(i.) C. C. R.-Evidence Confession-Duty of Prosecuting Counsel and Solicitor-Bail.-A confession is not admissible evidence where it is made in consequence of inducements held out by a person in authority, or after the accused was told that it would be better for him to speak the truth. Prosecuting counsel and solicitors having charge of prosecutions should satisfy themselves before putting confession in evidence that the confession was not made under circumstances to render it inadmissible. Bail is not to be withheld as a punishment.Reg. v. Rose, 78 L.T. 119.

Custom :

(ii.) C. D.-Tenant for Life of Manors-Leases for Lives-Fines-Income.Under a will a tenant for life of manors, without impeachment of waste, had power to grant leases for 21 years. According to the custom, he granted leases for lives to copyholders on nominal rents with fines. Held, that he was entitled to the fines as income.-In re Meadows; Norie v. Bennett, L.R. [1898] 1 Ch. 300; 78 L.T. 13. (iii.) C. D.-Common Bull-Tithes-Inclosure Act (Haddenham Parish), 1830 (11 Geo. IV., c. 4), ss. 37 d 38.-There was a custom that a parson of a parish, as owner of the great tithes, should keep a bull and a boar for common use of the parishioners. Lands were allotted under an Inclosure Act in satisfaction and discharge of the great tithes. Held, that the burden of the custom was not shifted to the owners of the lands in the absence of express words in the Act.-Lanchbury v. Bode, 78 L.T. 14.

Damages, Measure of:

(iv.) Q. B. D.-Breach of Warranty-Difference in Value-Sale of Goods Act, 1893 (56 & 57 Vict., c. 71), s. 53, sub-ss. 2, 3.-The plaintiff bought at an auction for £21 an orchid described as the only known plant of that species. It turned out to be an ordinary plant, worth about 7s. 6d., and in an action in the county court for breach of warranty, the defendants paid in £21, which the judge held to be sufficient. Held (per Day, J.), that the county court judge was wrong, and that the plaintiff would be entitled, in addition, to interest on his money and his expenses in rearing the plant, and (per Lawrence, J.), that he Iwould be entitled to the difference between the actual value of the plant and what it would have been worth if it had been as warranted.— Ashworth v. Wells, 77 L.T. 691.

Deed:

(v.) C. A.-Construction-Estate Clause-Recitals-Omission of MortgageEstoppel.-General words, whether descriptive of parcels or found in the estate clause, may be controlled or modified by other parts of the instrument and by the scope of the deed read as a whole, and for this purpose negative words are not requisite. By a settlement on the marriage of M. T., C., who had the fee (subject to two mortgages to A.), and of T., who had a life estate, conveyed, "according to their respective estates and interests," the fee and "all the estate, &c., of C. and T. respectively in or to arise out of the said premises" to trustees to the use of C., T., and M. T. for successive life estates with remainders over. At the date of the settlement (though no reference was made to it in the deed), T. was entitled to a mortgage created by C. T. afterwards voluntarily transferred this to M. T., who charged it in favour of the plaintiffs, who had no notice of the settlement. On the death of C. and of T., a declaration was sought, that this mortgage was a charge on the land, subject only to the mortgages to A. Held, that on the construction of the settlement, this mortgage did not pass, but had priority over the interests of all persons under the settlement, and that no estoppel was created by the representations made by T. in the recitals or by his standing by.-Williams v. Pinckney, 77 L.T. 700.

--

Employer and Workman :(i.) Q. B. D.-Defect in Ship Chartered-Injury to Charterers' Workmen― Employers Liability Act, 1880 (43 & 44 Vict., c. 42), s. 1 (1), 2, 3.— Contractors chartered a ship to bring coal to a wharf, and, in consideration of themselves doing the unloading, received a beneficial allowance from the shipowner. Owing to defective ventilation, gas had accumulated in the vessel, and through the negligence of the contractors' agent, an explosion took place, which injured one of the men engaged by the contractors. Held, that the ship must be considered as part of the "plant" of the contractors, and that the fact that she had no ventilators was known to their agent.-Carter v. Stephenson Clark & Co., 78 L.T. 76.

Education Acts:

(ii.) Q. B. D.-School Board-Superannuation Fund-Elementary Education Act, 1870 (33 & 34 Vict., c. 75), s. 35.-A school board can under sect. 35 of the Act of 1870 establish and manage a superannuation fund contributed to by officers and teachers out of their salaries.-Phillips v. The School Board for London; Cockerton v. The School Board for London, L.R. [1898] 1 Q.B. 4.

Factory:

(iii.) Q. B. D.-Bleaching and Dyeing Works-" Hooking, Packing, and Lapping"-Factory and Workshop Act, 1878 (41 Vict., c. 16), s. 93-Fourth Schedule, Part 1, s. 2.-Premises in which hooking, lapping, makingup, and packing cloth are carried on come within bleaching and dyeing works as defined by the Factory and Workshop Act, 1878.-Rogers v. Manchester Central Packing Company, L.R. [1898] 1 Q.B. 344 ; 78 L.T. 17.

Fishery Acts:-

(iv.) Q. B. D.-Salmon-Illegal Net-Salmon Fishery Acts, 1861 (24 & 25 Vict., c. 109), s. 8; 1873 (36 d 37 Vict., c. 71), s. 18.-The possession of a net illegal as to its mesh, with the intention of catching salmon with it, is not an offence under the Salmon Fishery Acts as such a net is not a "" "like instrument to a snare.-Jones and Parry v. Davies, L.R. [1898] 1 Q.B. 405; 78 L.T. 44.

Franchise: :

(v.) C. A.-Customary Tolls--Franchise Extinguished by Statutory Powers. -A local Act reciting that a corporation had a customary right to receive tolls enacted that the right should remain vested in them for passage over a bridge, and made a variation in the powers. This Act was repealed by a second one, limited to a certain number of years, which authorised another scale of tolls. Held, that the statutory right extinguished the ancient right, and the right to tolls ceased altogether on the expiry of the second Act.-Taylor v. Corporation of New Windsor, L.R. [1898] 1 Q.B. 186; 77 L.T. 585.

Friendly Society:

(vi.) Q. B.-Nomination by Member-Revocation by Will—Friendly Societies Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict., c. 60), s. 15, sub-s. 3.-A nomination made under sect. 15 of the Act may be revoked by a subsequent will not communicated to the society during the life of the nominating testator.-Bennett v. Slater and Another, L.R. [1898] 1 Q.B. 469. Highways:

(vii.) C. D.-Roadside Slips. The public right of way over a road extends prima facie from fence to fence.-Locke King v. Woking Urban District Council, 77 L.T. 790.

(viii.) Q. B. D.-Timber Trees Causing Obstruction-Highway Act, 1835 5 & 6 Wm. IV., c. 50), 88. 65, 66.-The Court affirmed an order of

magistrates under sect. 65 of the Highway Act, 1835, for the removal of a yew tree growing on private land and causing an obstruction to a highway, and held that sect. 66, which says that an owner shall not be required to remove a tree growing in a hedge unless the highway is to be enlarged, has no application to a case of obstruction.-Bullen v. Wakeley, 77 L.T. 689.

(i.) Q. B. D.-Extraordinary Traffic-Person Liable-Highways and Locomotives (Amendment) Act, 1878 (41 & 42 Vict., c. 77), s. 23.-Builders of a county asylum entered into a contract for the haulage of plant by horse or traction engine, but no route was specified. The highway was damaged by the extraordinary traffic. Held, that the builders were not the persons by whose order the traffic had been conducted within sect. 23 of the Act.-Pethick Bros. v. Dorset County Council, 77 L.T. 683. (ii.) Q. B. D.-Old public footway-Private Street Works Act, 1892 (55 ɗ 56 Vict., c. 57), ss. 2, 3, 5, 6.-A street formed upwards of 70 years ago had always been open at both ends into old highways, and used without interruption as a public footpath, though no repairs had been done to it beyond clearing away refuse. Held, that the onus probandi is upon the authority to shew that a street is a street within the Private Street Works Act, and that this was not such a street, being a footway repairable by the inhabitants at large. Rishton v. The Mayor of Haslingden, L.R. [1898] 1 Q.B. 294; 77 L.T. 620.

Highway Surveyor :

(iii.) Q. B. D.-Member of District Council supplying team for work on Highways-Highway Act, 1835, s. 46-Public Health Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict., c. 55), s. 144-Local Government Act, 1894 (56 & 57 Vict., c. 73), ss. 25, 46. By the Highway Act, 1835, sect. 46, a parish surveyor may contract for carrying materials for repair of a highway, but may not have an interest in the contract without the licence of two justices. By the Public Health Act, 1875, sect. 144, urban authorities have the powers of parish surveyors, and by the Local Government Act, 1894, sect. 25, rural district councils have the powers as to highways of urban authorities. A person let a team of horses to be used for repairing a highway within the district of a council of which he was a member, and he had no licence from justices. Held, that the magistrates were right in dismissing a summons against him for penalties under the Highways Act of 1835.-Buckley v. Hanson, 77 L.T. 666.

Husband and Wife :

(iv.) P. D.-Divorce-Desertion.-Where more than two years before a wife's petition for dissolution, a husband who had committed adultery absconded to avoid a criminal charge, the Court on the authority of Drew v. Drew L.R. [1888] 13 P.D. 97, found him guilty of desertion.Wynne v. Wynne, L.R. [1898] P. 18.

(v.) P. D.-Divorce-Permanent Maintenance-Dum sola without dum casta Clause. The respondent husband's income from investments was £972 a year, and he had a reversionary interest of the present value of £5,383. There was one child of the marriage, and the petitioner, it was suggested, was about to marry a gentleman of some means. The Court ordered a permanent maintenance secured, of £350, to be increased by £50 on the falling in of the reversion, with an additional £100 a year unsecured, to be paid to the petitioner for the child. The dum sola clause was ordered to be inserted with respect to the additional £50 only.-Smith (Florence) v. Smith (William), L.R. [1898] P. 29; 78 L.T. 28.

(vi.) P. D.-Divorce-Permanent Maintenance-Dum casta et sola vixerit.— Questions of permanent maintenance are decided on the circumstances of the particular case. The practice is to order the allowance for the petitioner's life. When the allowance is large and the petitioner has

a substantial separate income the dum sola clause should be inserted, and when the lady's reputation has not been spotless the dum casta clause also.-Kettlewell v. Kettlewell, 77 L.T. 631.

(i.) P. D.--Judicial Separation-Habitual Drunkenness-Charges of Misconduct-Admissibility of Evidence.-A woman who marries, with knowledge, a drunkard, is not held to have taken the risk of all results of his drunken habits. Where a wife, in a petition for judicial separation, alleges that her husband charged her falsely in the presence of other persons with ante-marital misconduct, proof of the alleged misconduct is not admissible unless the husband is called to state that he believed and acted on the reports which he received.—Walker v. Walker, 77 L.T. 715.

(ii.) P. D.—Divorce-Wife's Costs where no Real Defence.-The costs of a wife who is respondent will not be allowed where her solicitors had knowledge of her guilt, but they may be taxed against the correspondent.-Townson v. Townson and Bucknall, 78 L.T. 54.

Jurisdiction:

(iii.) C. D.-Foreign State Plaintiff-Defence.-A foreign sovereign or state suing in this country submits to the jurisdiction so far only as the subject matter of the action is concerned, and the powers of the Court to relieve the defendant are limited to allowing discovery and a counterclaim in mitigation of the demand (see 23, p. 47 (i.)).—South African Republic v. La Compagnie Franco Belge du Chemin de Fer, &c., L.R. [1898] 1 Ch. 190; 77 L.T. 555.

Landlord and Tenant :

(iv.) C. D.- Demise--Part of House with Right to Outer Walls-Advertising Boards-Derogation from Grant.-Where a part of a building was let with the right to use the outer walls for advertising, it was held that the landlord could not put up a sign of his own on the walls included in the letting.-Carlisle Café Co. and Todd v. Muse Bros. & Co., 77 L.T. 515.

(v.) Q. B.-Agreement to pay all Outgoings-A New Tax.-A yearly tenant had agreed to pay all outgoings. A new rate was made of which it was an incident that it could be deducted from rent unless there was an agreement to the contrary. Held, that a general agreement was not an agreement to the contrary; but that the tax could only be deducted from rent of the corresponding year and therefore a tax paid in past years and not deducted could not be recovered from the landlord.-Mile End Old Town Vestry v. Whitby, 78 L.T. 80. (vi.) Q. B. D.-Lease-Mesne Assignments-Who should Give Notice under Proviso to Determine.-A lease contained a proviso that it could be determined by the lessee, his executors, administrators, or assigns giving six months' notice before the expiration of 14 years, The original lessee assigned, taking a covenant of indemnity, to the third party who assigned, with a similar covenant, to another person who disappeared after depositing the lease with bankers as a security. The third party purchased the bankers' rights, took possession, and after paying rent to the lessor who was acquainted with the circumstances, gave in conjunction with the original lessee, notice to terminate at the end of the 14 years. Held, that the notice should have been given by (or at all events on behalf of) the assignee who had disappeared in whom the term was vested, and that consequently the lease was still subsisting.-Seaward v. Drew; Farmer, third party, 78 L.T. 19. (vii.) C. A.- Tenancy for One Year Certain-Notice to Quit at any Time.Premises were let for one year certain from the date of the agreement, and so on from year to year unless the tenancy should be determined by 28 days' written notice from either party, such notice to expire at any period of the year without reference to the time of entry, the

date of the agreement, or the commencement of the tenancy. Held, that the tenancy could not be determined during the first year.-The Cannon Brewery v. Nash, 77 L.T. 648.

(i.) C. A.-Breach of Covenant-Notice-Expiry Subsequent Claim for Rent-Second Notice ?-Forfeiture.--Where, in an ejectment action, a lessor has claimed rent to a date subsequent to that of the expiry of a notice of breach of covenant to repair, served under sect. 14 (1) of the Conveyancing Act, 1881, he can, if the breach continues beyond the date up to which he has claimed rent, enforce a right of re-entry under a proviso in the lease, without issuing a second notice.-Penton v. Barnett, L.R. [1898] 1 Q.B. 276; 77 L.T. 645. Letters:

(ii.) C. D.-Property in Letters-Rights of Publication. The property in the subject matter of a letter is in the writer; and the publication of the letter against his will, unless it be by the receiver in vindication of his own character, will be restrained. But the possessor will not be restrained from informing anyone of the contents of the letter.Labouchere v. Hess, 77 L.T. 559.

Licensing:

(iii.) Q. B. D.--Decease of Tenant- Transfer of Licence-Alehouse Act, 1828 (9 Geo. IV., c. 61), s. 14.-On the death intestate, of an innkeeper, the licence was handed to the appellant for a consideration, but petty and quarter sessions refused to transfer the licence for the remainder of the then current year on the ground that the case did not fall within sect. 14 of the Act of Geo. IV. Held, that the case came within the Act and that quarter sessions had jurisdiction.-Davies v. Evans, 77 L.T. 688.

(iv.) C. A.-Off-Licence-Order Sanctioning Removal-New Licence-Licensing Act, 1872 (35 d 36 Vict., c. 94), s. 50.-Decision of Divisional Court (23, 9, iii.) affirmed.-Reg. v. Thornton and Others; e. p. Lacon & Co., Limited, L.R. [1898] 1 Q.B. 334; 78 L.T. 95. (v.) Q. B. D.-Licensed Premises Demolished for Public Purposes-New Premises-Transfer of Licence-Intoxicating Liquor Licensing Act, 1828, 8. 14. When an inn is pulled down for public purposes, the person who at the time held the licence and carried on the business is the only one entitled to apply for a transfer of the licence to new premises. -Reg. v. Justices of West Riding of Yorkshire; e. p. Shaw, 78 L.T. 47.

Local Government:

(vi.) C. A.—Notice to provide sufficient Closet Accommodation under Public Health Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict., c. 55), s. 36.-The Public Health Act, 1875, enables a local authority to require the owner or occupier of a house" to provide a sufficient water closet." In accordance with a general resolution of a local authority a notice was served on an owner to provide a closet "on the waste water closet system." Held, that the notice was invalid as being made under a general resolution and as not permitting the owner to provide any other " sufficient" closet.Wood v. Widnes Corporation, L.R. [1898] 1 Q.B. 463; 77 L.T. 779. (vii.) C. A.-Paving-Liability of Frontagers-Ashton-under-Lyne Improvement Act, 1849 (12 & 13 Vict., c. 35)—Public Health Act, 1875, ss. 149, 340, 341.-A local Act of 1849 gave to a corporation the right to charge the expense of paving a street to the frontagers. The Public Health Act, 1875, sect. 149, requires the urban authority to pave streets which at any time become repairable by the inhabitants at large. Held, that this Act did not repeal the local Act, and that the corporation could recover from a frontager. Ashton-under-Lyne Corporation v. Pugh, L.R. [1898] 1 Q.B. 45; 77 L.T. 583.