Page images

to his rank as a lawyer, if our readers need any even for the examination of all the witnesses who testimony, perhaps the best we can give is the remark, claimed with good reason to be heard." An extremely more than once repeated, of the late Mr. Justice WILLES, important piece of documentary evidence for the com. We always listen with the greatest respect to whatever mittee will be the official “ Return of Maximum Rates Mr. JOSHUA WILLIAMS has to urge." It is no exaggeration of Charges which the Railway Companies of the United to say that in his special subject of commons his authority Kingdom are authorized to make.” This return, which was without a rival, and in knowledge of other branches of has just been issued as a parliamentary paper, is a fairly real property law he stood in the first rank. With his exhaustive analysis of the toll-clauses of the many thou. extensive and accurate knowledge he combined the most sand special Acts which fix the pecuniary relations of admirable clearness of exposition and common sense ; 80 the companies to the public. We have frequently that when he devoted himself to the instruction of the called attention to the terms of the 86th section of the law student it is not wonderful that he should have come Railways Clauses Act, 1845, whereby “it shall be lawful" to be regarded, for over a quarter of a century, as the for the companies“ to make such reasonable charges as Gamaliel of real property law. To the readers of the they may from time to time determine upon, not SOLICITORS' JOURNAL Mr. Williams' death is a special exceeding the tolls by the special Act authorized calamity; for until his health broke down, our columns to be taken," and have pointed out that, in theory at were from time to time enriched with contributions from least, this enactment makes every railway whatsoever his pen. Ho was always ready to draw upon bis learn- open to question before a jury. Before the issue of ing and experience for the purpose of helping the pro- these returns it was often difficult, if not impossible, to fession upon the questions of the day relating to his ascertain what were the “ tolls by the special Act auspecial subjects.

thorized to be taken” in any particular instance. This obstacle to making out a case against a railway company

will now exist no longer. On reference to the returns, IT HAS BEEN stated, we do not know on what authority,

it will be seen at a glance how much each company is authat it is proposed to shorten the Long Vacation by an

thorized to charge for each particular person, auimal, or Act of Parliament to be passed in the session of 1882.

thing on each section of its line. As would have been The original intention of the Legislature was to leave

expected by any person acquainted with the subject, sittings and vacations to be fixed by Order in Council ;

anomalies of a most striking character are discoverable. but the enactments by which the delegation of power

Thus the ordinary maximum fare is 3d., 2d., and 1d., for was effected are in some little confusion. By section 27

first, second, and third class passengers respectively. of the Act of 1873 the Queen in Council may, upon any

| But the South-Eastern may charge 3 d. for each person. report of the Council of Judges of the Supreme Court,

irrespective of class, and many companies, notably the with the consent of the Lord Chancellor, “make, revoke,

Great Eastern, may charge 1 d. per mile for third clase or modify orders regulating the vacations to be observed

fare. The Great Western, on its West Midland branch, in the High Court of Justice and the High [sic] Court

has a maximum of 2 d., 14d., and ld. The exception of of Appeal.” But the periods of vacation are spe

Government duty appears in the case of some half-dozen

So much citically fixed by ord. 61, r. 2. one of the Rules of companies, and is omitted in all other cases. Court scheduled to the Act of 1875, which by section 17

for the maximum authorized charges, which, being of that Act, as amended by section 17 of the Act of 1876 parliamentary, cannot (except, we believe, in the two and section 19 of the Act of 1881, may be altered or

| cases of the Great Western and Lancashire and York. annulled "by any five or more of the following persons,

shire Companies) be altered without an Act of Parliaof whom the Lord Chancellor shall be one-namely, the

ment. With regard to the charges actually made from Lord Chancellor, the Lord Chief Justice of England, the

time to time, it is material to point out that "returns" Master of the Rolls, the President of the Divorce, &c.,

of them also may be procured by the Board of Trade, Division, and four other judges of the Supreme Court

resorting to section 3 of the Railway Regulation Act, to be appointed for the purpose by the Lord Chancellor

1840 (3 & 4 Vict. c. 97), by which that Board "may order by writing under his hand." The question is whether

and direct every railway company to make up and section 27 of the Act of 1873, being in a particular

deliver to them a table of all tolls, rates, and charges subject matter, does not override section 17 of the Act

from time to time levied on each class of passengers, of 1875 and the enactments amending it, although they

and on cattle and goods, conveyed on the railway.** are later in date. If it does, the periods of vacation

Neatly tabulated in the same fashion as the maximum (although the fixture of them by ord. 61, r. 2, being

charges, and arranged so as to be compared with them part of an Act of Parliament, is legally valid) can be

at a glance, these returns would be of great value as evid. altered only by Order in Council under section 27 of the

ence. Nor do we see any very strong objection to Act of 1873. Such Order in Council cannot be made

charges being required to be printed on tickets. without a prior report from the Council of the Supreme Court, but there is no legal necessity that such order should be made upon the report being presented.

FOR SOME REASON or other, the number of workmen employed on tho building of the Royal Courts of Justice

has been recently considerably diminished. No fewer THE MORE IMPORTANT recommendations contained in

than 500 men were dismissed about three weeks ago, the interim report of the Select Committee on Railways,

and, if we are rightly informed, not more than a fifth of which has recently been issued as a parliamentary paper,

the number have been re-engaged. This, of course, has are that “it is necessary permanently to maintain some

seriously interfered with the progress of the building, special tribunal to which shall be referred questions

and if it is to be completed by next Easter, in accordance arising as to the rights and duties of railway companies

with the expectations which have been held out, the staff in their relations to the trade and traffic of the country";

of workmen will have to be considerably increased. The that "a revised classification of goods and merchandise

roof of the central hall is now practically complete, but ought to be adopted by the railways, as between them.

the girders of the floor cannot be fixed until the scaffoldselves and the public, such as, under the name of the

ing has been removed, and an immense amount of Clearing House Classification, is already in use as between

rubbish in the basement has been carted away, and the themselves," and that “railway companies should be

boilers to be used in connection with the heating and bound to make no increase in any rate without giving

ventilating apparatus have been placed in position. at least one month's public notice in the locality." The final report is deferred until next session, inasmuch as during last session “time failed not only for the due consideration of the whole of the evidence given, but


| a decision of a single judge and twelve jurymen, as THE PROCEDURE COMMIT E'S being of more weight than that of one judge alone,

ought to be heard, not by the three judges of superior REPORT.

rank, but by the three judges of less rank, and should

also, except in the specified cases, be final. This is not REMEMBERING the discussions which have lately taken

easy to follow, but when the case is further considered place with respect to appeals from divisional courts to

the difficulty increases. It may be that the judge does the Court of Appeal, and the important letter on that

not agree with the jury; and it may be that the three, subject on which we lately commented, we turned with

or possibly two out of the three, will agree with the jury

against the one, and uphold the jury. Nay, it may even curiosity and interest to that part of the report which deals with appellate business. And as, in substance, the

be that two out of the three may differ from the judge result of the report appears to be in favour of

and the jury, in which case two judges will overrule two retaining divisional courts under the restored name of

other judges of equal rank and the twelve jurymen.

Put the case as you will, it will puzzle the most astute to courts in Banc with very much their present functions, it is necessary to examine with some care the arrange

explain why the co-operation of the twelve jurymen ments proposed and the grounds alleged by the com

should cause the case to be sent to the proposed court mittee for their proposals. But, in the first place,

in Benc, instead of to the Court of Appeal, or make it following the report in this respect, we may notice that

right that no further appeal should be allowed. the 21st resolution proposes as follows:

The case, however, of a difference of opinion is one of “ 21. All appeals from a judge without a jury shall the excepted cases in which the right of appeal to the be to the Court of Appeal; and also where a judge has

Court of Appeal is reserved, and let this exception be con. directed a verdict for plaintiff or defendant; and the

sidered with reference to the next resolution, and the Court of Appeal shall thereupon have power to dispose

reasons on which the rule of finality in ordinary cases is of the whole case."

grounded, as well as the reasons for the provision made As to the first branch of this recommendation it need | for appeal in the excepted cases. The 23rd resolution is hardly be said that it is superfluous; the law being as follows: already that which it is proposed to enact. As to the “23. All appeals from the court in Banc shall be to a second branch, it will, no doubt, carry to the Court of Court of Appeal of not less than five judges." Appeal some few cases which would, at present, have to The reasons for finality in ordinary cases, and for the perform a double journey; but it is important to notice provision where an appeal is allowed, are as follows:that it excludes all applications for new trials in cases “And further, if it be granted that there should be where a verdict has really been given by the jury, and an appeal from judge and jury to the court in Banc, not directed by the judge, including as well cases where there is very good reason for making it, except in special the finding is complained of as cases in wbich misdirec instances, final. That three judges should overrule the tion only is the ground of appeal. In seeking for the judgment of one judge is natural and intelligible reasons for this limitation, we find lower down what enough, and no one objects to it; but that three judges we must consider in that light. They are as follows:- in one room should be overruled by three other judges “Questions of new trial, moreover, after the decision sitting in another is not, we believe, satisfactory to the of a judge and a jury, are really questions of appeal, and public or the profession. ... The business of the court often of appeal from a judge aud twelve other men. | in Banc, with the exception of the few important motions And this distinction is sometimes forgotten, when it is to which we have alluded, will be exclusively appellate attempted to assimilate the practice in jury cases and business, and in most of such cases its decision will be, the practice in non-jury cases. In the latter it is, we and ought to be final, although in the heavier and more think, quite right that the appeals should be direct to important new trial cases, and in all in which special the Court of Appeal. In the former it seems to us leave is obtained, we prefer to leave an appeal from the better, on the whole, to preserve the appeal, as at pre- court in Banc to the Court of Appeal. But we are sent, to a court in Banc, and to make such court in unanimously of opinion that, in these appellate cases ordinary cases fival. This was the old rule” (that is, (the number of which will necessarily be few), the finality was the rule before dissatisfaction with the then Appellate Court, which is to review the decision of three existing system caused an appeal to be given by the judges, should itself sit with a quorum of not less than Common Law Procedure Act, 1854). In non-jury cases, five. We also think that the present divisions of the therefore, including those where the matter is altogether Court of Appeal, which, for ordinary purposes, consist of taken out of the hands of the jury, the appeal is to be three judges respectively, should be empowered, in case to the Court of Appeal; in jury cases it is to be always of difference of opinion, to convene a court of five and to to the court in Bano first, and,“ in ordinary cases," it direct a re-argument before such re-constituted court. is to go no further, on the ground that the appeal is At present it not unfrequently happens, owing to a “often” from the decision of a judge and twelve other division of opinion in the Court of Appeal, that two men.

judges of appeal overrule the view of one of their own Now, in the first place, however convincing this number as well as the judgment of the court below-a argument may be, it does not apply to the case of mis- result which cannot be satisfactory to the public or the direction, or show why the Court of Appeal should not profession." deal with a single judge's misdirection in law as well as The manner in which the overruling of " three judges with a single judge's error in applying the law to sitting in one room by three judges sitting in another the findings of a jury or in his finding of fact and law. room” is spoken of is hardly respectful to the Court of But putting aside this case, and dealing only with jury Appeal, or in accordance with the facts. Technically, cases which are strictly such, the reasoning is remarkable the judges of the Court of Appeal are of superior rank. and needs to be considered carefully and in conjunction Theoretically, they are judges of greater experience, or at with the 22nd resolution, which is as follows:

least of greater weight. Practically, they are so. We “ 22. All applications for a new trial in jury causes believe that the public and the profession do find what shall go to a court in Banc, consisting of three judges is complained of to be satisfactory, at least, so far as the (of whom the judge who tried the case shall not be complaint extends, though they might find it more satisone); the decision of this court shall be final, except with factory if there were no court in Banc. But it may be their leave, or in case of difference of opinion, or where 1 granted to human nature that it is less satisfactory to the the subject-matter of appeal exceeds £500."

judges who are overruled. But if an argument is to be Now, the Court of Appeal consists of three judges of conducted on these lines, what is to become of the appeal superior rank; the proposed court in Banc is to consist to the House of Lords? If judges are put on a level in of three judges of less rank. Therefore the appeal from this way, and it is thought enough to say that “a judge is a judge for a' that," what shall we have to think if | understand what is the true nature of the present scheme. three judges sitting in one room-pamely, the House of | A covenant is not "got rid of " when it is implied Lordg-overrule, not three only, but perhaps five, judges instead of being expressed: it does not cease to crist by sitting in another room--namely, the Court of Appeal- being printed in a book instead of being written in a and perhaps also three other judges sitting in another draft. It is only made somewhat more difficult to find, room-namely, the court in Banc ? People think that and (to judge by the specimens now before us) a great the noble and learned lords are superior in weight to the deal harder to understand. An opportunity whick tribunals from which appeals lie to them; but they think will perhaps not easily recur, ceems to have been the same about the Court of Appeal. Is the difference to lost by the learned framers of the Act. It was be found in the fact that one judge is called a lord, and possible for them at least to have attempted to get the others are only commoners? If so, perhaps the Court rid of covenants for title not in pretence but in reality. of Appeal might be allowed to number less than five Covenants for title are only devices for adjusting the when the Lord Chancellor or the Lord Chief Justice sits rights and liabilities of the parties ; and we think that there, or even less still when both are sitting together. it was quite within the compass of human ingenuity

But, waiving this difficulty about the House of Lords, to have constructed a code of rules by which these let us see whether the supposed difficulty will be solved rights and liabilities might have been satisfactorily by the proposed arrangement. In cases where the Court adjusted, without any reference whatever to the form of Appeal, consisting of three members and hearing appeals of a covenant. If this course had been adopted and from a single judge, is divided, and directs a re-argument successfully executed, we should have pronounced it a bold before five judges, because it is not fit that two should and statesmanlike undertaking ; though we might even overrule two, will it be found any more satisfactory that, then have set no very high value upon what had been on the re-argument, three should overrule three ? And gained. But, putting aside the trifling saving of a few if so, why? And again, in appeals from the court in folios in length, we are not able to say what advantages Banc, three may not overrule three, but five may over. | are possessed by these implied covenants to compen. rule three. But what if the five are not unanimous ? sate for their undoubtedly greater difficulty of interpreThen four may overrule four; nay, three may overrule

tation. five. Will this be satisfactory?

Section 7 enacts that certain covenants shall be imIn truth, all these attempts to settle the question by plied in certain deeds on the part of certain persons, mere numbers are essentially illusory, and but hiding provided that the capacities in which these persons join one's head in a bush. As soon as the matter comes to in the deed are expressed in certain specified ways. So be worked out, the difficulty re-appears. But does the far as regards this section, the Act does not take effect allotment by law of the function to the men go for in the absence of any expression of a different intennothing? Does anyone suppose that the Lords and tion, but its operation needs to be expressly invoked Commons are all of them the wisest men in the United by the use of certain phraseology in the operative part Kingdom ? Yet they legislate for the realm. Does any of the deed: which obviously tends to lessen what is to anyone suppose that all the judges on the bench are be gained by omitting express covenants. This, at least, the best and ablest lawyers to be found ? Yet their is the only construction we can put on the provision of decisions are acquiesced in. In this way of arguing it is section 7, sub-section 4. forgotten that the judges of the Court of Appeal are

The forms of covenant to be implied are six in selected and appointed for this very purpose. It is for.

| number:-(A.) A covenant to be implied in a conveyance gotten that they are judges of more weight as well as

for valuable consideration, other than a mortgage; (B.) higher rauk. It is forgotten that on appeal the

a further covenant when the property conveyed is leasecase is better argued, because it has been argued before.

hold; (C.) a covenant to be implied in a mortgage; (D) It is forgotten that the court is assisted by the very

a further covenant, when the property mortgaged is opinions which it is called on to review. It is forgotten

leasehold ; (E.) a covenant to be implied in a conveyance that, owing to these and other causes, the very practice

by way of settlement; and (F.) a covenant to be implied and habit of constantly hearing appeal business creates,

in a conveyance by trustees, mortgagees, &c. to a large degree, the qualification which it requires.

We propose now to examine the form (A.) which is If these things are all forgotten so far as to make the

the one that would be applicable (for example) to "a judges of the High Court intolerant of having their

conveyance for valuable consideration," which we preopinions overruled by the Court of Appeal, the only

sume must include a grant of any estate in fee simple, remedy is to put an end to the courts in Banc, and

whether in possession, in remainder, or in reversion. introduce a state of things where that “natural and

The form of this covenant follows in its general ontintelligible" event may take place of “ three judges over

line the ordinary limited covenants for title in similar ruling the decision of one judge."

cases. By the words “otherwise than by purchase for value" it is restricted so as not to include predecessors in title more remote than the purchaser under the last

conveyance for valuable consideration immediately preTHE PRACTICAL EFFECT OF ceding the present conveyance. It may be doubted

whether this limit is strictly according to the prevailing THE CONVEYANCING ACT.

practice; which is, we conceive, to carry the nexus of VI.—Covenants POR TITLE (continued).

the covenants back, uot barely to the last purchase for

value, but to the last purchase for value upon which The question now remains to be considered, whether the such covenants for title as could have been insisted upon forms of covenants for title supplied by the Act fulfil by the purchaser were in fact entered into. The questhe conditions mentioned at the close of our last article, tion would be unlikely to arise umder the present practice, as regards safety and the judicious apportionment of and is therefore now unimportant; but we cannot be advantages and liabilities between the parties. The confident that it will always remain so, if the proposed length of the remarks which we propose to make upon new practice of purchase by open contract should become this subject will be proportioned rather to the interest widely prevalent. Purchasers and their legal advisers in it which seems to be felt by the public than to our now aro exceedingly careful to insist upo sense of its intrinsic importance. For we have listened | the covenants for title to which they are entitled, and with a feeling nearly akin to compassion to the hopes the covenants to which they are entitled do uot seem to which we have heard expressed that now at length the extend barely to the last purchase for value, but, as we time is come when “covenants for title will be got rid have said, to the last purchase upon whicb such covenants of " ; and we much fear that no little disappointment is were actually entered into as could have been insisted beivg laid up for the public, when they come rightly to | upon. Now it appears from section 66 that the purchaser

under an open contract cannot, after the Act has come “Through” refers to cases where the subsequent operation, insist upon any further covenants than those claimant was supposed to take or claim (by feoffsupplied by the Act.

ment, graut, devise, and the like) the whole estate The somewhat questionable limitation of time above of a predecessor in title. And “under” refers to cases pointed out stretches through the whole covenant, which in which the subsequent claimant was supposed to claim is divided into the usual headings, Right to Convey, a less estate derived out of the estate of the predecessor Quiet Enjoyment, Free from Incumbrances, and in title, in the sense in which a tenant for years may be Further Assurance. The second of these runs as said to claim under a former tenant in fee simple. When follows:

we speak of A. as claiming “ by, through, or under" B., “Tbat, notwithstanding anything as aforesaid [i.e., any. our language is anything rather than appropriate for thing by him or anyone through whom he derives title, limiting by necessary implication the claim of A. to the otherwise than by purchase for value, made, done, executed, extent of the claim of B. This language was, in fact, or omitted, or knowiogly suffered], that subject-matter [i.e., devised for the very purpose of abstaining from the imtbe property expressed to be conveyed] shall remain to and

position of any such limit. be quietly entered upon, received, and held, occupied, en

The covenant for quiet enjoyment is the most importjoyed, and taken, by the person to whom the conveyance is

ant, and the most beneficial to the purchaser, of all the expressed to be made, and any person deriving title under bim, and i be benefit thereof shall be received and taken

covenants for title; and defects in it cannot be adequately accordingly, without any lawful interruption or disturbance

supplied by the others. The covenant for right to convey [1] by the person who so conveys, or [2] any person con

Jabours under the disadvantage, that it is broken, if at veying by his direction, or [3] rightfully claiming or to all, at the time of conveyance; and therefore the statute claim by, through, uoder, or in trust for the person who so at once begins to run against it. It may be doubted conveys, or [4] any person conveying by bis direction, or whether the covenant against incumbrances could, except [5] by, through, or under anyone not being a person claim- by a very forced construction, be held to give any protecing in respect of an estate or interest subject whereto the con- tion against any such defect as has above been suggested. veyance is expressly made, through whom the person who so When we consider how easily the suspicions of purconveys derives title otherwise than by purchase for chasers are aroused, and how difficult they are to alluy, value."

we cannot but be of opinion that little wisdom was shown It will be seen that the persons against whoso dis. in allowing any doubtful symptoms to appear in the workturbance or interruption the covenantor covenants are manship of this section, which rather required that perfect divisible into five classes, which we have distinguished finish which is the best antidote against suspicion. But by numerals in square brackets. The italics mark a a general want of polish is displayed by numerous signs, very noteworthy exception out of class 5; whereby the not perhaps individually important, but such as a better covenant is prevented from giving any remedy against policy would have avoided. Why, for example, in the interruption or disturbance by “any person . . . . parenthesis appended to the covenant, should the phrase rightfully claiming or to claim ... by through or purchase for value” occurring in the covenant be alone under anyone not being a person claiming in respect of " mentioned, unless to suggest a suspicion that the phrase what for brevity we may style a prior estate, “through “conveyance for valuable consideration," occurring in whom the person who so conveys derives title otherwise the body of the sub-sub-section, may perhaps include a than by purchase for value.” This leaves such persons settlement in consideration of marriage ? Since there free to disturb, either withont imposing any limits afterwards occurs a separate form for “a conveyance by whatever to their permitted disturbance, or at all events way of settlement," it may be said that a “contrary without imposing them with that clearness and preci. intention appears" ; but we submit that this could have sion which such a case requires. Suppose a father, been, and therefore ought to have been, made to appear retaining a life estate to himself, should settle the much more clearly. Et sic de similibus. remainder in fee upon his second son ; who in the A copious variety of phrases is used in these covenants father's lifetime should sell this remainder entering only | to indicate the property dealt with by the deeds in into the statutory covenants. The lands would be con. 1 which they are respectively implied. (A.) speaks not veyed expressly subject to the father's life estate; there only of “the subject-matter expressed to be conveyed," fore persons claiming under him would be excepted. but also of “the subject-matter of conveyance" and of from the covenant; and the question arises, who these “the subject-matter of the conveyance"; (B.) speaks persons are, and what is the extent of their rights. I of “the property conveyed”; (C.) returns to the For example, does the elder brother, the heir-at-law of phrases of (A.), except that it omits “the” in its last the father, come within this description ? and might phrase; (D.) speaks of "the land conveyed”; (E.) and he, after the father's death, take advantage of a (F.) recur, like the words of a catch, to the last phrase concealed flaw in the title, to assert a right to the of (A.). For much of this variety we can discern no wliole fee and evict the purchaser altogether from the cause, except that want of scrupulous carefulness to lands?

which we have above adverted. We could indeed have We suppose we shall be told that in the pbrase, “any | suggested a good motive for the peculiar phrase of (D.); person claiming by, through, or under anyone not but there was precisely the same motive for employing being a person claiming in respect of " a prior estate, it in (B.), where it is not employed; so that it seems the extent of the first “claiming" is by necessary impli. on the whole to have been used a good deal at cation limited to the extent of the second “claiming,” random. that is, to the extent of the prior estate. We suppose As a further illustration of our preliminary rethat this was the draftsman's intention ; tut we could marks, we will beg the reader's attention to subhave wished that, in order to express that intention, he section (3). had not made use of language which we think better “ (3.) Where a wife conveys and is expressed to conadapted to exclude than to indicate any such meaning. vey as beneficial owner, and the husband also conveys The words “by, through, or under,” were not used at and is expressed to convey as beneficial owner, then, random by the old conveyancers. Each of them had its within this section, the wife shall be deemed to convey appropriate function. “By” refers properly to cases and to be expressed to convey by direction of the huswhere the hypothetical subsequent claimant was sup band, as beneficial owner; and, in addition to the posed to take or claim to take by the act of a previous covenant implied on the part of the wife, there shall also owner, but not to claim the same estate; as for be implied, first, a covenant on the part of the husband example, by the exercise of a power of appointment, l as the person giving that direction, and secondly, a in which case the appointee takes by a title para- 1 covenant on the part of the husband in the same terms mount to the title of the appointor, and the latter is as the covenant implied on the part of the wife." not properly speaking his predecessor in title at all.' Here we seem to have no less than four separate covenants, one by the wife and three by the husband. tainly his Droit International Codifié-to give it the We seem to find, (1) a covenant by the wife, in! title of the French translation which he sanctioned as a the form (A.), by virtue of the fact that she “con- 1 second original; but in Germany he is at least equally veys and is expressed to convey as beneficial owner"; known by his “General Public Law," Allgemeines (2) a covenant by the husband, apparently in identical Statsrecht, which, in its fifth edition became Algemeine terms, by virtue of the fact that he also conveys Statslehre. and is expressed to convey in like manner; (3) a But what was most remarkable in Dr. Blantschli covenant by, the husband, under enb-section (2), to

is that, with the thoroughness of a German professor, which for brevity we refer the reader without citing | he combined the keen taste of a Swiss for active it, by virtue of the fact that the wife is deemed to con

public life, and a faith in the triumph of his ideas vey by direction of the husband as beneficial owner; and which age in no way cooled. While resident in Switzer(4) a covenant on the part of the husband “in the same land he was prominent in politics on the Liberal side, terms as the covenant implied on the part of the wife."

as well during the commotions, consequent on the We do not see how to diminish the list. At first sight nomination of Dr. Strauss to the chair of dogmatic we might suppose that the sub-section, without this being

theology at Zurich, which gave the Conservative party a expressly said, was intended to override the general

temporary triumph in that canton, as during the dipates provisions as to covenants of the form (A.), and to pre which preceded the war of the Sonderbund; and he vent covenants from being implied on tbe part of “ a

was a member of the Grand Council of his canton, of person who conveys and is expressed to convey as many Federal diets, and of the Federal Government when beneficial owner”; whereby we should get rid of our Zurich was the Vorort. And it is a high testimony to first two covenants. But this hypothesis is inad

the part which he personally took that he was charged missible, because under it there would be no “ covenant

by the confidence of all parties with the preparation of implied on the part of the wife, to which sub-section 3 the civil code of the canton. Afterwards, in Germany, expressly refers.” Forced therefore to conclude that

he was a member of the Customs' Parliament at Berlin, the sub-section contemplates four covenants, we could

and although he refused to become a member of the wish that we had been informed whether the wife's is to

Reichstag in 1871, he served in both chambers of the bind her separate estate. And we should be very grateful Grand Duchy of Baden, and it is understood that his for any information touching the precise distinctions

confidential advice was highly valued by the Grand between the several covenants on the part of the Duke. husband.

Dr. Bluntschli's zeal for getting practically realized Our criticisms have thus far dealt with those qualities

whatever he believed to be right and true was also shown in of these covenants which seem to make them a doubtful

his being one of the founders and the permanent president boon to purchasers. In other respects, they have been of the Protestant Association of Germany, having thought to impose a somewhat heavier burden upon

religious liberty for its object, and in his activity with vendors than is imposed by the covenants in common

regard to international law. He was one of the delegates use. Sub-section (6) enacts that

to the Brussels Conference on the Laws of War, and one " The benefit of a covenant implied as aforesaid shall be

of the founders, as well as repeatedly president or viceannexed and incident to, and shall go with, the estate or

president, of the Institute of International Law; and interest of the implied covenantee, and shall be capable of

many in England will remember seeing him when that being enforced by every person in whom that estate or

institute met at Oxford last year, where another honorary interest is, for the whole or any part thereof, from time to degree was added to the long series of distinctions which time vested."

he had received from various countries, including the

title of corresponding member of the Académie des We have seen it suggested that this renders the

Sciences Morales et Politiques, covenantor liable to be sued by any person holding a

Those who had the privilege of knowing him personally less estate derived out of the estate of the purchaser,

will long remember the heartiness of his character and even though the grant of the less estate should contain

manner. In no scientific discu ssion did he forget, or an express stipulation to the contrary ; and generally, that the sub-section makes it impossible for an implied

allow others to forget, that human interests were being

dealt with. The end came when he had just delivered covenantor ever to obtain a release of these implied covenants. If the covenants were in other respects

the closing speech in the General Synod of Baden, and Eatisfactory, we should think little of this point as an

was on his way to have an audience of the Grand Dake : objection.


a Gitting close for such a life.. Its advantage to the purchaser and his assigns probably outweighs any disadvantage, more apparent than real, which it entails upon the vendor.


DR. BLUNTSCHLI. We regret to learn the death of Dr. Bluntschli, which occurred suddenly, from failure of the heart, at Carlsruhe, on the 21st inst. He was born at Zurich in 1808, and studied law and history in Germany under Savigny and Niebuhr, as well as later at Paris; was professor at Zurich from 1833, first of Roman law, and afterwards of German; became, in 1848, professor of German private law and general public law at Munich, and in 1861 a professor at Heidelberg, where he resided during the remainder of his life. The list of his works would be very long, for they extended over almost every branch of law, as well as history, politics, and religion in some of its philosophical aspects, and they included numerous occasional writings as well as regular treatises. That by which he is best known in the world at large is cer.

THE CONVEYANCING ACT. [To the Editor of the Solicitors' Journal.] Sir, I am reluctant to trespass again on your atten. tion, but it may not be unsatisfactory to acknowledge, as I gladly do, and with a sense of obligation proportioned to the clearness of exposition resulting from its very severity, that I now have it from the principal draftsman of this Act itself that you are quite right in construing the 13th section as applying to cases of sub-sub-demise, and in stating that on & contract to grant an underlease the leasehold title 'can still be called for. He puts it thus—that under the Vendor and Purchaser Act, 1874, on a contract to grant & lease by a leaseholder with a freehold reversion, or with a leasehold reversion, the intended lessee cannot call for the title to the freehold reversion, but he can to the leasehold reversion, while under the Conveyancing Act,

« PreviousContinue »