Page images
PDF
EPUB

Francis, Owen, Pwllheli, Carnarvon, out of business. June 11 at 2 at Albion Hotel, Chester. Owen, Pwllheli

Fuzzi, Santino George, South Shields, Licensed Victualler. June 17 at 3 at offices of Mabane and Graham, Barrington st, South Shields

Gibbs, Thomas, Canterbury, Horse Dealer. June 20 at 11 at Queen's Head Inn, Canterbury. Collard, Canterbury

William Graham, Tynemouth, Northumberland, Egg Dealer. June 17 at 2 offices of Joel, Newgate st, Newcastle-upon-Tyne Griffith, John David, Llanddeiniolen, Carnarvon, Quarryman. June 16 at 12 at at offices of Allanson, Bron Seiont, Carnarvon Haines, John, and Henry Hole, Cardiff, Monumental Masons. June 13 at 2 at offices of Jenkins and Co., Philharmonic chambers, Cardiff. Merrils and Son, Cardiff.

Harries, John, Carmarthen, Tea Dealer. June 13 at 11 at office of Morris, Red st, Carmarthen

Harrison, Ernest, Tranmere, Chester, Chemist. June 15 at 3 at offices of Langton and MacConnal, Lord st, Liverpool. Wyles Liverpool

Harrison, John Moore, Tranmere, Chester, Furniture Broker. June 15 at 2 at offices of Langton and MacConnal, Lord st, Liverpool. Wyles, Liverpool

Hayes, George, Worcester, Fly Proprietor. June 14 at 11 at offices of Tree and Son, High st. Worcester

Hodges, Henry Samuel, Bristol. Furniture Dealer, June 17 at 10 at offices of Nicholas, Corn st, Bristol

Hodgson, Asher, Liverpool, out of business. June 20 at 3 at offices of Bartlett, Dale st, Liverpool

Irons, Arthur John, Leicester, out of business. June 16 at 1 at offices of Miles and Co, Bank st, Leicester

James, Henry Robert, Kingsland rd, Licensed Victualler. June 15 at 3 at offices of Barrett, Leadenhall st

Jary, George Henry, Bury, Lancaster, Boot and Shoe Maker.
June 16 at 3 at Knowsley Hotel, Haymarket st, Bury. Molesworth,
Rochdale

Jenkins, Francis, Liverpool, Importer of American Woodenware.
June 20 at 2 at offices of Fildes, North John st, Liverpool
Jennings, Richard, Epworth, Lincoln, Butcher. June 17 at 2 at offices
of Sharp, Epworth

Shaw, James. Manchester, Glass Merchant. June 21 at 3 at the Trade Protection Association, China buildings, St. Ann's st, Manchester. Tremewen, Manchester

Sheppard, Arthur Nelson, Roman rd, Old Ford, Timber Merchant. June 20 at 3 at offices of Saffery and Co, Old Jewry chambers. Eastwood, Great St. Helen's

Sherrington, Job, Wigan, Lancaster, Grocer. June 20 at 3 at the
Minorca Hotel, Wallgate. Wood, Wigan

Smith, Charles Jesse, High st, Camden Town, Wine Merchant..
June 16 at 2 at offices of Foreman and Co, Gresham st. Badham
and Williams, Salter's Hall ct, Cannon st
Snowden, Edward, Pagnell, Peterborough, Rope Manufacturer.
June 16 at 3.30 at Mansion house chbrs, Queen Victoria st. Buckby,
Leicester

Stoddart, John Atkin, Spurstowe rd, Hackney, Shipbroker's Clerk.
June 14 at 3 at offices of Bridger, Botolph lane, Eastcheap
Thomas, William, Swansea, Glamorgan, Builder. June 14 at 2 at
offices of Donague, Worcester pl, Swansea

Townend, Edward, Huddersfield, Farmer. June 17 at 3 at offices of
Booth, John William st, Huddersfield

Whitaker, John, Ilkley, York, Oil Merchant. June 14 at 3 at offices of Atkinson and Wilson, Tyrell st, Bradford

Wilding, Arthur, Wolverhampton, Grocer. June 18 at 11 at offices of Stratton, Queen st, Wolverhampton

Wilks, Blfred, Walsall, Stafford, Grocer.

June 21 at 11 at offices of

Glover, Lichfield chbrs, Leicester st, Walsall Wilson, Thomas, North Dalton, York, Farmer. June 16 at 2 at offices. of Pickering, Parliament st, Kingston-upon-Hull. Leak and Co, Kingston-upon-Hull

Wood, James Henry, Kingston-upon-Hull, Music Hall Manager. June 14 at 3 at offices of Chambers, Scale lane, Kingston-upon-Hull

Wood, Enoch, Patricroft, Lancaster, Corn Merchant. June 16 at 3 at offices of Marlow and Dixon, Cross st, Manchester

Wood, William, Greuard rd, Peckham, Boot and Shoe Manufacturer.. June 15 at 3 at offices of Bordman and Co, Victoria st, Trinity st,. Southwark

Jones, John, Aberdare, Glamorgan, Fruiterer, June 15 at 10 at offices SCHWEITZER'S COCOATINA,

of Howell, Cannon st, Aberdaro

Kettler, Frederick, Commercial rd, Licensed Victualler. June 13 at 10.30 at offices of Dobson, Minories

Kilroy, Bernard Mark, Mare st, Hackney, Fishmonger. June 20 at 11 at Masons Hall Tavern, Masons' Avenue, Basinghall st. Fulcher, Horton rd, Hackney

Kingsbury, Phillips Lucas, Fulham rd, Silk Mercer. June 23 at 3 at Guildhall Tavern, Gresham st. Lawrence and Co, Old Jewry chmbrs

June 13 at

Kirtley, Robert, West Hartlepool, Durham, Plumber. 11 at Brunswick Hotel, West Hartlepool Lingwood, Francis, Grosvenor terrace, London Fields, Trimming Manufacturer. June 16 at 3 at offices of Goodwin and Co, Coleman st. Kisbey, Cheapside

Luff, William, Cam berwell rd. Bootmaker. June 23 at 2 at offices of Gray, Ludgate-hill

Martin, Walter Ernest, Chester, Restaurant House Keeper. June 13 at 12 at 13, Northgate st, Chester. Tatlock st, Chester Mercer, James, Bury, Lancaster Grease Manufacturer. June 15 at 3 at offices of Anderton, Garden st, Bury

Nancollis, Robert, Castle Northwich,, Chester, Joiner. June 17 at 3 at offices of William Poole and Co, Princes st, Manchester. Tremewen, Deansgate

Neale, John, Gravesend, Hotel Keeper. June 15 at 3 at offices of Pannell, Basinghall st. Philp, Walbrook

Newitt, Arthur William, Warwick rd, Kensington, Schoolmaster. June 10 at 12 at offices of Phelps and Co, Gresham st. Whitton, Towcester

Nicholes, Joseph Henry, Gt Tower st, Licensed Victualler. June 15 at 11 at offices of Jones, Mark lane

Oldacre, Thomas Smith, Stoke-upon-Trent, Stafford, Saddler. June 15 at 11 at offices of Ashmall, Albion st, Hanley

Peake, John, Birkenhead, Draper. June 16 at 3 at offices of Thomp. sou, Hamilton st, Birkenhead

Philcox, Henry Frederick, Grays, Essex, Tailor. June 20 at 11 at offices of Preston, Mark lane

Pickard, Abraham, Benjamin Pickard, and George Pickard, Bradford, Wood Box Manufacturers. June 16 at 11 at offices of Richardson, Cheapside, Bradford

Pitcher, William Michael, Cheltenham, Bootmaker. June 15 at 3 at offices of Billings, Regent st. Cheltenham

Pohl, Otto Erast. Liverpool, Salt Merchant. June 20 at 2 at offices of Harmond and Co, North John st, Liverpool. Stone and Co, Liverpool

Postlethwaite, Roger, Millom, Cumberland, Farmer. June 15 at 11 at Temperance Hall, Ulverston. Jackson, Ulver ton Preston, John, Gleason, Aldingham, Lancaster, Coal Dealer. June 4 at 11 at Temperance Hall, Ulverston Sims, Barr,w-in-Fur.

ness

Ratcliffe, Thomas Samuel, Bradley, Bilston, Stafford. Grocer. June 16 at 11 at offices of Hall and Son, Lichfield st, Bilston Robson, William Ashford, Kent, Marine Store Dealer. June 17 at 11 at offices of Waterman, Bank st, Ashford Redfearn, John Hooson, Worksop, Nottingham, Builder. June 20 at 3 at offices of Hodding and Breevor, Potter st, Worksop Reed, Henry Joseph, Norwich, Saddle and Harness Maker. June 13 at 12 at the Coachmakers' Arms, Bethel-street, Norwich Robinson, Brice Grant Dean, Heywood, Lancaster, Plumber. June 20 at 3 at 17 York st, Heywood. Henry Todd

Rolfe, Arthur Tillott, Garboldisham, Norfolk, Grocer. June 25 at 12 at offices of Stanley, Bank Plain, Norwich Samuels, Lewis, Bristol, Publican's Valuer. June 11 at 12 at offices of William Andrews, Nicholas st. Bristol- Essery, Bristol Serace, Isaac, Mount st, Grosvenor sq, Coffee-house Keeper. June 14 at 3 at offices of Knight, Bow st, Covent Garden Sealy, Frederick George, Caldicot, Monmouth, Builder. June 17 at 3 at offices of Haines, Westgate Chambers, Berkeley st, Gloucester

Anti-Dyspeptic Cocoa or Chocolate Powder.

Guaranteed Pure Soluble Cocoa of the Finest Quality, with the excess of fat extracted.

The Faculty pronounce it "the most nutritious, perfectly digestible beverage for Breakfast, Luncheon, or Supper, and invaluable for Invalids and Children."

Highly commended by the entire Medica Press. Being without sugar, spice, or other admixture, it suits all palates, keeps better in all climates, and is four times the strength of cocoas THICKENED yet WEAKENED with starch, &c., and IN REALITY CHEAPER than such Mixtures.

Made instantaneously with boiling water, a teaspoonful to a Breakfast Cup, costing less than a halfpenny.

COCOATINA A LA VANILLE is the most delicate, digestible, cheapest Manila Chocolate, and may be taken when richer chocolate is pre-hibited.

In tin packets at 18. fd., 3s., 5s. 6d, &c., by Chemists and Grocers,
Charities on Special Terms by the Sole Proprietors,
Я. SCHWEITZE‹ & CO., 19, Adam-street, London, W.c.

[blocks in formation]

MADAME

TUSSAUD'S

EXHIBITION BAKER-STREET.-On View, portrait Models of KING ALFONSO XII. and VICTOR EMMANUEL, the Duke and Duchess o EDINBURGH, the EMPEROR OF RUSSIA, the SHAH of PERSIA,. Sir SAMUEL BAKER, the late Dr. LIVINGSTONE, Mr. H. M. STANLEY, Rev. H. WARD BEECHER, Sir GARNET WOLSELEY, MARSHAL MCMAHON, MARSHAL BAZAINE, M. THIERS, the late CHARLES DICKENS, and Dr. KENEALY, M.P. Also superb and costly Court Dresses; the complete line of British Monarchs from William the Conqueror to Queen Victoria; and over 300 Portraits. Models of Celebrated and Distinguished Characters. Admission, 18. Children under twelve,6d. Extra room,6d. Open from 10a.m. til. 0p m

ROYAL POLYTECHNIC.-Lurline, the Rhine

Maiden, by Mr. George Buckland.--Arctic Exploration, by Commander Cheyne, R.N.-Porcelain Manufacture, by Mr. J. D. Cogan. The Photographer's Sunbeam, by Mr. T. C. Hepworth.The Rising in the Transvaal, by Mr. W. R. May.-Etherdo, the Juggler. The Microscope, Electricity, the Isle of Wight, &c., by Mr. J. L. King.-Fleuss's Diving Apparatus.-The Electric Railway. Balmain's Luminous Paint Room.-Recitals by Mrs. Stirling and others at 3 on Saturdays. Admission to the whole 1s. Open. from 12 till 5 and 7 till 10.

[blocks in formation]

MILNERS' SAFES for STAMPS, DEEDS, JEWELLERY,
PLATE, BOOKS, DOCUMENTS, &c.
MILNERS' SAFES for SOLICITORS, JEWELLERS,
AUCTIONEERS, BANKERS, &c.

Manufactory: PHOENIX SAFE WORKS, Liverpool. London:
MILNERS' BUILDINGS, opposite Moorgate-street Station, E.C.
Manchester: 28, MARKET STREET.

The Companies Acts, 1862 to 1879.

Every requisite onder the above Acts supplied on the shortest notice
The BOOKS and FORMS kept in stock for immediate ase
MEMORANDA and ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION speedily printed
n the proper form for registration and distribution. SHARE CER-
TIFICATES, DEPENTURES, &c., engraved and printed. OFFICIAL
SEALS designed and executed.

Solicitors' Account Books.

RICHARD FLINT & CO.

Stationers, Printers, Engravers, Registration Agents, &c., 49 FLEET-STREET, LONDON, E.C. (corner of Serjeants' Annual and other Peturns Stamped and Filed

inn).

ATES & ALEXANDER, General Printers, LonsChancery-lane Post-office.

AW, Parliamentary, and General Printing by

LAW;es Chancery-lane.

AUCTIONEERS' Work, Particulars and Conditions

of Sale, Posters, &c., printed by Yates & Alexander.

PAMPHLETS, Books, Newspapers, Circulars, Rules

and Regulations of Societies printed by Yates & Alexander. ROSPECTUSES of Public Companies, Memo

PROSP

AN IMPORTANT CONVENIENCE TO LAW WRITERS AND

SOLICITORS.

STEPHENS' SCARLET INK FOR STEEL PENS,

This new Ink supplies the demand continually made but never before met, for a Red Ink which is uninjured by Steel or other Metallic Pens. Steel Pens left in this ink for months do not impair the beauty of its colour, nor are the Pens in the least corroded by it. The existing Red Inks rapidly destroy Steel Pens, and lose their red colour if used with other than Gold or Quill Pens. This new colour is a very rich scarlet red of great beauty. The colour of this ink is not affected by use upon parchment, and is consequently of great value to Solicitors and Draughtsmen.

Sold in stone bottles, retail at 1s., 2s., 3; and Imperial Quarts of 40 ounces at 6. each. Also in glass bottles at 6d. and 1s. each. SOLD BY ALL STATIONERS.

HAMPTON & SONS make NO CHARGE for

inserting particulars in their FREE MONTHLY REGISTER of ESTATES, TOWN and COUNTRY HOUSES, Furnished or Unfurnished, or for Sale, to be had GRATIS at their Offices, or post-free for two stamps. Published on the 1st of the month, and particulars for insertion should be sent not later than five days previous to end of preceding month.

Valuations for Probate and Transfer. Surveys.

Estate and Auction Offices, 8, Pall Mall East, S.W.

THURGOOD &ctioneers, Lonsdale Chambers, 27, Chancers-
CO., Estate and Land Agent,

lane, W.C., hold PERIODICAL SALES of Property, at the MART, the
Second Tuesday in each month. Railway, School Board, Corporation,
Board of Works, and other Compensations conducted. Valuations ter
Probate, Mortgages, &c. Estates managed.
A scale of charges upon application.

DEBENHAM, TEWSON, FARMER, &

BRIDGEWATER'S LIST of ESTATES and HOUSES to be SOLD or LET, incind ng Landed Estates, Town and Country Resid. ences, Hunting and Shooting Quarters, Farms, Ground Rents, Rent Charges, House Property and Investments generally, is published on the first day of each month, and may be ob ained.free of charge, at their offices, 80, Cheapside, E.C, or will be sent by post in return for two stamps.-Particulars for insertion should be received not later than four days previous to the end of the preceding month.

randa and Articles of Association, Share Certificates, Receipts CLAPHAM COMMON.-To Professional Men.—To

Notices, &c., printed by Yates & Alexander, 27, Chancery-lane.

DISCOUNT filinga, 27, Chancery-lane.
ISCOUNT for Cash allowed by Yates & Alexander,

STATEMENTS of Claim and Defence, Affidavits

Petitions, and Pleadings printed by Yates & Alexander.

BRAND AND CO'S OWN SAUCE.
SOUPS, PRESERVED PROVISIONS,
POTTED MEATS and YORK and GAME PIES,
ES

also

SSENCE OF BEEF, BEEF TEA,
TURTLE SOUP, and JELLY, and other
SPECIALITIES for INVALIDS.

CAUTION:-BEWARE OF IMITATIONS.
Sole Address,

11, LITTLE STANHOPE STREET MAYFAIR, W.

KINAHAN'S LL WHISKY.
KINAHAN'S LL WHISKY.

Pure, Mild an
Mellow, Delicious and most Wholesome. Universally recom
mended by the Profession. The Cream of Old Irish Whiskies

KINAHAN'S LL WHISKY Dr. Hassall says.

"Soft and Mellow, Pure, well Matured, and of very excellen
quality."

KT INAHAN'S LL WHISKY. Gold Medal, Paris

Exhibition, 1878; Dublin Exhibition, 1865, the Gold Medal.
20, Great Titchfield-street, London, W.

private portion of Business Premises. Oeenpyapply to Messrs. J. MCLACHLAN & SONS, Estate Agents, Claphaming one of the best positions in Clapham.-For detailed partienlars

common.

CL

LAPHAM.-To be Let, a Detached Residence, fitted with every comfort; good bed and reception rooms, large garden and stable. Also a similar Residence without stable; also a Semi-detached House, situate in a choice position, and convenient for access to City and West-end.-Detailed particulars of Messrs. J. McLACHLAN & SONS, Estate Agents, Clapham-common, and 35, St, James-street, Piccadilly. (2469-2170).

be Let, a most convenient

CLAPHAM PARKtation, and within a short distance of

Clapham-common. Six bedrooms, dressing room, fitted bathroom, three reception rooms, and offices. Extensive grounds with beauti fully sheltered lawn, being surrounded by a belt of fine timbers. Excellent stabling, coach-house, and yard, with gardener's cottage, &c. Rent, £140.--Apply to Messrs. J. MCLACHLAN & Sons, Estate Agents, Clapham-common, and 35, St. James-street, Piccadilly. (2339).

CLAPHAM PARK.-A Semi-detached Residence,

well decorated; seven bedrooms, pleasant reception rooms and offices. Near station. Rent, £90. Apply to Messrs. J. MCLACHLAN & SON, Estate Agents, Clapham-common, and 35, St. James-street, Piccadilly. (2209).

CLAPHAM

PARK.-A

comfortab'e Detached Double-fronted House, in thorough repair; six bedroms, bath room, three reception rooms, and Offices. Detached stabling greenhouse, and good grounds. Rent, £100 per annum.-Apply to Messrs. J. McLACHLAN & SONS, Estate Agents, Clapham-common, and 35, St. James-street, Piccadilly. (2162).

MESSRS, BAXTER, PAYNE, & LEPPER beg

respectfully to announce that their AUCTION SALES of Estates, Building Land, Ground Rents, House Property, and si convertible Securities will be held at the MART, TOKENHOUSEYARD, E.C., on the following days during the year 1881. Sales will also be held on special days when required.

DINNEFORD'S MAGNESIA. Monday, June 20

The Medical; Profession for over Forty Years have approved of this pure
solution as the best remedy for
ACIDITY of the STOMACH, HEARTBURN, HEADACHE, GOUT
and INDIGESTION,

And as the safest Aperient for Delicate Constitutions, Ladies
Children, and Infants.

Friday, July 8

Monday, July 25
Wednesday, Aug. 10
Wednesday, Sep. 14

Wednesday, Oct 12 Monday, Nov. 7 Wednesday, Dec. 14 Terms on Application. Auction Sales of Furniture, Farming Stock, Growing Crops, Timber, Underwood, &c., by arrangement. Property Register, together with a separate List of Farms, published monthly, and forwarded gratis on application.

BAXTER, PAYNE, & LEPPER, 69, King William-street, E.C., and

DINNEFORD'S MAGNESIA. Town Hall, Bromley, Kent.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

Strand, by an entrance inside the archway leading to the great quadrangle.

BY THE CHANCERY CAUSE LISTS, which will be found in another column, it appears that the causes set down in the Chancery Division at the commencement of the present sittings numbered 127 before the Master of the Rolls, 45 before Vice-Chancellor BACON, 120 before Vice-Chancellor HALL, 115 before Mr. Justice FRY, and 49 before Mr. Justice KAY, making a total of 456 causes. At the commencement of Easter Sittings the list of the Chancery Division contained 417 causes, and this time last year the list contained 419 causes, so that the present sittings of the Chancery Division begin with a rather larger proportion of work than usual. The list of the Appeal Court contains 154 appeals, final or interlocutory. A year ago, the appeals in the list were 196, and at the Easter Sittings, 151.

A CURIOUS QUESTION in connection with the law of homicide recently came before the High Court at Calcutta. In Empress v. Gonesh Dooley (Ind. L. R. 5 Cal. 351) two snake-charmers had been tried for murdering a boy. They were exhibiting to a crowd a venomous cobra, whose fangs (as they knew) had not been ex

CASES REPORTED IN THE WEEKLY REPORTER. tracted, and one of them placed it on the head of a boy Attorney-General, The v. Mitchell. (Q.B.Div.) whom they had selected to assist them in showing off their dexterity in snake-charming. The boy took

Castro v. The Queen. (H.L.)

Hamilton v. Chaine. (App.)

.........

Thornewell v. Johnson. (Ch. Div. V.C.B.)

Maltby, In re. (Q.B.Div.)

Wright v. Marwood. (App.)

.....

...... 669

......... 676
.........3 78
677

673

Dudley Gas Works Company v. Warmington. (Q.B.Div.)...... 680 fright, and in trying to push away the snake was bitten by it in the finger, and he died from the wound. The jury had acquitted both prisoners, on the ground that the exhibition of snake-charming was authorized by custom, and that they had not intended to kill the boy. The sessions judge thought that they had caused the boy's death by an act of gross negligence, and he referred the case to the High Court. Mr. Justice McDONELL held that the prisoner who put the snake on the boy's head had been guilty of "culpable homicide not amounting to murder," and not of the minor offence of causing death by negligence," because he knew that the act was likely to cause death (although he had no intention of causing it), and that the other prisoner was punishable for abetting to homicide.

CURRENT TOPICS.

THERE IS NO FOUNDATION for the statement that the vacant lord justiceship has been offered to, and declined by, the Solicitor-General.

IT IS ANNOUNCED that the Master of the Rolls will sit in the Court of Appeal at Lincoln's-inn for five days next week, commencing on Monday, and will take motions and petitions in his own court on Saturday.

IT 18 UNDERSTOOD that the chambers of the Master of the Rolls will not be removed to the Royal Courts of Justice until the Long Vacation, by which time the approaches to the rooms on the west side of the central hall, which are being prepared for them, will be completed.

VICE-CHANCELLOR HALL'S chambers were removed to the Royal Courts of Justice on Saturday last. They now occupy the second floor in the block on the east side of the central hall, the judge's room being on the court floor at the north end. It may be convenient to practitioners to know that there are now two entrances to this part of the building on the north, from Carey-street, near the previous entrance, and on the south, from the

[ocr errors]

THE PROBATE in England, within the last few days, of the will of Pope Pius IX. recalls attention to the rule that our courts will not recognize any will of personalty except such as the Probate Court of this country has adjudged to be the last will. The result is that if any action has to be brought in any of our courts in respect of personal property in this country comprised in a foreign will, probate must be taken out here. At the same time, it is the established practice of the Probate Court here that where a will has been proved in a foreign court, a duly authenticated copy will be admitted to probate, without further evidence of the validity of the will, as it is presumed that the foreign court has been satisfied on that point (Miller v. James, 21 W. R. 273). Why should not every other court in this country follow the example of the Probate Court, and, without requiring the formality of an English probate, proceed on a duly authenticated copy of the foreign probate ?

"EVERY MAN has a right so to shape the disposition of his property as to avoid the probate and legacy duty, if

possible, and there is no fraud in so doing" (see Re Evans 2 Cr. M. & R. 205). But since the passing of the Customs and Inland Revenue Act, 1881 (44 Vict. c. 12), s. 38 (in the case of all persons dying after the 1st inst.), the disposition of property cannot be shaped so as to avoid probate duty; hence the use of quasi-testamentary voluntary settlements will, in future, be restricted to cases where the intended objects of bounty are of distant degrees of consanguinity to the person who is providing for them. In these cases it will still be important to save the legacy duty by executing a revocable settlement, for by section 38, sub-section 3, the stamp duty in the settlement is to be returned on the delivery of the account required by the Act, duly stamped.

THE SERIOUS CONTROVERSY pending between the telegraph clerks and the Postmaster-General may give rise to more than one important legal question, as to each of

|

which, however, there is happily a fairly certain solution. It is understood that the clerks demand a Civil Service status, disclaim the obligation to work overtime, and claim the same right to "strike" as that which is enjoyed by private employés, not being water or gas employés. The first two points appear to be settled by the Telegraph Act, 1868, and the third depends upon the construction to be put upon the Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 1875. As to the Civil Service status, the 8th section of the Telegraph Act, 1868, provided that "such officers and clerks "[of three telegraph companies mentioned in that section] “as enter into the service of the Postmaster-General shall be entitled to count their past years of continuous service with the telegraph companies as years passed in the service of the Crown, and all such officers and clerks shall be deemed to be, to all intents and purposes, officers and clerks in the permanent Civil Service of the Crown, and shall be entitled to the same but no other privileges." An attempt was made in Reg. v. Postmaster-General (32 L. T. 559) to get this enactment applied to all companies generally whose undertaking became vested in the Postmaster-General, but the contention of the clerks was shown by that case to be hopeless. If it be desired to give the clerks the Civil Service status, which gives, under the Superannuation Act, 1859, a right to a pension, subject to the power of the Crown to dismiss at any time without pension and without compensation, an Act of Parliament would seem necessary for the purpose. As to a "strike," the rights of the parties are not quite clear; but it is worthy of note that the Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 1875, amends the law of conspiracy as to "trade disputes" only, and expressly (sce section 3) excepts from the effect of that amendment the law relating to (inter alia) | "any offence against the State." The hours of work appear to be fixed by section 15 of the Telegraph Act, which empowers the Postmaster-General from time to time to "make regulations for determining the hours during which the offices appointed by him to be places for the receipt and dispatch of messages shall be open for the transaction of telegraphic business." Copies of these regulations must by section 23 be laid before Parliament, and the same section directs that "all regulations so made shall be binding on the parties interested in the subject-matter thereof to the same extent as if such regulations formed part of this Act." The Memorandum issued by the Post Office authorities distinctly claims the right to exact compulsory overtime work, but not, apparently, on the ground of any express contract, unless, indeed, the 6th section of the Telegraph Act, 1868, which preserves to the Post Offiec all agreements with the telegraph companies be relied on. "It should be evident to everyone who is conversant with telegraph working," says the Memorandum, "that it is impossible satisfactorily to dispose of the fluctuating business of a telegraph office without having recourse

to overtime, which is therefore compulsory, and in this respect there is no change from the practice existing under the late telegraph companies." This sets up an implied contract, the burden of proof of which would rest with the authorities, who, if they could prove it, would, we think, be entitled only to reasonable overtime at a reasonable rate of extra payment to the employés. Probably a petition of right would lie to recover reasonable remuneration. On the other hand, if the Post Office authorities were to dismiss a clerk for refusing to work overtime, the clerk would have no practical remedy, for the action of wrongful dismissal is an action of tort, to which the maxim that the Queen can do no wrong would apply. The overtime branch of the case seems to be clearly one for a compromise.

8

[blocks in formation]

Ar the present time, when the subject of the provision of hospitals for the smallpox and other infectious diseases is so frequently brought to the public notice, the recent decision of the House of Lords, in the case of The Metropolitan Asylums District Managers v. Hill (29 W. R. 617, L. R. 6 App. Cas. 193), is one of considerable interest. The legal questions that may arise with respect to the position of persons suffering from an infectious disorder, and to the mode of dealing with such persons, are questions of peculiar difficulty. Some. what analogous questions arise with regard to cognate subjects. The law of nuisance in general is fraught with difficulties, and if general principles were pushed to their utmost logical results still greater difficulties would arise. Undoubtedly matters which, in law, are nuisances exist in every direction, and arising, as they do in many cases, out of the exigencies of an advanced civilization, and necessitated as they are by the wants and interests of the community, they are often allowed to exist by a kind of tacit compromise. Great perplexities, for instance, have been experienced in reference to the sewage question. Large towns must get rid of their sewage, and that sewage often creates a nuisance. The conditions of human existence, when population becomes in anywise abundant, are fertile with occasions of nuisance, and in respect of such nuisances a conflict of interests and rights must often arise. The difficulty of reconciling the interests and rights of a person seized with an infectious disorder with those of others is very great. The truth is, that in this and similar cases the question is one of a struggle for existence in which the instincts of self-preservation on either side are very keenly brought into play, and with which the law consequently has much difficulty in deal. ing, just as it has in adjusting the rights of landlords and tenants in a country where the necessary conditions of things have produced earth-hunger. The sick man. claims to survive and get well, and to use the best means of doing so. The rest of mankind claim not to be ex posed to the risk of infection. In a completely selfish community the infected person would probably be put to death, but the result of civilization is everywhere to modify the struggle for existence, and some compromise between the interests of the two parties must be effected. It is very difficult to define the rights of the infected person and the community. For instance, the infected person, on becoming somewhat better, in order to com. plete his recovery wishes to go to some other place for change of air. Conceivably his doctor tells him it is of vital importance for him to do so. Does he commit a nuisance to the inhabitants of the place to which he removes by bringing a source of infection into their neighbourhood? On the other hand, if he stays where he is, he is a source of infection to those who inhabit his neigbourhood. The same sort of difficulty

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

arises with regard to hospitals for the treatment of infectious disorders. It seems probable that a number of smallpox patients scattered about in their own homes, possibly in densely-populated neighbourhoods all over a town, must tend to spread infection to a greater extent than hospitals specially provided in particular localities; on the other hand, the particular localities naturally cry out that the whole community ought not to be benefited at their expense. The question is one of great difficulty. Lord Blackburn endeavours in his judgment, in the case to which we have alluded, to lay down some general doctrines and principles of the common law on the subject of infected persons. If any living person could possibly do so satisfactorily, his lordship undoubtedly could, but the result of his endeavour is not entirely satisfactory. Every person who has ever attempted to make legal definitions must many times have with reluctance acknowledged the inevitable necessity there is that legal definitions should contain indefinite terms, and so really be hardly definitions at all. Nevertheless, such definitions, though not perfect, are useful as approximations to definiteness. Lord Blackburn commences his remarks thus: "Those who have charge of a sick person, if he is helpless (whether the disease is infectious or not), are at common law under a legal obligation to do to the best of their ability what is necessary for the preservation of the sick person." This may be admitted subject to the question who can be considered as having charge of a sick person, and whether any person is under legal obligation to have such charge. A person who can he said to undertake the charge is probably subject to the liability. His lordship proceeds: "When the disease is infectious, there is a legal obligation on the sick person and those who have the custody of him not to do anything that can be avoided which shall tend to spread the infection, and if either do so, as by bringing the infected person into a public thoroughfare, it is an indictable offence, though it will be a defence to the indictment if it can be shown that there was a sufficient cause to excuse what is prima facie wrong.'

[ocr errors]

The question that at once suggests itself to the reader of this proposition is as to the meaning of the term " anything that can be avoided." Lord Blackburn gives as an illustration the case of a person bedridden with an infectious disorder in a house which takes fire, the removal of whom through the crowd necessarily involves the probability of infection to others. He says that probably a much less degree of necessity might form an excuse, but that some excuse is required. He expressly declines, however, to determine what constitutes a sufficient excuse. It is obvious that we are here dealing with cases in which the limits of the respective rights of the individual and the public are extremely vague and undefinable. In the case selected by his lordship it is obvious that to leave a helpless bedridden person to perish by a horrible death is so dreadful an alternative as compared with the mere possibility of causing the death of another or other persons by the disease, that the law could not possibly undertake to insist on its adoption. And it seems to us, on reflection, to be almost impossible to lay down any principle. It must be in every case a choice of evils the comparison of which must depend on the particular circumstances.

His lordship proceeds to say that when those who have the custody of the sick person have not the means of isolating him from the other inmates, which is often the case with the poor, he is of opinion that that inability would form a sufficient excuse to an indictment for not doing so, and also that the neighbours could not maintain any action for the damage which they would in such case sustain from the proximity of the infected person, it being a necessary incident to the use of property for habitations in town that contagious sickness may befall their neighbours. We doubt whether the absence of means of isolation can be the ground of non-liability. Apart from statutory obligation, we feel very doubtful as to any original liability from which

excuse is necessary. The mere fact that a man is sick of an infectious disorder cannot give rise to a cause of action, and we doubt whether those who are around him can be bound as a matter of law to take any active steps in the matter with regard to the protection of neighbours. It is obvious that the measure of any such liability would be so vague and uncertain that it might be intolerable. The question what are proper and sufficient measures of isolation would be matter of conflicting opinion as to which experts would differ. Could it be contended that a person in charge of a patient sick of an infectious disorder is to be liable to an action at the suit of any person who may catch the disease, in which it would depend on the opinion of the jury, based on conflicting testimony of experts, whether this or that particular measure of disinfection or isolation ought to have been employed?

The learned law lord seems, moreover, from the terms he subsequently employs, to doubt whether there can be said to be any duty in such a case, for he proceeds to say, "If those who have the charge of the infected person have the means of isolating him on the spot, they certainly do well to use them, and if it cannot be done on the spot, and they can either, by their own means, or by the aid of charitable persons who have erected an hospital, find a place where he can be isolated so as to avoid the risk of infection, they will do well to use those means. I do not mean to express any opinion as to whether at common law they would or would not be responsible for not doing so." He then proceeds, "But there is

no authority, and, I think, no principle, for saying that they are justified in removing him to a place where the neighbours would be exposed to contagion, though it may be that those neighbours would be fewer in number than the neighbours of the spot where the infection broke out; nor for saying that if that was done, and the contagion was to amount to a real nuisance, those neighbours might not maintain an action and obtain an injunction to protect themselves against the importation of foreign infection. For though, as I have already said, I think it an incident to the use of a habitation in a town that the occupier must bear the necessary risks of the inmates of a neighbouring habitation falling ill of a contagious disease, I do not think it an incident that he is to submit to his neighbours wilfully, though for very laudable motives and not maliciously, bringing in contagion where it did not previously exist, if the effect is not merely to alarm but to injure him."

We cannot say that we feel very confident as to the absolute soundness of these propositions with regard to the law of the subject, taken strictly. Suppose a patient who falls ill of smallpox in one place is, from reasonable and not merely wanton or selfish motives, removed to another; suppose, for instance, that the father of a family of children removes one of them, being sick of contagious disease, to avoid infecting the others; or suppose that a person living in lodgings in town, without proper means of treatment, is removed by those who have charge of him to his home in the country, and large numbers of persons in the place to which he is removed are infected in consequence, could it be said that every such person would have his action ? Those in charge of the patient are, if this be so, placed between the dreadful alternative of disregarding the most obvious promptings of human nature or of incurring the most ruinous liability. It is not, to our mind, right that the law should undertake to deal too definitely with such matters. The province of the law is to reconcile the conflicting rights and interests of individuals under ordinary circumstances; it ought not too nicely to prescribe as obligations to be enforced by legal sanctions courses of conduct which contravene ordinary human nature. At any rate we do not think that the common, or, in other words, judge-made, law ought to do so. There was, it has always seemed to us, something of wisdom in

« PreviousContinue »