the judicial bench.
With Reoard to the Attorney-General's recent statement in the House of Commons, that arrangements had been made to increase the staff of clerkB in the Paymaster-General's Office in Chancery, we are enabled to state that additions are daily beiug made to the staff of clerks, and that the other arrangements for facilitating transaction of business to which we recently referred are in active progress.
As We Announced last week, the Order in Council consolidating the three common law divisions of the High Court came into operation on Saturday last, and a notice has been issued requesting solicitors to alter the title of proceedings commenced in the Common Pleas or Exchequer Divisions as follows:—" In the High Court of Justice, Queen's Bench Division.—Writ issued in the Common Pleas [or Exchequer] Division."
Comparino The List of honoursmen at the January examination of the Incorporated Law Society with that issued after the June examination last year, there will be observed a remarkable diminution in the number of men iu the first class. Last June there were eighteen, there are now but seven. Considering that there were eighty-four candidates, as compared with seventy-five at June, it would seem either that the general standard of attainment has greatly fallen (which is not very likely), or that the questions have been more difficult.
When The Council of the Incorporated Law Society are able to spare a little time from their engrossing public engagements, it may be well that they should bestow some attention on tha evidence given in a case in the City of London Court, reported in the City Press of last Wednesday. It would appear from this case that a new profession has arisen—that of the client introducer. The defendant was sued by a firm of solicitors for work and labour done as solicitors at his request; and, according to the report in the newspaper, he stated that a lady having applied to him to recommend her to a lawyer, he took her to the plaintiffs. "He had," he said, "been in tho habit of taking clients to solicitors from whom he got a commission, and he certainly expected n commission in the present instance." He had, however, never before, to the knowledge of the plaintiffs, been at their office, and he found that his profession was not recognized there. It would be very desirable to ascertain in what quarters his occupation has been plied, and whether he is the representative of any considerable number of client introducers.
The Irish Authorities display considerable assiduity in putting in force old statutes. It is stated that at a recent Land League meeting at Ballinasloe a local publican displayed from his window a flag bearing "a harp without a crown." The aWence of the latter emblem being supposed to render the flag disloyal, the head constable summoned the publican under the Licensing (Ireland) Amendment Act, 1836 (6 & 7 Will. 4, c. 38), section 8 of which enacts that "no person licensed to sell spirits by retail, to be consumed on the premises or otherwise, shall knowingly permit any . . . assembly of persons declared to be illegal or prohibited by any law in force at the time of the passing of the Act ... to meet or assemble " [upon the licensed premises], "nor shall on any occasion or pretence whatsoever hang out or display, or suffer to be hung out or displayed, on, from, or out of such house or other place of sale any sign, flag, symbol, colour, decoration, or emblem whatsoever, except the known and usual and accustomed sign of such house or other place of sale usually fixed thereto in the way of business," on pain of a penalty of £2 and the non.renewal of the licence. The defendant, having asserted his ignorance of the law, was "let off with a warning," it being "the first case of the kind ever before the court-" In future an Irish publican wishing to exhibit a " disloyal" emblem must style his house " The Harp"; but it is observable that the exhibition of the most loyal emblem which could possibly be emblazoned upon a banner would have equally involved the forfeiture of the licence. We do not find a similar provision as to flags in any of the English Licensing Acts, or the fronts of public-houses would present a lees enlivening spectacle during elections. We suggest the matter for the consideration of Sir Henry James with reference to his Corrupt Practices Prevention Bill.
The Case of Carter v. Stubbs (29 W. E. 132, L. B. 6 Q. B. D. 116) decided a practice point of some importance. Some time ago, a decision of a highly technical character was pronounced by the Queen's Bench Division in the case of Whistler v. Hanctck (26 W. E. 211, L. E. 3 Q. B. D. 83). The point there raised was as follows:— An order had been made dismissing the action unless otatemeut of claim was delivered within a week. The week expired, and no statement of claim was delivered. The plaintiff then took out a summons for further time for delivering statement of claim, and the master made an order giving the plaintiff a week's time. This order was set aside on appeal by Fry, J., on the ground that the master hud no jurisdiction to make it. The Queen's Bench Division affirmed the decision of Fry, J., on the ground that the action being already dead at the time when the master made his order, he had no jurisdiction to extend the time for delivering statement of claim. This decision was followed by the Exchequer Division in Wallis v. Hepburn (L. E. 3 Q. B. D. 84). It has always seemed to us that these decisions went upon a much narrower and more technical ground than might at first sight appear. The court, in deciding the recent case of Carter v. Stubbt, rather sail round than overrule these decisions, but they Bhow that the point decided was one of form rather than of substance. In Carter v. Stubbs an order was made dismissing the action unless au answer to interrogatories was filed by the plaintiff within seven days. The plaintiff swore his affidavit in answer within the time, but did not file it until after the seven days had expired. He, however, then took out a summons to have the order dismissing the action rescinded, and a master, thereupon, rescinded it, and gave the plaintiff a week's further time. On appeal against this last order, Hawkins, J., at chambers, set the order aside, and made two orders—one which extended the time for appealing against the original order dismissing the action, and the other varying that order by substituting fourteen for seven days. These orders of Hawkins, J., were upheld on appeal by the Divisional Court, and subsequently by the Court of Appeal. The case of Whistler v. Hancock is distinguished, on the technical ground that there was no order there extending the time for appealing against the order dismissing the action.
One cannot help observing that in substance the twocases were very similar, but in the former case no doubt the application was incorrect in point of form. It is now perfectly clear that the action, though it may be dead upon the time given by the order of dismissal expiring, is capable of being brought to life again through the medium, not of an application to a master to extend the time, as was done in Whistler v. Hancock, but of an appeal to the judge to extend the time for appealing against the order, and also to vary it by extending thetime for taking the particular step required.
The Peace Preservation Bill, introduced by Sir W. Harcourt this week, differs in some respects from the previous Peace Preservation Acts. It provides (claase IV that no person is to carry or have arms or ammunition in a proclaimed district except under conditions to be named in a proclamation by the Lord-Lieutenant; while the Act of 33 & 34 Vict. c. 9, allowed the carrying of arms under a licence, section 6 providing that no person, though licensed to kill game, should have or carry arms in a proclaimed district without a licence to do so under the 19 & 20 Vict. c. 36 and theamending Acts. Clause 6 of the new Bill defines "arms " as including any cannon, gun, revolver, pistol, sword, cutlass, pike, and bayonet (or any part of the armsso described), and " ammunition" as including bullets, gunpowder, nitro-glycerine, dynamite, gun-cotton and every explosive substance. Section 4 of the Act before referred to defined the word " arms" in the same way as in the present Bill, and included bullets, gunpowder, and ammunition, but did not specify any other explosives.
Mr. J. C. Mathew's appointment increases the predominance upon the judicial bench of former members of the Home or South-Eastern Circuit. That body is now represented by nine judges—namely, Lords Justices Bramwell and Lush, Sir Barnes Peacock, Sir Jakes Hannbn, Mr. Baron Pollock, and Justices Denmav, Hawkins, Williams, and Mathew. The circuit may also claim among former judges Lord Chelmsford, Lord Chief Justice Bovill, Lord Justice Thesiobr, Mr. Baron. Channell, and Justices Willes, Archibald, and HoxyMan. The Western Circuit ranks next, with five judges, Lord Coleridge, Sir Montaqoe Smith, Sir Bobbet 0n> Libr, and Justices Lopes and Bowen, to which list the name of the late Sir Alexander Cockburn should be added.
The City Press says that the will of Mr. Charles Brace, late of Billiter-sqaare, and of Denmark-hill, solicitor, who died on the 10th nit., was proved on the 8th inst. by Mr. C. C. Drnce and Mr. A. D. Drnce, the sons, the executors, the personal estate in the United Kingdom being sworn nnder £120,000. The testator gives to his eon, Charles Claridge, the piece of plate presented to his father by the Corporation of the City, a peouniary legacy of £2,000, and all his real estate. The testator recites in bis will that he had made various gifts and transfers to his ohildren is hit lifetime ; and he leaves tbe residne of bis personal estate to his said two sons.
"An Official" writes to the Times:—" With the view of ascertaining what proportion counsel's fees bear to the expense of an ordinary action in tbe common law divisions, I have just analyzed thirty of tbe last bills of costs filed in the Central Office here in cases which have proceeded to trial. The result I find to be:—Total costs of thirty actions (including counsel's fees), £3,250 10s.; counsel's fees in same, 598 guineas. I may add that these bills were taken just as they came, without any selection whatever."
LORD COLERIDGE'S TILT.
Osb of the effects of the consolidation of the three chiefs of the common law divisions seems to be that the consolidated one, conscious, no doubt, of the pith of three mighty warriors in his single arm, and feeling his thrice manly heart beating valiantly beneath the ou triplex of his chieftainship, has felt himself impelled to tilt, and has, in fact, tilted, against the sails of that gloomy old mill which was once known to men as the Court of Chancery, and which still, in spite of its new name and coat of paint, looms—at any rate, when seen from Westminster—almost as gloomy and giant-like as ever. We shall leave to the doughty champion himself (who has, we hope, by this time safely regained his feet) the pleasant task of examining the scars and marks of mischief which the recent encounter has doubtless left on his four-handed grinding old adversary; acd we shall merely make a few prosaic, common-place remarks in the expectation that, after the heat of the conflict has passed away, they will bo received, if not with acquiescence, yet with the tolerance which befits the truly brave and chivalrous.
It appears then—to drop all metaphor and disguise — that Lord Coleridge is so confident of the unerring accuracy of the test applied to chancery proceedings for administration by observing the ratio between the value of the estate administered, and the costs of administering it, that on finding, in the course of a cose before him last Monday (reported in the next day's Timet), that there had been an administration action in which the costs had been large in proportion to the estate, and on calling to mind another instance of the same kind, he thought it right from his judicial seat to pronounce a solemn malediction on the whole of the existing machinery provided for the public winding up of the affairs and estates of deceased persons, and to declare "that a system that permitted such a state of affairs was scandalous.''
Xuw, we do not mean to say that in some instances the costs of administration are not excessive; but what we do say is, that it is idle to compare, as Lord Coleridge did, the costs of actions . at law with proceedings for administration in chancery, or to treat, as the Timet reporter did in his report of the case we have referred to, the costs of administration actions " as illustrating the cost of litigation." The proper winding up of a very small estate may be necessarily a very arduous, anxious, and expensive undertaking. Hen may, and often do, die and leave very little after them except tangled bundles of rights and liabilities, and if, as cannot be doubted, it is proper to provide public machinery for unravelling these intertwisted skeins, it is clear that the cost of employing such machinery, and of skilfully watching and superintending its action, cannot be kept necessarily at a low percentage on what may be the value of the ultimate result of the process. Administration, in fact, is not litigation; and however procedure may be altered and costs cut down, there mnst still be many cases in which estates must pay very largely for the operation of disentangling, clearing up, and dividing. It is to be hoped that, as intelligence spreads, the public will see that this must be so, and will not be led by the random observations of even consolidated judges to consider that, because it is possible for a small estate to give rise to difficulties, the system that cannot always overcome such difficulties ■without causing considerable expenditure, is necessarily a scandal and disgrace.
We tre informed that it wm arranged, subject to Sir H. M. Jackson's health allowing bim to attend, that he •honld be sworn in as a judge of the High Court on Thursday.
THE COST OF LITIGATION.
Lord Justice Bramwell has addressed a letter to the Timet on the cost of litigation which contains one useful suggestion, and, if we may ventnre to say so with the utmost respect, some other suggestions which seem to be either unpractical or unnecessary. The useful suggestion is that interlocutory costs should be paid down. The result of the adoption of this course would certainly be to diminish applications for time and so forth, which are now too numerous, arising, not from a desire to henp up costs, but from pressure of work or an easy-going compliance with custom. If a solicitor hud either to furnish the money necessary for this purpose out of his owa pocket or to ask his client for it, he would be likely to consider more carefully before making these applications. !But tbisiM a very small part of the Lord Justice's scheme. He proposes that the whole system on which costs are allowed in litigation shall be changed. "The remedy I propose," he says, "is that the solicitor should be paid a lump sum; for instance, so much if proceedings stopped at the writ, so much if they stopped at a further stage, so much if there was a trial; and this sum should vary according to the amount at stake and other circumstances. It might either be a percentage or it might be a lump to be determined by the Master on hearing the nature of the case. But I do not desire to go into detail. Merely to pay according to the work done ia wrong. Of course the amount might vary if the losing* party had vexatiously increased the expense. It might vary, as between solicitor and client, if the client insisted on a particular expense. If it was thought necessary to protect the client, according to modern legislation, his order for extra expense might be required to be in writing. No doubt some hardship would be worked by this. A solicitor would sometimes be underpaid. A successful party would not always get the full amount of costs occasioned by his adversary being in the wrong. But, as in other cases, the occasional hardship must be borne as part of a good system."
This proposal strangely leaves out of sight the difference which exists among actions as to the period at which the main expense is incurred. In some actions a very large part of the solicitor's work may have to be done before the writ is issued. Take, for instance, an action for breach of contract for successive deliveries of coal or iron. There will most likely be a most voluminous correspondence, which must be read and copied, and analysed and carefully considered, by the solicitor before any legal steps are taken. On the other hand, there are actions where but little expense is incurred before trial; cases, for instance, in which the facts are not in dispute and a point of law only is involved; here, until the preparation of the brief and payment of counsels' fees there is little outlay. How is it possible, when actions vary so greatly as to the period at which the main expense is incurred, to fix an arbitrary lump sum if the action is stopped at the writ, and another lump sum if it is stopped at a further stage and before trial? There would be not merely "occasional hardships," but constant injustice resulting from such a system.
But the Lord Justice suggests that the lump sum to be allowed need not be arbitrarily fixed; it might be determined by the Master on hearing the nature of the case. And he suggests that the Master should be constituted a final and unfettered tribunal to decide the lump sum at his own will. This at least is the meaning we attach to the following passage in the Lord Justice's letter:— "Thirdly, it would be necessary to abrogate the present rules of taxation. A master is bound by the practice. For instance, suppose in a certain class of cases two counsel are allowed. The master must allow them in such a case, or a judge will set aside his taxation. If the judge refused, the Divisional Court would; if that refused, then the Court of Appeal, or finally, the House of Lords. Iu other words, though,