Page images

had ruled the occasion as privileged, and, even if not, be shoild submit that the claim as to that was barred by tbe Statute of Limitations.

Denman, J., said he should not consider that point tonight (as to entering judgment) in case the jury should find or the plaintiff on that part of the case. It was Dot the main part of the case.

Tbe jury retired, and, after an absence of an hour, returned into court, saying they were unable to agree unanimously on the third question, but found "Yes" to the first, and '■ No " to the second question. After some discussion with bis lordship they retired again, to consider the question of actual malice, though his lordship intimated that he thought it was immaterial, being disposed of in the former answer. After a brief absence the jury again returned, and said "No " in answer to the third.

Desmax, J.—That is a verdict for the defendant, and I give judgment for him.

Meisheimer asked for a stay of execution to move, and Dbnhax, J., granted it, observing that his verdict would have been the same as that now given.—Times.



A special meeting of the Incorporated Law Society, for the purpose of taking into consideration the present position of legul procedure, the impending changes in the profession, and other incidental matters, was held at the society's hall on Friday, the 16th inst. The meeting had been convened on the requisition of a large number of the members of the society. About 250 gentlemen attended, and Mr. J. M. Clabon, President, occupied the chair.

The President stated the object of the meeting.

Mr. C. Ford asked whether he might be permitted to put some questions to the president?

The President replied that he was in entire ignorance as to what would be done. Until he came into the room he had not seen the resolutions that were to be submitted to tbe meeting. He wished to give every possible information in answer to any questions that might be put to him.

Mr. Ford then put the following questions:—(1) Whether the circumstances under which the council sent to and received baok from the Legal Procedure Committee crtain recommendations, as announced at the time in the Times newspaper, are open to any satisfactory explanation, or whether this society must regard the action of the Legal Procedure Committee in the light of an affront on this society? (2) Whether any arrangement has been come to between the conncil and the benchers with regard to the regulations of the Inns of Court affecting the call of solicitors to the bar? (3) Whether, with reference to the communication of the Attorney-General to the council in regard to certain solicitors, whose names had been scheduled by the Parliamentary Commissioners, the council are aware of any steps in contemplation by the first law officer of the Crown to put a stop to the reckless expenditure uf money by barristers and Other candidates for parliamentary honours at election times? (4) Whether tbe council have taken any steps to safeguard the right of solicitors to audience in the Bankruptcy Court when, as provided iuHhe present Government Bankruptcy Bill, such court becomes a branch of the High Court of Justice?

The Presidest replied that (1), with reference to the suggestions made by the council to the Legal Procedure or Costs of Litigation Committee, the matter had been referred by them to the particular committee which they had appointed for the purpose of considering the suggestions, and the result of their deliberations had been forwarded to the Costs of Litigation Committee. This resulted in communications between himself and the Attorney-General, the council, he believed, coming well out of the matter. The suggestions were not accepted by the committee at first, but were sent back to the council, and having been reconsidered, and some or them to which objection had been taken having been struck out, they were returned to and reconsidered by the committee. In his opinion, nothing in the nature of an •{front had been intended to the council or the society. The eecond question concerned a subject which had occupied

the attention of the council very largely. They prepared a Bill with regard to it, and had an interview with the Lord Chancellor early in January, when certain suggestions were made by them, but up to then bis lordship had not received any communication from the benchers, and the matter was postponed. They afterwards saw several of the members of the bar, more particularly the treasurers of the four Inns of Court, who, at the suggestion of the council, considered the snbjeot separately and together, and eventually passed a resolution that the period of probation might be reduced from three years to one year—in other words, that solicitors might become barristers on only one instead of three years' terms. This was not considered to be all that was wanted, because there was still the preliminary examination for the bar, Bndthe council requested that the society's preliminary examination, should be held to bean equivalent for it. Answers bad been received from Lincoln's-iun and tbe Middle Temple, stating that the matter should receive consideration, and they expected that a similar reply would be received from Qray'sinn. He believed the oouncil would consider this a satisfactory solution of the difficulty. The council knew nothing whatever with respect to the subject of the third question. As regarded the fourth, the conncil had taken immense trouble with reference to the Bankruptcy Bill, and had appointed a strong committee previous to the commencement of the session. They drew up observations which were sent to the Bankers' Institute, the wholesale dealers, and the provinoial law societies, and when their replies were received they were forwarded in a tabular form to the AttorneyGeneral and the Board of Trade. The council also saw Mr. Chambeilain, and had received communications from him. They afterwards considered the Bill, and communicated with the provincial societies. As soon as answers had been received from the societies, the council intended to ngain communicate with Mr. Chamberlain, and, in the meantime, Mr. Ford's questions would be referred to a committee of the council in order that the subject of the audience of solicitors in the Bankruptcy Court might be carefully considered.

Mr. E. Kimber remarked that it was not his intention to make an attack upon the council, or to say whether what they had done was right or wrong. The meeting had to consider what was to be done at the present time, and he felt that it was incumbent upon every member of the solicitors' branch of the profession to make a strong stand against a matter which was, in his opinion, unconstitutional and illegal. He thought that when he attacked the Judicature Act every one present would be in accord with him. Great authorities disagreed with respect to it, so it was, at least, not surprising if solicitors did so, and that the public took an erroneous view of their conduct. He drew the attention of the meeting more particularly to the 75th section of the Act, which related to the Council of Judges who were to consider the procedure and administration of justice. The seetion laid it down that they should assemble once a year to consider the operation of the Act and tbe Rules of Court, together with the working of the offices and the arrangements relative to the duties of the officers of the courts, and to inquire into any defects which existed in the system of procedure or the administration of the law in the High Court of Justice and the Court of Appeal. They were also to report annually to one of the Secretaries of State as so what amendments it was desirable should be made for the better administration of justice. What was there in existence at the present moment? A Legal Procedure Committee had been appointed, of the object of which the president himself was in doubt, but thought it to be a committee to consider the costs of litigation. This was the first instance in the country's history of the appointment of a committee upon the mere authority of one Minister of State—a departmental committee to govern Legislation and prescribe what should be done with regard to the great profession of the law. Personally, he admired the Lord Chancellor greatly, but in the present instance he had acted, not as a Minister, but as a creature. It was most extraordinary that the judges had never met in oouncil, in accordance with the requirements of the Aot, until after the death of the Lord Chief Justice. If those who were appointed to administer the law had not upheld one of the principal sections of the Judicature Act, was it surprising that the general public looked unfavourably on the whole practice and profession of the law? They had done so, as was proved by the calumnies that had been uttered in the Times, and

many other newspapers, with regard to the costs of the legal profession, their practice, and their social position. The judges had never met, except for the purpose of abolishing two ancient offices. Why were not the defects of the Act discussed by the judges themselves? It conld not be from the want of knowledge as to its requirements, for he had heard one of the judges in the Court of Appeal remark that he knew what a particular rule meant, as he had drawn it himself. Again, a Queen's Counsel, who was a member of Parliament, had told the court that he knew the meaning of the Act, for he was the anthor of it. Sir William Charley had said in a work he had written that the judges were accuetomed to meet together for the purpose of consultation, but such a meeting was unknown in the present day. These meetings were, however, calculated to break dswn the barrier of prejudice which existed, but which, he was glad to be able to say, was slowly disappearing. That the Lord Chancellor entirely sympathized with the Act a letter which he held in his hand would prove. It was addressed to a solicitor by the secretary to the Lord Chancellor, and stated that his lordship was glad he had no complaint to make against the officers of the Court of Chancery, and that the subject of expense in the Chancery Division of the Supreme Court had for a considerable time occupied his earnest attention, with a view that such changes might be made as would meet the difficulties which arose out of a defeotive system. It was sad that the profession, who were the instruments by which the Act was to be cari led out, should be liable to be attacked because of its defects, whilst the judges, and not they, were liable for them. He was of opinion that it might safely be concluded that the Lord Chancellor thought that, although the Council of Judges had not been annually called, yet that it ought to have been, and that there was some difficulty in calling it; also, that when it was called it would be a machine awkward and difficult to set in motion—too heavy and cumbrous for its objects. Therefore it had been thought best to appoint a Committee of Legal Procedure, or a Costs of Litigation Committee. It -was, however, a departmental committee, consisting of judges, barristers, and only two solicitors. Neither the solicitor branch of the profession nor the public were properly represented upon it. How was the committee composed? Lord Coleridge was the chairman, Lord Justice James, Mr. Justice Bowen, Mr. J. C. Mathew, Mr. R. T. Beid, all of them either barristers or past-barristers; Mr. Hollams and Mr. C. Harrison, solicitors. Lord Shand, Sir James Hannen, and the Attorney-General, all from the barrister branch, had, In consequence of representations which had been made to the Government, been added to the committee. What conld these gentlemen know about the matters which most affected solicitors in their practice? He held in his hand a number of letters of complaints which he had received, and one of them showed that the particular work which could be effected by two attendances when the matter was in the Common Law Division required no less than thirteen attendances if it was in the Chancery Divition. The construction of the Rules of Court was in most cases determined from the draftsman's point of view, and from the reading of some of them opposite conclusions might be arrived at from those which would be derived from others. Some of them had required the decision of the Court of Appeal, and of the very jndges who had drawn them, which would not have been the case if the practical men of the solicitor branoh had been taken into the confidence of the gentlemen who drew them. He could not understand how it was that law and legislation were conclnded without consulting the very men who were best able to define the practice affected by the rules to be made. The Council of the Incorporated Law Society were consulted now and then, it was true, and it really was a fact that quite reoently they had got no less than thirteen of her Majesty's judges to dine with them, when, no doubt, they had ample opportunities of consultation. But the benchers also dined together on the very same nigfcr, and they invited several influential members of Parliament. How were the two entertainments spoken of in the newspapers? That of the benchers was referred to in much higher terms than that of the society. The members of the bar were an important element in the background in the management of the influential newspapers. Their intentions were evident by the articles which appeared in the Times. The solicitors were gaining in the esteem of the publio, both in

the House of Commons and outside of it, and it beoame necessary to throw cold water on all that they did. The Legal Procedure Committee itself originated from au article which appeared in the Timii, followed by letters signed " Lex" and one from a member of the Judicature Commission. It wag not at all difficult to define who that gentleman was, from the views to which he had given expression when on the bench. Artioles and correspondence followed, the whole press took the matter up, and eventually the Government, after consulting the Lord Chancellor, appointed a departmental committee. The Time* never after made any allusion to the cost of litigation, but advised the committee to get rid of the many steps necessary to be taken in some of the courts before a case oould be decided. The Times, at any rate, had at length taken the burden from the shoulders of the solioitors, and he hoped the aotion of the meeting would result in its being put on the right ones. He would move, " That no Committee on Legal Procedure can have the confidence of the public, or of this branoh of the profession, unless both be properly and adequately represented • and this sooiety recommends to her Majesty's Government tbe appointment of a Royal Commission to inquire into the whole question of economizing, simplifying, and accelerating the prooess and practice of tbe law." If thy passed this resolution, the publio and tbe press could no longer say the solicitors were opposed to simplification, economy, and swiftness in the practice of the law, or to ear that solicitors desired to protract litigation that they might put money in their pockets. The statistics of the High Court of Justice proved that the applications for immediate judgments were extremely numerous, and that this had been tbe case to a much greater extent than had ever been contemplated by the Judicature Commissioners themselves, which, of itself, would prove that solicitors were in the habit of >dvising their clients at the earliest possible moment so as to put an end to litigation. It would be said, in opposition to the appointment of the Royal Commission, that one hid already beeu appointed—the Judicature Commission—which had sat several times and had been the cause of ttie passsng of two Acts of Parliament. In reply to that it could be said that grievances were still complained of by the public ami that the costs of litigation had not been reduced. Emphatic action must be taken, pending the report of the Legal Procedure Committee, in order to influence the House of Commons and with a view to getting rid of the opprobrium which at present attached to them in tbe exercise of their profession. Many members cf the House of Commons rn both sides, to his personal knowledge, were in favour of the solicitor branch as against the bar, 'and felt the want of the solicitor in framing Acts of Parliament, of the interpretation of eighty per cent, of which they would have the responsibility. Tbe members of the society who occupied seats in tho House osii mnde their mark upon the Statute Book on many occasion?. He urged the society to put aside antiquated notions of dignity. The reforms of the law must come from tlie humble, workiog members of the profession. The members who signed the requisition upon which the meeting had been convened were ot the rank and file, and experienced tbe respon. sibility of interpreting laws which were not to be adminis tered in London only, but in the provinces, where tbe flower of the profession praotised in the minor courts. If the solicitors were properly represented the public would soon understand that, although the costs of litigation were heavy, they were desirous of diminishing them and also of diminishing litigation, notwithstanding that their costs would necessarily be reduced at the outset. The law could be m de more costly, more expeditions, and yet more profitable ti th« lawyer. Let them carry the motion and prove to the Government that they were not in the rear in public opinion, but were prepared to lead it, and to do so to the entire esusfaotion of tbe nation.

Mr. J. Mote seconded the motion, and objeoted to tbe committee as he had a dislike to anything of a secret character, and to being bonnd to trust implioity in any persons, however high their station. He thought that neither the solioitors nor the public were sufficiently represented upon it, and thought it would give great confidence to the general publio if the name of Buoh a person as Samuel Morley had been placed upon it.

Mr. Ford moved an amendment, "That this sooiety, whilst appreciating the oourtesy of the Lord Chancellor in appointing a Legal Procedure Committee, regrets that so few solicitors were appointed to serve thereon, and especially that neither the president nor vioe-president of this society were so appointed." He thought the meeting was muoh indebted to Mr. Kimber. He was opposed, however, to the resolution, as they had not the report of the committee before them and they ooald not say whether it wonld be satisfactory or otherwise. The position of the president for the time being had been duly recognized in the recent Bill for altering the remuneration of solicitors in conveyancing matters. He suggested that Mr. Kimber should withdraw his proposition for the appointment of a Royal Commission, at any rate, for the moment. If they adopted the motion, they might be told that they were acting prematurely and unwisely.

Mr. J. Indermaur seconded the amendment. He asserted "that far too much attention was 'paid to the bar and far too little to the solicitors in these mitten. There was no need for the public to be represented on a committee of this character. The bar knew very little upon these matters as a rule. It was really the solicitors who were acquainted with the practical working of the law who were beat fitted to give an opinion. The motion was far too extensive in its character, but the amendment was a very reasonable one. What did the bar know as to the details of the profession P They knew literally nothing as far as the simplification of "the practice was concerned. In ordinary matters, in his opinion, the costs allowed to solicitors were quite inadequate, and the whole system of the conduct of an action might be very much amended. The solicitor branch ought to be so represented that the public might be made to know that they did not desire the increase of expense or the continuation of litigation, because the continuation of litigation ■was not to their interest. They trusted that they were honest men, and would not continue litigation to the detriment of their clients, but that would work more to the interest of the barrister than of the solicitor, to whose interest it was to simplify litigation and make it as cheap and expeditious as possible. The amendment would prove that the council were not always so active as they might be.

Mr. F. K. Mdnton thought that the amendment would more adequately meet the circumstances of the case than the motion. He quite agreed that it was very undesirable that the members of the society should do or say anything that was likely to affect the conduct of the society as a whole, and although it might be said that the council had not so actively looked into the matter as some members might have liked, yet having appointed their representatives, if they complained of them, it should be done rather by way of a recommendation to them to consider it. He was strongly opposed to a motion being passed that looked anything like an attack upon the council. Mr. Justice Bowen had complained, according to a report in the Times of that morning, that his time was taken up for several hours in trying a case of tort respecting a very small matter, and the report seemed to allude to the folly of the solicitor in bringing such an action in a superior court. But it was next to impossible after the writ had been issued to take an action for tort which had been commenced in the superior court into a county court. He mentioned a case where the verdict was for £20, and the costs amounted to £96, but it was the Judicature Act that was in fault and not the solicitor.

Mr. W. Roberts (Debenham, Suffolk) was quite sure that everybody wished to pass a resolution that would be satisfactory to the general body of the profession, but oould not help thinking that the amend ment in its present form would be construed hy many of them and of the public as a mere wail. Many of the opinions expressed by Mr. Kimber had long been felt by country practitioners. He suggested that Mr. Kimber and Mr. Ford should combine to produce a resolution, and the meeting which had been called for a specific purpose would be productive of great good.

Mr. N. Haniiart could see nothing in the resolution attacking the council, and thought they should express an opinion as to the constitution of the committee before the report came out, because, if the committee happened to make some good suggestions, their opportunity would be lost. It was time that the public, should be made to understand that their interests were the interests of the solicitors. He held that litigation must always be expensive, as it was the application of expensively trained intellects to the dissection of very small affairs. There ought to be more -opportunity by a summary process of getting security for -costs. Fewer false claims would then be advanced, and

fewer false defences made, and enormous expense in litigation would be saved. He thought that the simplification of the procedure of the Mayor's Court should engage the attention of any committee now sitting. The time had arrived for energetio action on the part of the solicitor branch, in order that the public might generally know that they had their interests at heart as well as their own.

Mr. A. Beyfus hoped the motion would be carried for a Royal Commission. He regretted to have to say that it was to the interest of the barristers that solicitots should not be permitted to do the work that they ought to do. The scale of fees for drafts of length and difficulty was so low that they were obliged to send them to counsel to settle, and whilst they were not properly represented on the legal committees, this must continue to be the case. The public had no idea where the costs went to. The costs of an ordinary appeal would amount to £70 or £80, and only some £15, perhaps, would go to the solicitor ; but the public did not know this, and would not until the solicit' wwera more largely represented, and a commission appoiuted to consider the whole position of solicitors and barristers. The publio would get substantial justice when the solicitors had it, but Dot before.

Mr. Edwin Hughes moved the adjournment of the meeting in order that the council might have an opportunity of considering the amendment.

Mr. Low seconded the motion.

Mr. C. A. Betts thought the appointment of a Royal Commission would only shelve the matter for two or three years, and the motion for the adjournment would delay a question which solicitors had at their very hearts—the opprobrium which had been cast upon them for years past— whilst the amendment expressed regret and did nothing more. The question had beeu burked again and again, and this meeting proved the interest taken in it by solicitors. The council had not protected them in this or any other matter. (Question.) The taxing masters treated their costs as something to be redtioed under any circumstances, and the delays in payment were infinite, whilst no consideration whatever was paid to the interests of the working branch of the profession.

Mr. L. Emanuel spoke in the highest terms of the wisdom, sagacity, and higli-miudedness of the council, but there must be something in the traditions of the pla?e which had the unfortunate effect of enervating them, and these gentlemen for whom individually they had the highest respect, did net do collectively what they would do individually in conducting their own affairs. He felt sure the obnoxious certificate tax would be repealed if Parliament were properly approached, and the question of their relation with the other branch of the profession certainly required amendment. He wished they could meet as they were doing more frequently, and that the council would do more to advance the interests of the solicitors, and with the object of removing the mediteval prejudice which was felt against them.

Mr. Morgan suggested that the' first half of the motion should be combined with the amendment, and that the eeeond half of the motion, on which there would be probably some difference of opinion, should be moved separately. He did not concur in the observations which had beeu made which were detrimental to the council.

Mr. Melville Green (Worthing) thought the mode and time of proceeding was just one of those questions which had better be left to the council. Mr. Chamberlain had brought in a Bill dealing with bankruptcy reform, upon which he prided himself that he did not care for the advice of solicitors. At the present time the opinion of solicitors was at a lower point than usual with those in power ; there was, therefore, no use in carrying the proposition which was before the meeting. But it would come to pass that any legal reforms which had not the assistance of their knowledge and experience must fail, and it was not for them to take an inopportune moment for protesting when they would be simply supposed to be grumbling.

Mr. T. H. Devonshire was desirous the meeting should not make a serious mistake. If the council would tell them that they really would give the subject their earnest and prompt consideration, and call them together again, without unreasonable delay, it was their duty and to their interest to adjourn. He was quite sure no one in the room desired to make any serious complaint against the councilMr. Kimber entirely agreed with the amendment; but alter what had been said, thought it better to adjourn. He thought himself as good a judge as Mr. Chamberlain of the way in which public opinion was likely to move, and did not care for his boasting in the House of Commons.

Mr. W. M. Waltbks, speaking as a member of the council, thought that they would like to have an opportunity of consulting with each other, as they had not known the nature of the resolutions to he submitted to the meeting until they entered the hall. He was in accord with much that had been said, bat there might be other questions which it was necessary to consider. They might all assent to the principle involved in the resolutions, but they ought not to be so placed that they would be compelled to do something which wonld injure the responsible position they oooupied. The council were at present in amicable conBnltation with Lord Coleridge and other authorities, and they must be cautious. The effeot of the discussion would doubtless be beneficial, but if the conclusions they were to arrive at were postponed for a fortnight it would have all the necessary effeot. He hoped they would not determine upon anything that day which would look as if they were offended because the president was not on the committee, and that they were showing their spite by endeavouring to throw discredit on the committee.

Mr. Grinham Keen, also a member of the council, said that large committees of the society were always formed whenever important questions were to be oonsidered, as was the case when the charter of the society was altered, and when Lord Selborne's School of Law Bill was before Parliament, and these committees rendered great assistance to the council. The suggestions of the members would always receive every consideration at the hands of the council, as had been the case with regard to the suggestionB of the committees he had mentioned, which he thought were in every case adopted. Tf the members of the society and the members of the council worked together in the same direction, and aiding each other, a great deal of good wonld result.

The President observed that he felt his position a very peculiar one. He bad the honour to be the president of the sooiety, and as such he oocupied the ohair, and not merely as president of the council. At the same time, the meeting would readily imagine that for the last nine or ten months the functions of the president of the council bad not been slight. He was the executive of the council, and had to carry into effect the determinations of the cooncil; and at the present moment he was necessarily, perhaps, better acquainted than any one present with the difficulties that were in the way, and, he hoped he might venture to say, with what wonld be best for the profession at large. He trusted they would give him the credit that, being in this anomalous position, he intended what he said for the benefit of the whole of the profession, and not of the society alone, and as the representative of both. And he said, honestly and sincerely, that they had better net pass any resolution that day. Mr. Green bad supposed that Mr. Chamberlain had said something which he did not say. Tbe Bankruptcy Bill was founded almost entirely on the suggestions of the council, and it was quite a mistake to suppose that he had ever said anything disrespectful concerning them. There never was a period in the history of the society when they had more influence than at the present moment. If this resolution were passed tbe members would put themselves in antagonism with the council. He bad said tbey had great influence, and were represented on the Costs of Litigation Committee; but if they were to recommend a Royal Commission, on the ground substantially thi.t they were not sufficiently represented upon it, they would be doing muoh harm. The meeting objected that it was a secret committee. All committees must be secret. They did not publish what they had resolved upon until they bad made their report. When tbe Judicature Committee sat tbe council had only two members npon it. If it had sat twenty years since they would hare had none. Why should the president of the sooiety be on the committee? He was a conveyancing man, and they had upon it one of the most competent members of the counoil in Mr. Hollams, and an eminent solicitor in Mr. Harrison. He wonld perhaps have liked three or four solicitors on the committee; but, as things went, he thought that was as many as they could fairly ask for. Therefore be did not like that a resolution should be passed asking for a Royal Commission. He thought it

would injure them with the Chancellor and with the Government, and lessen the influence they undoubtedly possessed at the present time. (Cries of " Adjourn.") He would advise them not to adjourn. The annual meeting would shortly be held, and if in tho meantime the counoil had not done what the members thought they ought to have done, let them say so. But Go not let them do anything to lessen the just influence which they bad exercised.

Mr. Hughes advised the adjournment, that the oonnoil might have an opportunity for discussion. He wonld go with them in everything, except delay.

The motion to adjourn tbe meeting for a fortnight wis oarried.

On the motion of Mr. Kimber, a vote of thanks was passed to the president, and the proceedings terminated.



Tuesday, May 10.—Mr. Bartlett in the ohsir.—ITr. C. P. Fielder was elected a membar. The adjourned debate npon the question, " Are the Governmeut proposals as to Irish land reform satisfactory?" was resumed. The discission was continued by Messrs. Lloyd Jones, Qreeo, Ellis, Beddoes, Eains-Jackson, W. F. Barry, and Napier; and tbe question on being put to the meeting was deoided in the negative by a majority of three vote*. The debate for next Tuesday, the 17th inst., will be upon the question, "That the polioy of tbe Government in South African affairs has not been worthy of approval."


A meeting of this society was held on Wednesday, the 9th inst, at the Law Institution, Mr. D'A. B. Collyer in tie chair, when the following question was discussed:—"Do" the word 'children' in the statute 22 & 23 Car. 2, c. 10, include only children legitimate according to English lav, or does it also include children legitimate according to the la* of the country where they are domiciled, but illegitimate according to English law p" Mr. Parker opened tbe discussion, and argued that the word " children" included only children legitimate according to English law. He *ai supported by Mestrs. Dale, Hart, Samuel, and S. A. Jones, and opposed by Messrs. Gatey, Jenks, and Hartrnm. Tbe opener replied, and after tbe chairman had summed up, the question was decided in favour of construing the word "children" so as to include only children legitimate according to English law, by a majority of four votes.

BIRMINGHAM LAW STUDENTS' SOCIETY. A meeting of the above sooiety was held on Tuesday last at the Law Library, Bennett's-hill, Birmingham, when T. Martineau, Esq., took the ohair, and the following moot point was disoussed :—"A. alights at tbe door of an ion, leaving his servant in charge of his horse and trap, with instructions not to move away. The servanr, contrary to such instructions, drives np and down the road, and in so doing negligently causes itijiry to B. Is A. liable for the injury so caused by his servant?" The speakers on the affirmative were Messrs. Vinoe, G. T. Edwards, Shale, Rowlands, Platnauer, Kyland, and Ludlow. The sneakers on the negative were Messrs. Corbe't, Hoggins, Swinsoa, and Smitb. After an address from tbe chairman, tbe question was pot to tbe meeting, and oarried in the sffinnative by a large majority. A vote of thanks to the chairman concluded the meeting.


HOUSE OF COMMONS. New Standing Order. The following Standing Order was agreed to on the 10th of March:—"The municipal or other local authority of any town or diatriot alleging in their petition that such town or diatriot may be injuriously affooted by the provision of any Bill relating to the lighting or water supply thereof, or the raising of oapital for a*-y suoh purpose, ehall be entitled to be beard against each Bill."


Mr. Justice Kay has received the honour of Knighthood. Mr. Richard Bullock Andrews, Q.C., has been appointed a Puisne Judge of the Supreme Court of the Colony of South Australia. Mr. Justice Andrews was called to the bar at Adelaide in 1857. He was created a Queen's Counsel for the colony in 1865, and he has held the office of Attorney-General. He has been Crown Solicitor and Public Prosecutor since 1870.

Mr. Arthur Joseph Ellis, solicitor, of Maidstone, has been appointed Clerk to the Maidstone Burial Board. Mr. Ellis w8S admitted a solicitor in 1878.

Mr. Ernest Hepburn, solicitor, of Haslemere, has been appointed a Commissioner to administer Oaths in the Supreme Court of Judicature.

Mr. Griffith Jones, solicitor, of Aberystwith, has been up pointed a Perpetual Commissions for Cardigamhire, for taking the Acknowledgments of Deeds by Married Women.

Mr. W. E. A. Kime, Tolicitos, of 49, Bedford-row, W.C., has been appointed a Perpetual Commissioner in and for the County of Middlesex and the Cities of London and Westminster. Mr. Kime was admitted in Easter Term, 1875.

Mr. Alfred Bray Kempe, barrister, has been appointed Secretary to the Eoyal Commission on the Ecclesiastical Courts. Mr. Kempe is the son of the Eev. John Edward Xc-mpe, rector of St. James's, Piccadilly. He was educated at .Si. Paul's School, and he was formally scholar of Trinity College, Cambridge, where he graduated ns a wrangler in 1872. He was called to the bar at the Inner Temple in Michaelmas Term, 1873. Mr. Kempe is a member of the W. stern Circuit, and he was formerly one of the staff of the "weekly Reporter.

Mr. Charles Henry Leemino, solicitor, of Halifax, haa beee appointed a Commissioner fur taking Bail and Affidavits in the Supreme Court of the Colony of Queensland.

Mr. Alexander Campbell Onslow, Attorney-General of West Australia, has been appointed to act as Chief Justice of that colony. Mr. Onslow was called to the bar at the Inner Temple in Michaelmas Term, 1868. He was for several years Attorney-General of British Honduras, and he was appointed Attorney-General of West Australia about a year ago.

Mr. Thomas Charles Scanlen, who has been appointed Prime Minister and Attorney-General for the Cape Colony, practises as a solicitor at Cape Town, and is c member of the Colonial House of Assembly.

Mr. Francis Summers, solicitor, of Hull and Grimsby, ha* been elected an Alderman for the Borough of Kingsionupon-Hull. Mr. Summers was admitted a solicitor in 1857.


Joint Stock Companies,
Limited In Chancery.

Birmingham . v:, Midland Counties I, - Mi And In. •: \ - AsSociation, Limited.—Petition for winding up, presented May 3, directed to bo heard before too M.R. on May li. Robinson and Co, Lincoln's inn fields, solicitor for the petitioner

Bi Kingkam Brewing, Malting, A.vd Distilling Company, Limited.—Creditors are required, on or before June 15, to send their names and addresses, and tho particulars of their debts or claims, to John Percivall, Colmore row, Birmingham, and Edwin Hooper, Harborne, Stafford. June 30 at 3 is appointed for hearing and adjodicating upon the debts and claims

Carriage Co-operative Supplv Association, Limited.—Tho M.R. has fixed May 1G at 11 at his chambers for the appointment of an official liquidator

Oakham Collieries Company, Limited.—Creditors are required on or before June 3, to send their names and addresses and tho particulars of their debts or claims, to Charles Frederick Finney, 12, St George's crescent, Liverpool* June 17 at 11 is appointed for hearing and adjudicating upon tho debts and claims

iOasette, May 6.]

Anglo-Via ann An FRBBnoLD Land Company, Limited.—Petition for winding up, presented May 6, directed to be heard before Hall, V.C., on May 20. Rooko and Sons, Lincoln's inn fields, solicitors for the petitioners

Cleddau Valley Slate Quarries Company, Limited.—By an order made by the M.R., dated Apr 30, it was ordered that tho company be wound up. Andrew and Co, Great James st, Bedford row, solicitors for the petitioners

Clivigeb Cotton Shed Company, Limited.—Petition for winding up, presented May 7, directed to be hoard )>efore the M.R. on May 21. Milne and Co, Harcourt bdgs, agents for Creeke and Sandy, Burnley, solicitors for the petitioner

Gaewbux Slatf Quarry Company', Limited.—Petition for winding up, presented May 7, directed to 1k> heard before Hall, V.C.. on May 20. Hepburn and Co, Bird-in-Hand ct, Chcapaide, solicitor for the petitioner

Llandrindod Wells Freehold Land And Building Company, Limited.—Petition for winding up, presented May 0, directed to be heard before Hall, V.C., on May 20. Vaiiderpump, Gray's inn 8q, solicitor for the petitioner

Manchester Val De Travbra Paving Company, Limited.— Petition for tho compnlsory winding up or for the present voluntary winding ap to be continued, presented May 9, directed to bo heard before the M.R. on May 20. Bolton and Co, Lincoln's inn fields, agents for Symonds/Manchester, solicitor for the petitioner

New Victoria Salt Company, Limited.—By an order made by Bacon, V.C., dated Apr 30, it was ordered that the voluntary winding up of the company be continued. Heliums and Co, Mincing lane, solicitors for the petitioner

Penarth Ihon And Steel Company, Limited.—Petition for winding up, preseuted May 9, directed to be heard before Fry, J., on May 20. Marsland, St Swithin's lane, agent for Addleshaw and Warburton, Manchester, solicitors for tho petitioner

Thorp's Gawder Hall Collieries, Limited.—Hall, V.C, has by an order, dated May 0, appointed Thomas Young Strachan, Newcastle upon Tyne, to be official liquidator

Tramway Stabting And Stopping Company, Limited.—Petition for winding up, presented May 5, directed to be heard before the M.R. on May 21. Randall anil Augier, Gray's iun pi, petitioners in person

Western Distbict Co-operative Society, Limited.—By an order made by Hall, V.C., dated Apr 20 it was ordered that the society be wound up. Finch, Borough High st, solicitor for the petitioner

Gazette, May 10.]

Unlimited In Chancery.

Oldfield-boad Loan Society.—The M.R. has by an order, dated Apr 12, apppointed George Alfred Pack wood, 28, Hampson st, Salford to be official liquidator

[Gazette, May C] Patent Composite Fire Light Comp Iny.—Petition for winding up presented May 7, directed to be hoard before the V. C. on May 20. Bradley, Mark lune, solicitor for the petitioner

[Gazette, May 10.] County Palatine Of Lancaster. Well And Galloway, Limited.—Petition for the continuing of the voluntary winding up, presented May 4, directed to be heard before the V. C. on May 14, at St Georgc'sHall, Liverpool. Bateson and Co, Liverpool, solicitors for the jtctitiouers

IGazette, May 9.] Fhieudly Societies Dissolvm*. Alfbeton And District Land Investment Society,Limited. Local _ Board Office, Alfreton, Derby. May 4

Co-operative Productive Manufacturing Society, Limited,

Albert st, Newton Heath, Lancaster. Apr 28 Court Banks Of The Wiiahfe, Race Horses Inn, Kettlewell, York. May 4

SisTtRs' United Ttmplars' Mutual Benefit Society, Missionroom, Mill st, Toxteth park, Liverpool. May 2

Widows* And Orphans Institution*, Manchester Order of Odd Fellows, Commercial chbrs, Temple st, Birmingham, Apr 30

IGazette, May 0.]


MR. GEORGE BROOKE NELSON. Mr. George Brooke Nelson, solicitor, registrar of tho Dawsbury County Court, died at his residence,Denieou Hall, Leeds, on the 5 th iust., from an attack of apoplexy. Mr. Nelson was born at Nottingham in 1801. lie was admitted a solicitor in 1828, and he soon afterwards went into partnership with Mr. Hemingway, of Leeds, to whom he had been articled. The partnership was dissolved in 1839, and about seventeen years later Mr. Nelson was joined by the late Mr. John Bulmtr, and mure recently his ton, Mr. George Ilird! Nelson, who was admitted a solicitor in 1S5S, and is steward of the Manor of Hunslet, became a member of the firm. Mr. Nelson was a perpetual commissioner for the

« PreviousContinue »