Page images
PDF
EPUB

considered at all in the matter. That was not a proof of the influence they possessed.

to-morrow. These were subjects which required discussion
in order that the council might be made aware of what
practitioners had to contend against in conducting their
clients' business. He should like also that their attentioning,
should be direc'ed to the continual changes which were
being made. It was nothing but learning and unlearning.
What could have been better than the Common Law Pro-
cedure Act? No revolution was required, though many
things might have been changed and improved. There was
no necessity for repealing it and for amalgamating all the
business as was now the case. He would like that the
council should take some steps with the view of ascertaining
the opinions of solicitors on these points, and that they
should then recommend to the proper authorities what course
should, in their opinion, be taken.

Mr. A. CALKIN LEWIS thought that the meeting wished for an amendment in the present legal procedure. He suggested that a committee should be appointed, consisting of members of the society, who should consider the present procedure, and who would be able to bring up a report to the council, which would deal with a great number of matters which were at present neither more nor less than a positive scandal, and which urgently required reforming. The gentlemen upon the Legal Procedure Committee really knew very little about these matters. He would refer only to one-the power which was given to the masters, upon a reference, to deal with the costs in any way they considered fit, which power was often exercised in a grossly unjust manner, and in a way that no judge on the bench would ever think of. When a judge thought proper to deprive a plaintiff of his costs he acted upon some known principle, but, with the master, a plaintiff might recover a substantial verdict, and, notwithstanding, might be deprived of his costs. Such a committee as he had suggested would point out reforms which only needed pointing out in order to be adopted.

Mr. J. S. RUBINSTEIN asserted that the amendment could lead to no practical result. There was a motion before them suggesting the appointment of a Royal Commission, and the amendment requested the council to support any well-considered measure having for its object the promotion of economy and expedition in litigation. The amendment was a reflection upon the council, and practically affirmed that they had not exerted themselves to carry into effect these necessary reforms, or to endeavour to bring about an improvement in legal procedure. He bad prepared an amendment, as follows:-"That this meeting is of opinion that the 75th section of the Judicature Act, 1875, should be amended by providing for the adequate representation of solitors on the council constituted by such section, on the ground that their practical acquaintance with the administration of the law would enable them to render valuable assistance in carrying out the objects for which such council was appointed; and that the Council of the Incorporated Law Society should take such steps as they might deem expedient to effect such amendment." A Royal Commission was appointed only for a particular work, and, when it had reported, there was an end of it. The legal procedure required reform, and a committee had been appointed, and would report thereon, and there their fonctions would end. But the 75th section of the Judicature Act provided for an annual meeting of the Council of Judges to consider these matters, but, as a fact, that council never met; still, that was no reason why they should not meet in the future. The fact that the Lord Chancellor had appointed a committee to consider questions which the Council of Judges ought themselves to consider, appeared to him to be somewhat out of order when there was an actual statutory provision that the council should meet once a year to consider these very matters. He therefore, for that reason, would like to propose his own amendment, and hoped Mr. Crowder would withdraw his with that object. The opinion of the meeting might then be obtained upon a practical point. The president had stated at the last meeting that the society at present occupied a position of influence such as probably they had not done before. As a practising solicitor he could not agree in this opinion. Even in the matter of the accommodation provided at the new Law Courts, the solicitor was placed in a wholly inferior position to that occupied by members of the bar. Splendid provision was made for the accommodation and comfort of the barristers, whilst the solicitors were scarcely

The PRESIDENT remarked, for the information of the meetthat the council had been consulted with regard to the building, and a large committee of the council had met Mr. Street, and had asked for improved accommodation for solicitors in the rooms, corridors, and library. Mr. Street had no authority to give a definite answer to their application. The council had also been consulted with regard to the convenience of solicitors in court, and as to the means of getting rid of the horrible "well" which existed, and they had been told that one of these days a smaller court and a larger court would be fitted up experimentally, and they would be asked for suggestions with regard to it. He did not think it was correct to say that the solicitors had no voice as far as the subject of the building was concerned.

Mr. COLLINS could not see that the notion would cast any slur upon the council. Unfortunately the whole of the profession were not members of the society, and it did not, therefore, represent the entire profession. Every profession and trade had its representative body, and naturally looked to that body to make its views known. If the whole body of solicitors, and not only those who were members of the society, were to present a petition to the society embodying their views, the voice of the solicitors as a profession could be made known to the House of Commons, and throughout the length and breadth of the land. Having referred to difficulties and delays which were experienced by solicitors in the transaction of business at the offices, he stated as his opinion that a Royal Commission would be productive of the utmost advantage to solicitors. They would be called upon to give evidence before it, and the working members would have an opportunity of making their views heard, and of pointing out where the shoe pinched, and also the reason why costs accumulated. It was by no fault of the solicitors that costs were so heavy; it was simply the red tapeism of the law which was the cause of it, and which bound the solicitor fast. They were unable to move hand or foot without the assistance of counsel, and the solicitors were liable for any defect of judgment, or any error which might be construed into negligence or gross ignorance; but if they simply employed counsel and gave him a guinea for his opinion, they were relieved of the whole responsibility. Why should the solicitors accept a responsibility for a charge of 68. 8d. when, by making their clients pay a guinea for the opinion of counsel, it was shifted on to someone else's shoulders? If solicitors were compelled to seek audience by the intervention of counsel, those counsel should at least take a fair share of the responsibility. If solicitors were allowed to address the court in the conduct of their own cases, he ventured to say that at least one half or three-fourths of the expense of litigation would be got rid of. He would not venture to impute any sordid motives to the members of the bar, but many solicitors would vouch for it that in a great number of cases adjournments were permitted to take place which no solicitor would allow. And the result of this was that the unfortunate client had to pay for fresh briefing, and for bringing up witnesses again to give their evidence. These were the matters which ought to be brought to the notice of the Royal Commission, so that they might be brought to understand what were the defects which required remedying. They would never ascertain it from the mouths of the Legal Procedure Committee.. As he understood it, that committee, which was formed for the purpose of making proposals for the alteration of legal procedure, was composed almost entirely of that branch of the profession whose interest it was not to permit the views he had expressed to come before that public. It was incumbent, therefore, upon the solicitors that they should be properly represented upon that committtee, and there ought to be a Royal Commission that their views might be made known. He did not find fault with the council; on the contrary, he was of opinion that the members owed them a debt a gratitude for leaving their business and attending to the affairs of the society. But the members wished them to lay their views before those who could find a remedy for the disadvantages under which they suffered.

Mr. D. T. MILLER was firmly convinced that, neither at judges' chambers, nor at the courts and offices, did the solicitors receive the consideration to which they were enwas drawn titled; but a strong line of demarcation between them and the bar, which it seemed to be

impossible to bridge over. The time had come when their position ought to be improved. Solicitors above all others knew best what reforms were required, and they ought to be consulted and their views ascertained in the matter. They were desirous that that undeserved opprobrium which had clung to them for so long should be removed. No one would contradict for a single moment the first part of the motion, that it was the duty of solicitors to promote economy and efficiency in the administration of the law. Neither could anyone object to the solicitor being fairly paid for the work he did; but there was a much larger question which ought to be considered, which was the promotion, not only of their own interests, but of those of the great body of the public who was compelled to enter into litigation. The latter part of the amendment requested the council to support all well-considered measures tending to further these objects. He must take objection to that, because it went to imply that the council had not hitherto taken all well considered measures with this view. He ventured to think that they had done all that lay in their power with this object. But the meeting were desirous of strengthening their hands. They did not wish to act in opposition to them, but to support them in their efforts. The passing of an abstract resolution with regard to the 75th section of the Judicature Act was not what the meeting wanted, for he would prefer that it should stand adjourned for a fortnight in order that the council might have an opportunity of considering the matter and of letting the members know how they could meet together as a body, and give expression to the views they entertained with regard to the different subjects which came before the profession and before Parliament from time to time. The council would then become acquainted with the views of the whole body of their constituents and would have the advantage of their support, and they would receive a very visible accession of strength if some such process as he had suggested were adopted. It would enable them to go to the Lord Chancellor, or the House of Commons, or the Government of the day with a very great deal more power than was at present the case. They would be able to urge that they were not only bringing forward their own opinion, but that of the whole great body of solicitors, and that this opinion was valuable, and they might impress upon them the desirability of giving effect to the views which were expressed. The effect would be that much greater attention would be paid to the representatives of the society, the wishes of the profession would be made known, and great good would result, not only to them, but to the public at large.

The PRESIDENT remarked that Mr. Miller had to a certain extent invited the council to express an opinion, and he had prepared himself by speaking to some of the members of the council in order that he might make known to the meeting what that opinion was. It was to the effect that until the report of the Legal Procedure Committee was issued the subject could scarcely be properly discussed. The report might suggest everything that the meeting required or, on the other band, it might be very deficient. Would it not be taking a commonsense view of affairs to wait until the report was presented ? He would promise the meeting that a copy of the report should be immediately sent to each member of the society, and that they should be asked to make suggestions upon it. The council had authorized him to pledge them that they would call an extraordinary meeting to consider it. He had no wish to stop the discussion, but as Mr. Miller had given him the opportunity by asking the question, he ventured to make known what the council had authorized him to promise.

Mr. MILLER observed that his remarks had not been confined to the report of the Legal Procedure Committee, but there were other subjects he would like to see considered. For instance, there was the Bankruptcy Bill. That was a matter he would like to see discussed in the hall of the society. It affected a very great number of the members of the profession and of the public, and, therefore, although he was exceedingly obliged to the president, what he had suggested did not quite meet his views.

The PRESIDENT remarked that the council had appointed a committee to consider the whole subject of the Bankruptcy Bill. That committee had been very hard at work for the last six months, as he himself knew, for he had devoted much time to it. The suggestions which had been made by the committee had been laid before Mr.

Chamberlain, and an interview had been had with him upon the subject, and a draft report had been prepared by the committee.

Mr. T. H. DEVONSHIRE was very pleased at hearing what had fallen from the president. He thought it would be a good plan to adjourn the meeting until the report of the Legal Procedure Committee had been presented, and leave it to the council in the meantime to remain in communication with the committee with the object that solicitors might be adequately represented. If this course were adopted he would like the council to take some steps in order to ascertain what the views of the profession really were. The president had sug. gested a course which could not but be most acceptable to the meeting, but he would like the council to take steps to ascertain fully and clearly the views of solicitors, and particularly of those members of the profession who had to engage in the practical part of the work day by day, at the offices and at the courts, and who, from their own experience, were in a position to point out what the defects of the present procedure were, and who would be able probably to offer valuable suggestions as to remedies for the defects in question. The council could readily, if they thought it desirable, call before them any members of the solicitor branch of the profession they might suppose to be more particularly qualified to furnish them with information upon the subject, and possibly it might be thought proper to adopt this course before calling a general meeting. It was very desirable that a general meeting should be convened, but it was extremely difficult to go into matters of detail or to take up particular points at a general meeting. He would suggest for the consideration of the council whether it would not be a good plan to have at least one general meeting yearly, in addition to the ordinary annual meeting. This would be likely to conduce to a more clear and complete understanding between the council and the members of the society being arrived at.

Mr. J. PERRY GODFREY observed that a great deal had been said with respect to the status of solicitors and their reception in different places in connection with the carrying out of their professional work. The meeting knew perfectly well that law emanated principally from the judges, assisted materially by the members of the bar and, in some instances, of the solicitor branch of the profession. If the judges and barristers had had, in the first instance, the experience of the solicitors, they would better understand the procedure, and be able more readily to lay down regulations which would be of much better service than those handed down under the Judicature Act. He was not present at the last meeting, but he urged the members not to accept what according to the report in the SOLICITORS' JOURNAL appeared to have been the result of that meeting. At the last annual general meeting a resolution was passed to the effect that the time had arrived for the council to seek parliamentary legislation with the object of giving to solicitors the same facilities that were enjoyed by the bar at the present time. At the annual provincial meeting at Sheffield a similar resolution, but stronger in its terms, had been passed, because it was acknowledging the suggestion made by the council that it was their intention to bring a measure into Parliament with that object. The society had now arrived close upon its next annual meeting, and he believed communications had passed between the council and the Inns of Court, and that the council were inclined to accept the proposals of the Inns of Court-namely, that solicitors who had passed the prelimi nary examination should be called to the bar upon passing the bar final examination, after having kept terms for one year. He would like to see the same advantages extended to solicitors as were given to the bar, which he believed would have the effect of raising the status of the solicitor branch to a much higher degree than anything else that could be done. From the president's address at Sheffield he inferred that the Inns of Court had returned a negative answer to the com munications of the council, and the Inns of Court had returned no answer at all to their subsequent communication; but now, at any rate, they seemed inclined to make a little concession; but he trusted the council would not accept any concession unless it was exactly similar to that which they had granted to the bar. The concessions made by the Inns of Court applied only to those solicitors who kept terms for one year who had passed the Incorporated Law Society's preliminary examination. That examination was instituted in 1865, therefore the senior members of the solicitor branch would be entirely shut out from the concession, and would have to pass a school boy's examination before they could

derive any advantage from it. If the council were to adopt the measures suggested by the Inns of Court, they would be acting unjustly towards the senior members of the branch of the profession to which they belonged.

Mr. JOSEPH MOTE thought it not unreasonable to require that a person should have passed the preliminary examination, but suggested that the objection which had been raised should be met by making the rule apply only to the future, and that it should not be retrospecive in its action. He thought that the mere fact of a person having already attained the status of a solicitor ought to be considered as a proof that the council, whose passport he was compelled to hold, had exercised sound judgment with regard to his fitness to be a member of the profession. In his opinion, a solicitor of ten years' standing ought not to be required to pass the bar final examination before he could practise as a barrister.

Mr. S. J. DEBENHAM thought there had been a great deal too much comparison of solicitors and barristers, and it had been said that solicitors did not occupy a proper position in the estimation of the public, or meet with proper attention at the courts of justice. He could not agree with the first part of that proposition, for at the present day a lawyer's letter had just as much influence as it had fifty years since. He considered the solicitors held a very proper position in connection with the public, and were treated with proper respect and regard. With reference to their reception at the courts by the officials, he must say with respect to one class of those gentlemen, and that the highest, that no solicitor would voluntarily, if he could spare his managing clerk to take his place, go before a judge in chambers, unless he knew what judge was going to preside. Some of them made it a practice to constantly snub the solicitor. But he had experienced no want of courtesy from the inferior officers, and he thought this was a matter which depended very much upon the solicitors themselves. He had been informed by a friend that he had handled and seen a brief in an important action of trespass which had been delivered one hundred years since, and which was indorsed "Her Majesty's Attorney-General, four guineas, two guineas." At that time solicitors' fees were what they were at present, barristers' fees were now what the meeting knew of. As regarded the remark that had been made to the effect that the council and the society did not represent the solicitor branch of the profession, he could not consider it justified or well founded, because it was said that the majority of the profession did not belong to it. All that could be said was that the profession did not represent the society, not that the society did not represent the profession. It was a part of the profession, and perhaps the most important part, and he did not know what better could be done than to leave its constitution as it was. meeting would be quite safe in leaving the subject in the hands of the council, who seemed inclined to do the best they could for solicitors.

The

Mr. KIMBER was desirous of withdrawing his motion in consequence of the remarks which had been made by the president, and of moving that the meeting should adjourn to another day. It was exceedingly desirable that the discussion of the objects the meeting had in view should be kept alive, as it was at present, in the eyes of the public. He had received several congratulatory letters from members of Parliament expressing their pleasure that the meeting had been called; and he was sure those gentlemen felt that the Legal Procedure Committee, as at present constituted, was not a public advantage. As for the argument which Mr. Crowder had advanced that the solicitor branch had arrived at a crisis, he would only say that it would never do to pass a resolution during a crisis, and such a resolution as that proposed, which simply expressed an abstract idea. The publio would at once say, "You have a fine opportunity, what are you going to do with it ?" This crisis should be taken very seriously into consideration. An opportunity had presented itself such as the solicitors never had offered to them before, and if they failed to make use of it they would deserve to remain under the stigma which the public and the press seemed to be delighted to cast upon them.

The PRESIDENT remarked that if Mr. Kimber would with. draw his motion by leave of the meeting, then Mr. Crowder's

amendment would be before them as a substant ve motion and Mr. Kimber could move the adjournment.

Mr. CROWDER observed that the remarks both of Mr. Kimber and the chairman went to carry out what the meeting were desirous of obtaining. He was desirous that the meeting would not rush too hastily into any action as they might upset everything. He would not allow his amendment to stand in the way if Mr. Kimber withdrew his resolution and the president's suggestions were carried into effect.

Mr. KIMBER thought that if the motion and amendment were withdrawn the influence of the meeting would be lost, and the public would naturally ask what they had met about and what they had been discussing. If they withdrew the motion and amendment they would be in a state of vacuum.

The PRESIDENT said they would be a state of vacuum until after the issue of the report of the Legal Procedure Committee.

[ocr errors]

Mr. J. E. Fox felt certain that no one intenlelt blame the council. The feeling was that solicitors could not continue to hear the opprobrium which was heaped upon them by the outside public. Now that an opportunity presented itself, something should be done with it. Solicitors did not occupy the same position, nor were they treated with the same respect as were the members of the bar. His experience of judges' chambers was, however, that there, of all places, the solicitor was treated as a gentleman. The judge himself treated the solicitor properly and he was so treated by the officials in the presence of the judge. It would be a great injustice to the solicitor branch if the council were to adopt the suggestions of the Inns of Court. Their ranks had been thrown open to the members of the bar. What benefit had been derived from this that solicitors should accept from the Inns of Court anything less in return? The blame for the heavy costs of litigation which was thrown upon the solicitors should be properly placed on the shoulders of the barristers. They took the fees; but did they do the work? And were they liable in any way, as was the case with the solicitor, for neglect? Certainly not. This was the fault of the solicitors themselves in some measure. The council had done their duty, but the solicitors had not opened their mouths to assist in the work. He asserted that the solicitor and the barrister ought to be placed on the same footing. The solicitor was in every way as well qualified to conduct his case as was the barrister, and ought to have an opportunity of doing so if it was the wish of his client. He did not say that he should be allowed to go against the wish of his client in the matter.

Mr. C. A. BETTS thought that the subject had been thrashed out and moved the previous question, but was ruled out of order by the president, there being an amendment already before the meeting.

Mr. F. R. PARKER asked the president, as representing the council, to say whether they would object to a committee being appointed from the members of the society for the purpose of receiving and considering suggestions on the various points which had been discussed at the meeting and then communicate them to the council? They would then have before them the views of those who had not yet had an opportunity of being heard, and the council would be able to receive a digest of these suggestions before acting upon them, and so be able to take some proper step which might seem right as regarded the matter. He certainly was of opinion that the solicitor branch was not adequately represented on the Legal Procedure Committee. He could not believe that a committee which was empowered to regulate common law, chancery, probate, and perhaps bankruptcy practice could be properly constituted when there were only two solicitors upon it. They were entitled to a larger representation and ought to have it. He very much wished the council would meet the members more frequently and give them an opportunity of expressing their views, and he thought the council would be able to speak with greater authority if this were the case. He might mention an instance which had struck him forcibly. The council presented a petition to Parliament with regard to the abolition of the Chief Justiceship of the Common Pleas and the office of Chief Baron of the Exchequer. That memorial was put forward as the memorial of the Incorporated Law Society of the United Kingdom, but he believed it never came before the members or beyond the doors of the council room. If rumour spoke truly, it was a memorial of a majority of the council, not the unanimous memorial of the whole.

The PRESIDENT stated that, as a matter of fact, the memorial was unanimous.

Mr. PARKER said that in that case the statement which had appeared in the public papers ought to have been corrected. It went forth to the public at large as the memorial of the society, whilst it certainly was the memorial of the council alone. One subject he would more particularly mention, which affected greatly those solicitors who had to deal with election business. There was a Bill before Parliament which had for its object the reforming of the whole practice of elections, and the question that affected them was that of the privilege of solicitors, whether it existed or not, and whether it ought to exist or not. The commissioners had stated that there was no such thing as privilege of any sort with them, and that solicitors were not exempt from this ruling. He had been advised by counsel that this was not the case, and that the privilege of solicitors undoubtedly existed. If a client had a petition presented against him, it was obvious that it was necessary for him to tell the whole truth to his solicitor, who would also have to ascertain what evidence it was necessary to produce. How could this be done if the solicitor was liable to be compelled to repeat what the witnesses had told him? In all other matters the client relied on the communications which passed between him and the solicitor being absolutely secret, and not to be divulged; but under the Bill, solicitors were to be compelled to make known before commissioners that which they had learned in their professional character. Again, any solicitor who happened to be scheduled in the commission, and found guilty of bribery, could not be deprived of his vote until he had had an opportunity of being heard in answer to the charge, but, supposing him to be an election agent, he could not, for seven years, engage in the slightest election business, whether he was guilty or not. He had no notice of the charge and no opportunity of being heard, but, if he was scheduled, the consequences he had referred to immediately followed. As an individual member of the society he thought they were much indebted to Mr. Kimber for the trouble he had taken in bringing forward this discussion.

Mr. RUBINSTEIN, having regard to the remarks that had been made by the president, moved that the meeting do adjourn to another day to be settled by the council.

Mr. KIMBER was willing to accede to this course, upon the distinct understanding that the report should be circulated amongst the members as soon as it was received, in order that they might have an opportunity of making suggestions

upon it.

The PRESIDENT thought he was in a position to pledge the council as to this. The only question was one of time. The council would have to receive the suggestions before fixing the time of meeting. The latest information the council had with regard to the report was that the committee would have at least two more meetings, and that the report was not yet even in draft. That was about a week ago and was authoritative.

Mr. FORD urged that the meeting should come to some moderately reasonable resolution recognizing the valuable services which had been rendered by the council, and at the same time recognizing the feeling of the meeting that the suggestions made ought to be carried out, and the sooner the better. The president had given them a very valuable assurance, for which they were very much indebted. He had told them that, as soon as the report was issued, he would send a copy to every member of the society, and that they would be summoned together in special meeting to consider and deal with the report. It appeared to him that almost every question brought forward to-day might be considered deliberately with the report before them. He urged them not to adjourn without coming to a resolution, or they would be told that they had talked for two days and had done nothing, and that they had simply made a mistake by calling the meeting before the report of the Legal Procedure Committee had been issued. He would have liked

them to have passed the following resolution :-"That this meeting, in view of the statements made by the president, expresses satisfaction at the recent efforts made by the governing body of the society to secure a reduction in the cost of litigation and to simplify the process of law, and urges the council to continue its labours in order to reform those defects in legal procedure of which solicitors of the Supreme Court, as practical lawyers, are the best judges.'

Mr. R. TCDD seconded the motion for the adjournment, and thought it would be a great mistake to act hastily. Mr.

Kimber's motion had been pretty well dealt with by the various speakers, and Mr. Crowder's amendment ought not to be passed because it cast a slur upon the council. Thepresident had promised that they should be called together again, and the members would be acting wisely in accepting the offer of the council. If they did not do so, they would have no right to complain if the council modified their course hereafter.

Mr. E. W. HAINES did not know that anyone could point to a single Act of Parliament which had been carried on a resolution of a Royal Commission. If the solicitors were desirous of getting any Acts of Parliament passed in their favour, they could only do so by pressure. They had plenty of power if they chose to exercise it, and it was no use to wait for support from anyone else. Public opinion was ripe for the admission of solicitors to the bar, and if they, as solicitors, insisted upon this point, they would obtain it, but if they idled about with Royal Commissions they would get nothing. If the meeting decided to adjourn, some steps should be taken to bring the matter before the public, either by articles in the newspapers or by some other

means.

Mr. INDERMAUR strongly objected, after they had met twice and turned the hall into a debating room, to separating without coming to a resolution. That would be to a certain extent to cast a slur on the council. Some reasonable resolution ought to be passed, expressing their confidence in the council and their wish to strengthen their hands. It would be absurd to adjourn the meeting with a resolution like that of Mr. Kimber's upon the paper, and to bring it forward when the report of the Legal Procedure Committee had been issued. A fresh meeting ought to be held.

Mr. MILLER observed that if the meeting were adjourned as the president had suggested, they would simply have before them at some future time the report of the Legal Procedure Committee, and the subjects which had been referred to, and which were not included in the matters to be deliberated upon by the committee, would not be considered. He would have liked to have heard from the council whether some method could not be devised by which the various opinions which had been expressed with regard to the relation of the two branches of the profession, and other matters, should have fuller and further discussion, so that they might arrive at something tangible. At present they proposed to separate without doing anything at all.

The PRESIDENT remarked that the annual meeting would be held on the 8th of July, and anyone was at liberty to suggest what ho pleased at that meeting, and that would be the best time for considering general subjects. If it were deemed necessary, the council would call an extraordinary meeting for the same day and hour as the annual meeting to consider the report of the committee, in order that there might be no delay.

The motion for the adjournment was carried, and the proceedings terminated with a vote of thanks to the president, moved by Mr. KIMBER and seconded by Mr. MUNTON.

LAW STUDENTS' JOURNAL.

LAW STUDENTS' DEBATING SOCIETY. Tuesday, May 24.-Mr. Bower in the chair. --Messrs. J. H. Grant, J. W. B. Stanley, and Mr. T. O. Jackson were elected members. The report of the committee appointed on the 5th of April last to consider the rules of the society was laid before the meeting, and it was resolved that the proposed new rules annexed to such report be printed for circulation prior to the discussion to be held thereon. The society then proceeded with the discussion of the question appointed for debate: "Does the trustee of a bankrupt lessee estop himself from disclaiming the lease by severing and selling the fixtures? Mr. Green opened the debate in the affirmative, and a discussion followed, in which Messrs. Birkett, Kirk, Fox, and Neale took part. Mr. Green then replied, and the president having summed up, the question was put to the meeting and decided in the negative. Next Tuesday, the 31st inst., a debate, to be opened by Mr. Mun-ton, on the Government Bankruptcy Bill will take place.

[ocr errors]

LEGAL APPOINTMENTS.

Mr. E. H. BIGGIN, solicitor, of 61, Chancery-lane, and 80, Delancy-street, Gloucester-gate, Regent's-park, has been appointed a Perpetual Commissioner for taking the Acknowledgments of Married Women for the County of Middlesex, and also for the Cities of London and Westminster.

Mr. JOHN GORRIE, Chief Justice of Fiji, has received the honour of Knighthood. Sir John Gorrie was admitted a member of the Faculty of Advocates in Scotland in 1856. He was appointed Substitute-Procureur and AdvocateGeneral in Mauritius in 1869, and in the following year he became a puisne judge for that colony. He has been Chief Justice of Fiji since 1876.

Mr. GRIFFITH DAVIES DEW, solicitor, of Llangefni and Menai Bridge, Anglesey, has been appointed a Perpetual Commissioner for taking the Acknowledgments of Deeds by Married Women for the County of Anglesey.

Mr. JAMES EDGELL, solicitor, of Kingston, has been appointed Clerk to the Thames Ditton School Board. Mr. Edgell was admitted a solicitor in 1867, and is clerk to the Kingston Board of Guardians, Assessment Committee, and the Rural Sanitary Authority, and superintendent

registrar for the district.

Mr. GRIFFITH HUMPHREY PUGH EVANS, barrister, has been appointed an additional Member of the Council of the Governor-General of India. Mr. Evans is the son of Mr. John Evans, of Lovesgrove, Cardiganshire. He was formerly scholar of Lincoln College, Oxford, where he graduated third class in classics in 1862, and he was called to the bar at Lincolu's-inn in Trinity Term, 1867.

Mr. FREDERICK JAMES FEGEN, barrister, has been created a Civil Companion of the Order of the Bath. Mr. Fegen was called to the bar at Lincoln's-inn in Trinity Term, 1869. He is a member of the Western Circuit, and he is Naval Counsel to H. R.H. the Duke of Edinburgh.

Mr. GEORGE FREDERICK GRAY, solicitor, of 30, Ludgate Hill, has been appointed a Commissioner to administer Oaths in the Supreme Court of Judicature.

Mr. HENRY LELAND HARRISON, barrister, has been appointed to act as Commissioner of Police at Calcutta. Mr. Harrison was educated at Westminster and at Christ Church, Oxford. He was called to the bar at Lincoln's-inn in Michaelmas Term, 1870, and he has been a member of the Bengal Civil Service since 1860.

Mr. RICHARD NICHOLAS HOWARD, solicitor, of Weymouth and Portland, has been appointed a Magistrate for the Borough of Weymouth. Mr. Howard was, for some time, one of the borough aldermen, and he is now serving the office of mayor for the second time. He was admitted a solicitor in 1855, and he is one of the coroners for the county of Dorset, and clerk to the Portland Local Board.

Mr. JAMES MACDONALD has been appointed Chief Justice of the Province of Nova Scotia.

Mr. JOHN THOMAS MARSHALL, solicitor, of Devizes and Marlborough, has been appointed a Commissioner to administer Oaths in the Supreme Court of Judicature.

Mr. CHARLES LILLEY, Chief Justic of Queensland, has received the honour of Knighthood. Sir C. Lilley was called to the bar at Brisbane in 1861. He was for several years a puisne judge of the Supreme Court of the colony, and he was appointed Chief Justice of Queensland in 1878.

Mr. HERBERT JOHN LLOYD, solicitor, of Carmarthen and Haverfordwest, has been appointed Registrar of the Carmarthen County Court and District Registry (Circuit No. 31), to act jointly with the present registrar, Mr. Jeremiah Walter Lloyd. Mr. H. J. Lloyd was admitted a solicitor in 1865, and has been for several years registrar of the Haverfordwest County Court, but has now ceased to practise at Haverfordwest.

Mr. WILLIAM HENRY POWELL, solicitor (of the firm of Powell & Browett), of Birmingham, has been appointed Perpetual Commissioner for taking the acknowledgements of Deeds by Married Women, in and for the County of Warwick.

Mr. JAMES PRENDERGAST, Chief Justice of New Zealand, has received the honour of Knighthood. Sir J. Pren

dergast is the youngest son of the late Mr. Michael Prendergast, Q.C., recorder of Norwich, and judge of the Sheriffs' Court of the City of London. He was born in 1826, and was educated at St. Paul's School and at Queen's College, Cambridge, where he graduated B. A. in 1849. He was called to the bar at the Middle Temple in Easter Term, 1856. He was Attorney-General of New Zealand from 1865 till 1875, when he was appointed Chief Justice of the colony.

Mr. JOHN WILLIAMS RANDALL, solicitor (of the firm of Brundrett, Randall, & Govett), of 10, King's Bench-walk,. Temple, bas been appointed a Perpetual Commissioner for taking the Acknowledgments of Deeds by Married Women for the County of Middlesex and the Cities of London and Westminster.

Mr. THOMAS REES, solicitor, of Cowbridge, has been appointed a Perpetual Commissioner for Glamorganshire for taking the Acknowledgments of Deeds by Married

Women.

Mr. WILLIAM JOHNSTON RITCHIE, Chief Justice of the Dominion of Canada, has received the honour of Knighthood.. Sir W. Ritchie was born in 1813. He was called to the bar in New Brunswick in 1838, and he was created a Queen's Counsel for that colony in 1854. He became a puisue judge 1865, a puisne judge of the Supreme Court of the Dominion in New Brunswick in 1855, Chief Justice of the colony in of Canada in 1875, and Chief Justice of Canada in 1879.

Mr. WILLIAM WARREN STREETEN, Chief Justice of Sierra Leone, has been appointed a Companion of the Order of St. Michael and St. George. The Chief Justice was educated at Tunbridge School. He was called to the bar at Lincoln'sinn, in Trinity Term, 1857, and he formerly practised in the Court of Chancery. He was Queen's Advocate for the West African Settlements from 1874 till 1880, when he was ap-pointed Chief Justice of Sierra Leone.

Mr. WILLIAM CHARLES WEBB, barrister, has been ap-pointed to act as Revenue Judge and Chief Presidency Magistrate at Bombay. Mr. Webb was called to the bar at Lincoln's-inn in Easter Term, 1868, and he is Government Professor at the Law School at Bombay.

Mr. CHARLES WADE WELBY, solicitor, of Nottingham, has been appointed a Perpetual Commissioner for Counties of Notts and Derby and County of the Town of Nottingham.. Mr. ROBERT WILLCOCK, solicitor, of Wolverhampton, has been appointed a Commissioner to administer Oaths in the Supreme Court of Judicature.

[blocks in formation]

DINAS DHU SLATE QUARRIES COMPANY, LIMITED.-Petition for winding up, presented May 16, directed to be heard before the M.R., on May 28. Chinnery and Co, Fenchurch st, agents for Mason, Chester, solicitor for the petitioner ENFIELD STUD AND RACE COURSE COMPANY, LIMITED.-Petition for winding up, presented May 3, directed to be heard before the M.R., on May 11. Rumney, Walbrook, solicitor for the petitioner GAEWERN SLATE QUARRY COMPANY, LIMITED.-Petition for winding up, presented May 12, directed to be heard before V.C. Hall, on May 27. Gregory, Rowcliffes, and Co, Bedford row, agents for Davies, Dolgelly, solicitor for the petitioner THORP'S GAWBER HALL COLLERIES, LIMITED.-Creditors are required, on or before June 21, to send their names and addresses and the particulars of their debts or claims to Thomas Young Strachan, Newcastle-upon-Tyne. July 1 at 12 is appointed for hearing and adjudicating upon the debts and claims iGazette, May 20.] AUSTRALIAN MEAT COMPANY, LIMITED.-Creditors who have not already been allowed as creditors are required, on or before Oct

« PreviousContinue »