Page images
PDF
EPUB

CASES OF THE WEEK.

consols so bequeathed to add intended for the issue (bad there been snob) of her or them so dying without issue, anto the survivors or survivor of the four daughters, equally

if more than one, and if but one, to such one. The wife MARRIED WOMAN-REVERSIONARY INTEREST IN PER

died before the testator ; the four daughters 8 arrived him.. SONALTY-SETTLEMENT OF PERSONAL ESTATE_UNAUTHO

Three of them married, and died leaving children. The RIZED INVESTMENT IN LAND-20 & 21 VICT. C. 57.-lo a

fourth daughter did not marry, and having attained the age of cage of Durrant to Stoner, before the Court of Appeal on

fifty-four she petitioned for a transfer to her of the one-fourth. the 20th inst., & question arose as to the power of a mar

of the consols to the dividends of which she was entitled ried woman to convey land which represented a rever

| for her life, on the ground that, if she died without issue, sionary interest in personal estate to which she was en.

she would be entitled to that one-fourth absolutely as titled under a settlement made before the Act 20 & 21

the survivor of the four daughters, and that she might Vict. c. 57 (known as Malins' Act), which authorized

now be treated as past the age of child-bearing, and, married women to alienate reversionary interests in personalty, the trustees of the settlement having made an

consequently, it might be assumed that she would die

without ingne. FRY, J., held that she was entitled to the authorized investment of part of the trust funds in land. In 1842, a marriage settlement was made of personalty of

transfer. He was of opinion, following the decision of the wife, on trust for the wife and the husband and the

Jessel, M.R., in the somewhat similar case of Malen v.

Taylor (45 L. J. Ch. 569), that the words “survivors or children of the marriage. The settlement contained no

survivor" meant those of the olass of daaghters who were power to invest the trust funds in the purchase of land.

at the time when the death witboat issue took place the În 1853, the trustees, at the request of the husband and

survivors of the class. The fourth danghter answered this wife, laid out part of the trust funds in the purchase of land. In 1875 a deed was executed, to which the survive

description, and ag, by reason of her age, she might be ing trustee, the husband and wife, and their two danghters

taken to be past child-bearing, she was entitled to the (who were the only children of the marriage) and their hus

fand absolutely. If this construotion was not sound, the bands were parties, by which the trustee (at the request of the

original gift to the daughters, being & gift of the income other parties) conveyed the land to such uses as the husband

without any limitation, was equivalent to a gift of the and wife should jointly by deed appoint, and in de

capital, and there was a gift over in the event of the fault of appointment as the survivor should by deed or

| death of a danghter leaving children, and also in the event will appoint, and in default of appoiotment, after the

of her death without leaving obildren, and leaving sisters death of the survivor of the husband and wife, to the use

or & sister surviving her; bat there was no gift over in of the two daughters respectivels in fee in moieties, for their | the event of ber dying without issue, and leaving no sister separate use. This deed was acknowledged by the daughters. surviving her. Consequently, the original gift remaioet The wife died without haviog had any other children,

in operation.-SOLICITORS, Letts Brothers. and the husband then contracted to sell the property. The purchager objected that he could not make a title, on the ground that the land represented personal estate,

WILL-CONSTRUCTION - GIFT OVER OF LEGAQY ON and that the daughters had no power to deal with their

DEATH OF LEGATEE BEFORE IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN PAID reversionary interests in personalty under the origioal settle

TO HIM-VALIDITY.-In a case of Chaston v. Seago, before ment. Hall, V.C., held that a good title could not be

Fry, J., on the 18th inst., the question arose whether a gift made. The Court of Appeal (JESSEL, M.R., and BAGGAL

over of a legacy, in case of the death of the legatee before the LAY and Lush, L.JJ.) held that, whatever rigbt the

legacy or any part thereof should have been paid to bim, was daughters might have against the trustees in respect of

void for uncertainty. It was contended that it was, upod the breach of trust, still they had an interest in the land

| the authority of Áutchin v. Mannington (1 Ves. jan.366)

and Martin v. Martin (14 W. R. 986, L. R. 2 Eq. 404). in which the trust fund bad actually been invested, and that under the Fines and Recoveries Act they could make

FRY, J., was of opinion, upon the language of the particular an effectual conveyance of that interest as they had affected

will, that the testator was referring, not to the time of actual to do by the deed of 1875. Consequently, the father

payment of the legacy, but to the time when payment ought could make a good title to the purchaser under the power of

to be made according to the directions of the will. That appointment created by that deed. At any rate, if the

being so, the case of In re Arrowsmith's Trusts (9 W, R. daughters joined in the conveyance to the purchaser (as

258, 2 De G. F. & J. 474) was almost exactly io point, and they were willing to do), every difficulty would be re

was an authority for holding that the gift over was valid. His moved.--SOLICITORS, Sole, Turner, & Knight ; Scarlett.

lordship was of opinion that that was à sound decision, notwithstanding what was said of it by Malins, V.C., in Bubb v.

Padwick (28 W. R. 382, L. R. 13 Ch. D. 517). The words APPEAL FOR Costs—TRUSTEE DEPRIVED OF Costs.-In

in Hutchin v. Mannington and Martin V. Martin were esa case of Farrow v. Austin, before the Court of Appeal on

sentially different. In the latter case it was the time of the 21st inst., the preliminary objection was raised ibat the

actual receipt which was referred to.- SOLICITORS, Clarke, appeal was for costs only, and could not, therefore, be enter.

Woodcock, d Ryland; Whites, Renard, & Co.; Walker tained. The action was brought by the tenant for lite of the

Battiscombe. residue of the testator's estate, who was also the executrix, for the administration of the testator's estate ; an ad STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS - MORTGAGE - FORECLOSURE ministration decree was made; and, op further consideration, Action-3 & 4 WILL. 4, c. 27, ss. 2, 24, 40—7 WILL. 4, AND Malins, V.C., on the ground that the action was unneces. | 1 Vict. c. 28–37 & 38 Vict. c. 57, s. 1.-In a case of sary, declined to allow the plaintiff any costs, and ordered Harlock y. Ashberry, before Fry, J., on the 20th inst., the her to pay the costs of one of the inquiries wbich bad question arose whether a simple foreclosure action is an been directed. The Court (JESSEL, M.R., and BAGGALLAY action to recover land, or an action to recover the money and Lush, L.JJ.) overruled the objection, and reversed the secured by the mortgage, and whether, therefore, it is decision of the Vice-Chancellor, giving the plaintiff her costs governed by sections 2 and 24, or by section 40 of the Statute out of the estate.-SOLICITORS, F. Jones ; Sadgrove.

of Limitations (3 & 4 Will. 4, o. 27). Fry, J., held that such an action is an action to recover land, and is, therefore,

not within section 40. Its object, he said, is to put an end Will-CONSTRUCTION—SURVIVOR.-In the case of David. to the mortgagor's right in equity to recover the land, though son v. Kimpton, before Fry, J., on the 17th inst., a question the mortgagee's estate bad become absolute at law. This was arofe as to the meaning of be word "survivor" in a | the view of Lord St. Leonards in Wrixon y. Vize (3 Dr. & will. A testator gave the dividends of a sum of £10,000 W. 104), and it seemed to bave been the view of the Court console to bis wife for her life, and after her death be gave I of Appeal in the recent case of Heath v. Pugh (L. R. 6 Q. B. tbe dividends of the copsols upto and equally between bis | D. 345). Another point arose upon the construction of the four daughters, and from and immediately after their re. Act 7 Will. 4, and i Vict. o. 28, which provides that "it spective deaths be gave the consols to their children, in shall be lawful for any person entitled to, or claiming under, any the proportion of ope-fourth part thereof unto and equally | mortgage of land to make an entry, or bring an action at la between the children of each daughter, and in case any or suit in equity, to recover such land at any time witam one or more of the daughters should die witbont any issue | twenty years next after the last payment of any part of the ber or them surviving, he gave the part or parts of the principal money or interest secured by such mortgage, although more than twenty years may have elapsed since the dispelled by the more recent cases of Watts v. Kelson (19 time at which the right to make such entry, or bring such w. R. 338, L. R. 6 Ch. 166), and Ray V. Oxley action or suit in equity, shall have first acorded." The L. R. 10 Q. B. 360), which had laid down the law period of twenty years is now by the Act 37 & 38 Vict. in accordance with the old authorities, and showed that, in C. 57, 8.1, reduced to twelve years. The question was, by any case, a defined way actually used at the time would whom must the “payment" there referred to have been pass under a grant of all ways now used.-SOLICITORS, Ew. made, the words not being liniited, as they are in bank di Partington; Venn $ Woodcock. section 40, which relates to actions to recover mortgage money, to payment “by the person by whom the samo sball be payable, or bis agent.' The question arose under these ciroumstances. A legal mortgage of land was CASES BEFORE THE BANKRUPTCY made in 1849. The last payment of interest was made in

REGISTRARS. 1859, and no payment of principal was made. In 1878 one

(Before Mr. REGISTRAR Pepys, acting as Chief Judge). of tbe tenants of tha estate, in consequence of a notice given to him by the mortgagee that be claimed the estate, paid

May 24.-EF parte Lindsay, Re Thornton. the mortgagee a balf-year's rent. This payment was made

Leave given to trustee of bankrupt partner to inspect partwithout the knowledge of the mortgagor. The tenant paid

Dership books, notwithstanding the fact of an action having kis next half-year's rent to the mortgagor, and afterwards

been brought against one of the continuing partners in

which the solicitors for the plaintiffs were also the solicitors for gave op possession of the premises which he occupied to

| the trustee, but the inspection was limited to the transactions him. The question was whether the payment of the

in which the bankrupt had been a partner. £5 was a payment which, under the Act 7 Will. 4, and 1 Vict. c. 28, would keep alive the mortgagee's right

This was an application on behalf of the trustee under to bring a foreclosure action. The payment was made before

the bankruptcy of Wm. W. Thornton for an order for the the Act 37 & 38 Vict. C. 57, came into operation, which

produotion and inspection, for the purpose of investigating was not till the 1st of January, 1879. FRY, J., held that

the bankrupt's affairs, of all books belonging to the bankthe payment bad kept alive the right, though it was not

rapt, either solely or jointly with H. G. Williams and H. made by the mortgagor or bis agent. He was of opioion

Bennett, or containing any entries relating to the business that the payment might be made by the mortgagor or bis

transactions of the firm of Henry Bennett & Co., or of the agent, or by any person who, as between the mortgagor and the

bankrupt as a partner of such firm, or individually, both mortgagee, was liable to make a payment to the mortgagee

prior to the dissolution of the firm and subsequently. in respect of the mortgage. A payment by a mere stranger

Previously to the 1st of January, 1880, the bankrupt carwould not do ; but the effect of a mortgage of land was

ried on business at 26, Lime-street, as a tea merchant, ia that a tenant of the mortgaged property became liable to

partnership with Messrs. Bennett & Williams, under the pay his rent to the mortgagee, who might at any time re

style of Henry Bennett & Co. quire bim to do so. The tenant was, therefore, a person

Notice of the dissolution of the partnership was adverwho, as between the mortgagor and mortgagee, was liable

tised in the London Gazette of the 2nd of January, 1880, to make a payment to the latter in satisfaction of the mort

and such notice stated that the firm had been dissolved by gage debt, and the payment by him would keep alive the

mutual consent on the 31st of December, 1879, and that mortgagee's right to foreclose.-SOLICITORS, T. H. Barllett ;

all debts due to or owing by the firm would be received Gregory, Rowcliffe, d: Co.

and paid respectively by Williams & Thornton.

The trustee stated his belief that, for several months sub

sequently to the dissolution, the bankrupt attended regularly EVIDENCE — ADMISSIBILITY - UNSTAMPED DOCUMENT — at the offices of the firm ; that a banking account continued TIME FOR TAKING OBJECTION.-In a case of Thomas v. to be kept with Messrs. Barclay & Co, in the name of the Hounsell, before Fry, J., on the 21st inst., a document firm ; and that the bankrupt continued to transact business wbich created a charge on some property was tendered in at the said offices in his own name, or in that of the firın, evidence, and was received without any objection. The jointly with H. G. Williams. He had been unable to obtain next day, on the continued bearing of be case, Fry, J., Jinspection of any of the books of the firm, or to get from the Doticed that the document was not stamped, and expressed bankrupt any account or statement of his affairs in conneca doubt whether it could be received in evidence. Counsel |tion with it, or of his dealings sabsequently to the dissoluurged that, as the objection had not been taken by the tion, or of the state of accounts between him and H. G. Wil. officer of the court, or by anyone, when the document was liams, in reference to transactions subsequently to the 1st tendered, it was too late to take it after the document had of January, 1880, or any account of the property of the firm been admitted in evidence. FRY, J., acceded to this view. come to the hands of the bankrupt and Williams. An ap-SOLICITORS, R. Davies; T. H. Strang ways.

plication had been made to the solicitor of Williams for an inspection, and refused.

Mr. Williams in bis affidavit stated that after the 1st of EASEMENT-RIGHT OF WAY-OWNER OF TWO ADJOIN- January, 1880, to the best of his knowledge and belief, the ING CLOSES-GRANT OF ONE WITH ORDINARY GENERAL | bankrupt never made use of, or transaoted busiuess in, the WORDS AS TO WAYS.-In a case of Barkshire v. Grubb, name of Henry Bennett & Co., and no business was ever before Fry, J., on the 22nd inst., the question arose transacted by the deponent, either alone or jointly with him, whether, when the owner of two adjoining closes of land | in chat or any other name. All that was done was to receive grants one of them, “ together with all ways thereto apper. debts due to the original firm of H. Bennett & Co., contracted taining and now used therewitb," and there exists at the prior to the 1st of January, 1880, and sell and dispose of the date of the grant a defined road over the close which is re- stock belonging to the partnership, and out of the proceeds tained by the grantor, which road is then used for access thereof, and the other moneys of the estate, pay the liabilities to the close which is granted, the road having been con of the firm contracted during the period of its existence. structed by the grantor during his unity of possession of the | The banking account opened in the name of Henry Bennett two closes, a right of way over the defined road will pass to & Co., with Messrs. Barclay & Co., in 1878, for the purposes the grantee under the general words. It was contended, of that firm, was kept on foot solely for the liquidation of the

rity of Thomson v. Waterlow (16 W. R. business. All the trade liabilities of Henry Bennett & Co. 686, L. R. 6 Eq. 36), and Langley v. Hammond (16 W.R. had been paid, and all the assets realized and applied for that 937, L. R. 3 Ex. 161), that no right of way would pass to purpose. Mr. Williams alleged also that the trustee was enthe grantee, unless there had been a right of way before the deavouring to obtain inspection in order to assist the plainunity of possession. Fry, J., however, held that it tiffs in an action brought against him to recover £2,000, the made no difference whether a right of way had existed be amount of two bills of exchange recently accepted by the fore the unity of possession, or whether the way had been bankrupt in the name of the firm of Henry Bennett & Co., constructed during the unity of possession ; in either case, and the same solicitors were employed. Mr. Williams stated

right of way over a defined road, actually used at the | the bills were accepted by the bankrupt without his authority, date of the grant, would pass to the grantee under the 1 and could only bind the bankrupt individually. general words. This, Fry, J., said, was the effect of the Foote, in support of the application.--The trustee is older authorities. No doubt the two cases which had been entitled to inspent the partnership books : Rɔbson on cited gave some colour to the distinction which had been | Bankraptcy, p. 623, and the cases there oited. He is not suggested, but, in his lordsbip's opinion, this doubt had been bound to accept the mere statement of Williams as to the assets and liabilities of the partnersbip. The trustee's been discharged, and the present application was made by right to inspection is in no way affected by the action. two creditors who now sought to obtain an adjudication.

Brough, for Williams.-The trustee does not show that There was the usual evidence of fitness of the receiver. there are partnersbip liabilities or assets outstanding, and F. C. Willis, for the applicants. no benefit oan accrue to the bankrupt's estate from an Mr. REGISTRAR Hazlitr thought, as Mr. Vale had not inspection. Any right which the trustee bas against been discharged, the more convenient course would be to conWilliams is a right outside the bankruptoy, and this court tinue bim under the bankruptcy proceedings. cannot make him account: Ex parte Musgrave (27 W. R. Solicitor, G. Bathurst Norman. 372, L. R. 10 Cb. D. 94). (2) The application is not made for the benefit of the creditors, but really in the interest of a firm who bave brought an action against Williams. (3) The application is for the inspection of the

SOLICITORS' CASES. books of Williams & Bennett without notice to Bennett,

QUEEN'S BENCH Division. and it is therefore irregular : rule 50.

(Before Lord COLERIDGE, C.J., MANISTY, J., and Foote, in reply.

POLLOCK, B.) Mr. REGISTRAR Pepys said he thought the trustee was enticled to an inspection of the partnership books, and the

June 17.-In re A Solicitor. lact of an action having been brought against Mr.

This was an application at the instance of the Incorporated Williams, in whioh the solicitors for the plaintiffs were

Law Society. One of the charges in the affidavits was that also the solicitors for the trustee, was not a sufficient

the solicitor had got a client, an old lady, to transfer to him ground for depriving the trustee of bis rigbt. The

property to the value of £1,896, which he placed to his acmotion was, however, too wide ip its terms, and the

count at his bankers, already overdrawn to the amount of inspection of the books must be limited to the transactions

£6,000, and also a sum of £1,139, which be had proceeded to in which the bankrupt was a partner.

lend, she knowing nothing of what was done with her money Solicitors for the trustee, Neish f. Howell.

until he became insolvent, when she found herself penniless.

Another charge stated in the affidavits was that he received Solioitor for Williams, J. Rae.

for another client, an old lady, a sum of £2,500, which he

told her be bad invested, but wbich he retained in his own (Before Mr. REGISTRAR HAZLITT, acting as Chief Judge.)

hands until his insolvency, when she also found herself penni

less. Upon affidavits stating these and other matters, June 3.-Re Perris.

Wills, Q.C. (W. Murray with him), on behalf of the InNew first meeting of creditors allowed to be convened in a corporated Law Society, moved for å rule calling on the cart wbere, at the original meeting, the creditors were unani

solicitor to answer the matters thus stated, or to show cause, DOUN in favour of liquidation by arrangement, but two

in the event of bis not answering them, why he should not BOI *1#te resolutions were signed, each of them appointing a different trustee.

be struck off the rolls. The learned counsel stated the two

charges above mentioned, and said tbat there were others, as This was ap application for leave to convene a fresh first

to which, however, the parties bad declined to give informa. meetiig under a petition for liquidation presented by the

tion; for, he said (strange as it might appear), the solicitor dehtor.

implicated was rather popular, and though he had been tried The first meeting took place on the 2nd inst., when

on a criminal cbarge as a “fraudulent bailee,” persons of the the creditors were unanimous that there should be a liqui.

best position, including the clorgyman cf his parish, gare him dation by arrangement, but a contest ensued as to the

the highest character, and he was acquitted. trusite to be appointed. Votes were taken upon two

Lord COLERIDGE.—No doubt, he was church warden. resolutions, both in favour of liquidation by arrangement,

Wills.-My lord, he filled all “ the parochial offices." but the meeting separated before the votes were counted.

Lord COLERIDGE.-No doubt, and I dare say he was thought t was subsequently found, upon the figures being investi.

| to be persecuted ; but this court, which only takes a mere gated, that neither of the resolutions had been carried by

thed by worldly view of such matters, regarding them by the light of the necessary majority of creditors, although all the

the common honesty, cannot help granting such an application in creditors were in favour of liquidation, and desired to avoid

such a case. bankruptcy.

Accordingly, a rule nisi was granted as applied for.Foulkes, who appeared for the applicant, said that if the court allowed a new meeting to be convened, the creditors would, no doubt, agree upon a trustee.

Mr. REGISTRAR HAZLITT.-There seems to have been a squabble between two accountants ?

SOCIETIES. * Foulkes.-The trade creditors desired to have an accountant trustee, but the landlord and another trade creditor, whose debt was disputed, preferred someone else, but no

INCORPORATED LAW SOCIETY. one seems to have wanted bankruptcy. Ex parte Gibbs,

The second of the dinners given by the metropolitan Re Webb (23 W. R. 529, L. R. 10 Ch. 382), is an authority

members of the Incorporated Law Society to the Provincial n point.

Law Societies was held at the society's hall, Chancery Mr. REGISTRAR HAZLITT said he would make the order,

lane, on Thursday evening, Mr. J. Moxox CLABON, prebut he hoped the creditors would agree upon a trustee, sident, in the chair. About one hundred and forty gentleand that the new meetiug would not result in the appoint.

men were present, and amongst those who aceepted invita. ment of two accountabis as trustees. Solicitors, Hadden, Woodward, & McLeod.

tions were :-Mr. C. C. Druce (vice-president), Mr. W. J. Williams, Mr. T. Mallam, Mr. Verrall, Mr. W. Williams,

Mr. J. Thornely, Mr. J. Eaden, Mr. J. Miller, Mr. Penning. (Before Mr. REGISTRAR HAZLITT, acting as Chief Judge.)

ton, Mr. W. H. Guest, Mr. H. Roscoe, Mr. Mullings, Mr.

| H. Cook, Mr. F. H. Janson, Mr. Jepson, Mr. M. B. Wood, June 3.-Re Stevens.

Mr. G. Hadfield, Mr. W. B. Paterson, Mr. White, Mr. Receiver appointed under petition for liquidation continued Lowndes, Mr. A. P. Bower, Mr. Bright, Mr. Hussey, Mr. under proceedings subsequently taken to adjudicate the debtor Binney, Mr. Blake, Mr. W. Melmoth Walters, Mr. S. a bankrupt, default having been made in carrying out the terms | Unwin, Mr. Fitz Hogh, Mr. Mills, Mr. W. H. Clarke, Mr. of a composition.

E. Bailey, Mr. J. N. York, Mr. Crossman, Mr. This was an application for the confirmation of the ap- l Gill, Mr.' D. T. Burges, Mr. Grinbam Keen, Mr. pointment of Mr. John Vale as receiver of the debtor's estate, H, F. Lawes, Mr. Hutchings, Mr. Cotton, Mr. Howlett, Mr. or for leave to serve short notice of motion upon the debtor.' | Tucker, Mr. Herbert, Mr. Fielder Watson, Mr. Jourdain,

The debtor (a trader) had presented a petition for liquida. | Mr. Greening, Mr. F. Ince, Mr. Thorn, Mr. E. Pope, Mr. tion, and at the first meeting the creditors agreed to accept | M. Pope, Mr. J. J. Freeman, Mr. Farnfield, Mr. E.. a composition, and the resolutions were registered. The | Emanuel, Mr. C. Ford, Mr. Bramley, Mr. Papworth, ME debtor failed to carry out the terms of the resolutions, and a | Humphry, Mr. Wansey, Mr. Hughes, Mr. Vizard, w: day had been appointed for the hearing of an application to Compton Smith, Mr. Lee, Mr. A. Murray, Mr. Malcolm, Mr.

udicate bim a bankrupt. Uoder the petition for liquida. | Parker, Mr. Cleaver, Mr. Gribble, Mr. Crowder, Mr. Fraser, tion Mr. Vale had been appointed receiver, and he had not I c.O., Mr. Pedley, Mr. Ryland, Mr. Crowther, Mr. Cockburn,

Times.

Mr. Sbaen, Mr. Morton, Mr. H. Kimber, Mr. Manton, Mr. R. H. Fryer, Mr. W. O. Hewlett, Mr. T. Skewer-Cox,
Morris, Mr. Barnard, Mr. W. Greaves, Mr. J. T. Ince, Mr. Mr. G. R. Dodd, Mr. B. Levis, Mr. C. T. Abbott, Mr.
J. F. Foster, Mr. Pritobard, Mr. Busby, Mr. Janeway, Mr. G. C. Filliter, &c., &c.
W. B. Brook, Mr. Andrew, Mr. Trehearne, Mr. Crossfield, The association, which was established in 1858, is com
Mr. Ditton, Mr. Bromhead, Mr. Whitehead, Mr. Cheesman, posed of solicitors (who are required to be practising
Mr. Turner, Mr. Hazard, Mr. Tippetts, Mr. Nicholls, Mr. Solicitors at the time of their admission as members) in
Moyle, Mr. Tbatcher, Mr. G. B. Wheeler, Mr. Parkes, Mr. | England and Wales. Its objects are:-“To relieve, either
Chubb, Mr. Wayman, Mr. Eddison, Mr. Ricbard Smith, by donations or aonuities, necessitous members and their
Mr. Rance, Mr. W. Ford, Mr. H. J. Francis, Mr. Carpmael, wives and families, and the necessitous widows and families
Mr. Murton, Mr. Russell, Mr. Osbaldeston, Mr. Peck, Mr. of deceased members, and in special cases the parents or col.
Evan Hare, Mr. Oldman, Mr. Prideaux, Mr. G. Burges, Mr. lateral relations of deceased members; and, secondly, such
Robinson, Mr. E. W. Williamson (secretary), Mr. š. P. B. necessitous persons as are or have been attorneys, solicitors,
Buckoill (assistant secretary), and Mr. F. Boase (librarian). or proctors, and bave not been members, and who, in the

The toasts of “ The Queen” and “The Prince and opinion of the directors, may be deserving objects, and their Princess of Wales and the rest of the Royal Family " wives and families; and the necessitous widows and families having been given from the CHAIR, and honoured with the of deceased attorneys, solicitors, and proctors who were not customary enthusiasm,

members of the associati n at the time of their decease.” The CHAIRMAN, in proposing the toast of the evening, Solicitors throughout England or Wales are eligible to be “The Provincial Law Societies," referred to tbe fact that members (subject to the approval of the board), and are inthere was a law society in existence in Kent long before vited to co-operate for the promotion of the association. A one bad been instituted in London. If at any time any

single payment of ten gaineas (on admission) constitutes a life feeling of jealousy bad existed between the country law member, and a subscription of one guines a year (paid yearly societies and that of the metropolis, he was happy to say

in advance) an annual member. that that feeling had long since died out. It was true

During the year 1880 £1,105 was expended in the relief of that there was at one time a Metropolitan and Provincial

members and their families, and £1,130 in the relief of nonLaw Association, but it was found that they and the Inoor.

members and their families. The total relief granted was porated Law Society were doing very much the same work,

£2,235. The society has expended $18,833 158. in relief and they were in time amalgamated, with a proviso that

since it was founded. the Incorporated Law Society should bold annual meet

The CHAIRMAN having given the loyal and patriotic toasts, ings in the provinces, a stipulation which they had been

which were received with the usual honours, very happy to carry out.

Mr. DODDs, in proposing “The Bench and the Bar," reMr. VERRALL (Sussex Law Society), in responding, spoke

marked that the bench of England bad, during every period of the labours of the Inoorporated Law Society for the

of the country's history, received the respect and confidence, benefit of the profession, and, therefore, of the pablio. He

not only of suitors, but also of the public at large. He recognized in warm terms the hospitality which had been

thought it would be admitted that at no previous time had extended to the Provincial Law Societies in the present

there been a greater measure of confidence reposed in it than gatbering, and promised that his society would do their

was the case at the present day. The bench, during the best to weloome the Incorporated Law Society in a fitting

last few years, had been labouring onder what might, to a manner on their coming visit to Brighton.

certain extent, be considered as difficulties ; be referred to

the changes which had taken place by reason of the passing Mr. JANSON next gave “ The Incorporated Law Society," and traced its origin and growth up to the present time,

of the Judicature Act, which had brought about that fusion paying a high compliment to Mr. Williamson, the secre

of law and equity which had been witnessed, Naturally

enough the changes which had been made bad imposed a tary, for the zeal and earnestness with which he fulfilled

considerable amount of responsibility and difficulty on the the office.

bench, wbich their predecessors in office had not been called The CHAIRMAN responded, and, referring to the fact that

upon to contend with. These difficulties had, however, as the solicitors' was called the lower branoh of the profession,

they had all seen, been surmounted, as was expected, by the thoroughly repudiated the term. Both they and the

distinguished men who occupied the high judicial offices of barristers were working together for the common good of the country; and the duties of these offices had been disthe public.

cbarged entirely to the satisfaction both of the suitors and of The remaining toasts were “The President,” proposed the public in general. In proposing the toast, he could not by Mr. MaLLay and acknowledged by that gentleman, and but refer to the fact that the hand of death had been very “The Entertainment Committee," submitted by Mr. busy in the higher ranks of the bench during the last few BRAMLEY, and replied to by Mr. KEEN,

months; and perhaps at no previous period had tbree men of During the evening a selootion of musio, under the equal eminence with the Lord Chief Baron of the Exchequer, direction of Mr. John Davis, was performed by Miss Agnes the Lord Chief Justice of England, and Lord Justice James Larkom; Mr. Stedman's Choir Boya, Mastere Probert been taken away within so short a time. He (Mr. Dodds) Walenn, Fielder, and Toop; Mr. Harper Kearton, Mr. was old enough to recollect the late Lord Cbief Baron as Frederiok Beyan, and Mr. Luigi Carozzi (solo flate). occupying a conspicuous position in the political history of The dinner was served by Messrs. Ring & Brymer. Mr. the kingdom, and later on he had filled an important office Harker was the toastmaster,

on the bench, and be would be ever remembered in connecA full report will appear in our next issue.

tion with that position. With respect to the Lord Chief

Justice he could only say that his distinguished qualities SOLICITORS' BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION.

not only as regarded the judicial bench, but also in other

respects, would cause them long to revere and to cherish his The twenty-first anniversary festival of the Solicitors' | memory. Everyone must agree in the eulogiums that had Benevolent Association was celebrated at the Albion Hotel, been pronounced, not only in the courts of justice, but in Aldersgate-street, on Wednesday evening, Sir Henry James, | the press and elsewhere, upon the late Lord Justice James Q.C., M.P., her Majesty's Attorney-General, presiding. after his death. Anything more eloquens and touching could There were present about sixty gentlemen, amodgst whom scarcely be conceived. In connection with the second part were the following:

of the toast, there were bappily a number of men of giant The Hon. Mr. Justice Williams, Mr. G. B. Gregory, M.P., | intellect prepared to step forward and occupy the positions Mr. J. Dodds, M.P., Mr. Lewis (chairman), and Mr. P. vacated by those who had gone before, and ever ready to Rickman (deputy-chairman of the society), Mr. H. C. keep up the dignity and the bigh character of the judicial Owen (president of the Wolverhampton Law Society), Mr. bench in a way that should leave nothing to be deG. Haddeld (president of the Manchester Incorporated Law sired. During the present session of Parliament he Society), Mr. Montague Cookson, Q.C., Mr. H. c. Beddoe, had been particularly impressed with the fact that the J.P., Mr. W. Melmoth Walters, Mr. Munton, Mr. present House of Commons oontained a greater number H. W. Trinder, Mr. E. Bromley, Mr. J. A. Farnfield, Mr. of distinguished lawyers than perhaps bad ever assembled E. Low, Mr. G. MCA. Low, Mr. S. H. Asker, Mr. W. G. there at any other period of its history. He had often Stuart, Mr. W. E. Shirley, Mr. H. Sowton, Mr. J. Tarry, thought that if it should so happen that every seat upon Mr. J. T. Prall, Mr. R. Prall, Mr. G, F. Carnell, Mr. R. the judicial bench should become vacant, there were lawyers Pennington, Mr. S. Castle, Mr. S. Harris, Mr. L. Heritage, enough of ability and position in the House of Commons Mr. C. S. Routh, Mr. W. Evans, Mr. P. L. Holt, Mr. | alone to fill every office satisfactorily. With respect to the

attempts that had been made during the last few years to | an assembly of lawyers such as be was addressing. This fuse together the two branches of the profession-the bigber was more especially the case when it was considered that the aod the lower, as they were termed-he might perhaps be work performed by the judges was unfortunately much more permitted to say that these attempts had been unsuccessful, difficult than that of former times, owing to the great changes as be would veatore to predict would be the case with any which had taken place. In former times an endeavoar was similar attempts in the immediate future. There was one made to reduce the responsibility by compelling the suitors matter, however, which interested them, in respect of to reduce the points in dispate, whether of fact or of law, which the efforts that had been made, he was happy to say, to as much exactitude and narrowness as was possible, the had been more successful-namely, the rendering the pas result of which was thut in the great majority of instances gage from one branch of the profession to the other easier a definite and specific question came before the judge, which than had hitherto been the case. A very much easier way of course rendered easy the dispatch of business. The Judi. had been opened to the solicitor branch to those gentlemen cature Act did away with all this, and now everything was who, having been called to the bar, found that that they | left, and be thought properly so, at large. The difficulties lacked the necessary eloquence, or for some other reason with which the judges were called upon to contend had, were unsuccessful in their vocation, and had perbaps ar however, been enormously increased. In the great proporrived at the conclusion that they were not likely to attain tion of cases-probably in ninety-nine out of a hundred-the to any very distinguished position as advocates and mem- | matter was dealt with without the least difficulty, and when bers of the bar. An Act of Parliament had been passed in the hundredth case the difficulty arose, the judge bad of on their bebalf which greatly facilitated their passage to course to take the responsibility. If there should be an error the solicitor branch of the profession. Regulations had or dissatisfaction, there was a very simple and inexpensive likewise been made by the Inns of Court for the purpose of proceeding in the Court of Appeal which was open to the facilitating the passing of the solicitors from their branch of suitor. Times had changed for the better since it was pos. the profession to that of the bar, and this could now be sible for a case to come before a judge such as that wbich bad done, after an interregnum of one year only. This was a actually been heard upon the Oxford Circuit, when a man great step in advance, and the solicitors might congratulate was charged with stealing two ducks. He had been caught themselves that they had entered upon a new era. He in the very act, but his counsel, at the conclusion of the case was glad to couple with the toast the name of a gentleman for the defence, submitted that the judge must direct an with whose good qualities the members of the House of acquittal, as the ducks in dispute were proved to have been Commons were well acquainted. They all rejoiced at his dead, whilst ducks in law inferred live ducks. The judga promotion ; but, in doing so, they could pot but regret that asked what answer the counsel for the prosecution could he was no longer among them. They all looked forward to make to this; and the counsel for the prosecution was com. & distinguished career for Mr. Justice Williams. He pletely floored, and could make no answer. The judge, therehad pleasure also in connecting the name of a distinguished fore directed the jury that they must acquit the prisoner, at advocate, Mr. Montague Cookson, with the toast. The well which the foreman asked, “If they bean't ducks, what be's deserved reputation of that gentleman was so thoroughly ap they?" The judge replied that he was not called upon to preciated amidst an assembly of lawyers, that it was unne say wbat they were ; he could only repeat that they were pot cessary for bim to do more than to mention his name.

ducks in the eyes of the law. This was what had occurred The Hon. Mr. Justice WILLIAMS, in replying for the not so very long ago, and within a recent date, upon a bench, referred to the great satisfaction he experienced in great circuit of England. Such a proceeding at the present being able to support bis friend, Sir Henry James, who oc- day would, of course, shock their common sense and their copied the chair, and onder wbose banner, in a different view of justice. He hoped and believed that the changes place, and in different circumstances, he had had the great which had taken place, and which tried the judges seriously, pleasure of serving. He must not, however, indulge in re- and which doubtless to some extent had produced discomfort, collections of the pleasure he experienced in those by-gone would be the means of doing great good. In the olden times, times, for he now knew nothing more of politics. Still he if a question came before the court, there was a specific was sure he would be forgiven if he looked back for a mo- method of dealing with it, and everyone understood what the meat, with a sort of hankering, to the time when the chair. question was. Now, when a decision was given, if the man and he walked side by side in a different place. The parties were dissatisfied, they took it to the Court of Appeal, toast for which he was responding had been received with so the whole thing was heard over again, fresh points were much kindness and generosity that evening—and he believed opened, and new evidence introduced, and the judges did not the kindness and generosity had been exhibited fairly and hon shrink from investigating the matter and giving the case 2 estly—that it ought to make the task of responding an easy one. real rebearing and a new trial. He could say a great deal It was a relief to him ttat tbe toast was not a personal one, with respect to the dutiies of the judge as regarded the but one of a general character. The English bench bad been criminal branch of their labours, but he would abstain from so loog known, so long respected, so long looked up to, that occupying the time of the assembly. These duties had been it had been a sort of shock to many of those who occupied the most painful of his office, and he must admit that positions on the bench to reflect ibat, for the past six or he had shrunk from them; because he thought that seven years, the judicature had been passing through a kind in some parts of the country where he had gone of ordeal, by reason of the great reforms which had taken | there had been a disposition on the part of the pablic to look place in connection with it. The Judicature Act brought for too groac severity in the sentences on offenders, and there with it the most sweeping changes; but he believed it had been a feeling that the judges bad administered the law was very generally felt by the public-and, he believed more moderately and timorously than had been the habit of rightly felt--for many years, that these reforms were the local judges. He doubted whether the inbabitants of not being carried into execution with the thorough- | these localities preferred the justice and poderation of the ness and loyalty for wbich they had looked. But I judges to the sentences of the local judges. He was horrified be did hope, and firmly believed, tbat, at the present time, by the cry for vengeance which was at times raised by those and for some months past, an honest and thorough attempt / who wished to revenge themselves on the prisoners, and as ao was being made to give effect to these changes; and, so | individual he would never shrink from len ling as far as be far as he could judge, as a practical lawyer, the progress | could the weight of his example and of his opinion which had been made bad been as extensive as could be in the direction of mercy towards the unfortunate fairly expected baving regard to the nature of the changes / criminals who came before him. He would say for to which he had referred. He did not believe that the the judges that they were cognizant of the bond public would be so unreasonable as to expect that such l of sympathy and mutual respect and confidence which sweeping reforms as had been made could be brought into existed between all lawyers, whether they were judges, thorough working order all of a moment. At present, he barristers, or solicitors, and he certainly believed that a desire was of opinion there was an accumulation-an uonecessary existed amongst the judges to cultivate that mutual good accumulation-of assizes, wbich took away a large number feeling and respect. Speaking for himself, he hoped to of the judges, perbaps unnecessarily. He believed, how cultivate it with success, because he believed that the interests ever, that, notwithstanding this, the courts at Westminster of the public would be maintained by the continuance of the were keeping pace with the work that came before them, friendly relations wbich already existed between them. He and that during the present sittings all the business ready hoped that nothing would be done by the judges to impair this from hearing would be dealt with and entirely cleared away. I good feeling. This was a great fact, and one that would be appreciated by Mr. MONTAGUE COOKSON responded for “The Bar," Rod

« PreviousContinue »