eleven, Leeds.-Tate, T. out of business, Cheltenham, Nov. 7, at eleven, Bristol.-White, J. fly driver, Bath, Nov. 5, at eleven, Bristol. MEETINGS AT BASINGHALL-STREET. position of the Board by that of the Shareholders. If all the Lane, J. gent. Frien Barnet, Nov. 10, at eleven, to audit, ment, they must be represented in the Directory. and at a quarter past eleven, div. From the Gazette of Friday, October 24. Faryon, W. licensed victualler, Farringdon-st. City.Gurney, J. brewer, Lambeth-walk, Surrey.-Hardy, G. innkeeper, Saint Ives, Huntingdonshire.-Featherstonhaulgh, A. butcher, Great Bolton, Lancashire.-Gill, F. hardwareman, Manchester.-Jones, A. innkeeper, Bourne, Gloucestershire.-Castle, R. grocer, Twyning, Gloucestershire.-Sykes, J. hosier, Doncaster. THE ADVERTISEMENTS. In the mean while, the LAW TIMES, from which the fession can supply, and by whom the shares will be allotted FORM OF APPLICATION FOR SHARES. LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY. Capital 500,000l. in 10,000 Shares of 501. each. Deposit (in compliance with the provisions of the statute 7 & 8 Vict. c. 10, under which the Company is provisionally registered) 5s. per Share. PROSPECTUS. It is certain that most of the Insurances in the United Kingdom are effected through the medium of the Solicitors. But the Solicitors receive only a very small proportion of the great profits they bring to the Insurance Companies-a trifling Commission being all that is allowed to them. A plan has been matured and approved by the members of the Profession for securing to the Profession by whom the business is obtained a due share of the profits of that business, and at the same time for offering to their clients and the public all the security and advantages of an Office conducted upon the most liberal, but safe, principles which experience has proved to be practicable. The plan is this: The Assured to have the Security of a Capital of 500,000l. in 10,000 shares of 501, of which, however, not more than about 21. per share will be required to be paid up, probably not above 21. 10s.; deposit 5s. per share. On the Capital advanced the Shareholders are to receive Interest at the rate of 4 per cent. per annum certain, and, in addition to this, a dividend of one-fifth of the profits (after deduction of 10 per cent. therefrom, to be applied to the Widows' and Orphans' Fund afterwards mentioned). Provision will be made for paying off the shares at any time that it may be deemed expedient by the Profession so to do, at their then market value. Three-fifths of the profits of the Life Insurance branch of the Office will be divided triennially among the Assured, in the form of Bonuses, as customary with other Offices. The REMAINDER OF THE PROFITS, subject to a deduction of ten per cent. (to be applied to the Widows' Fund), will BE DIVIDED ANNUALLY AMONG THE SOLICITORS BY WHOM THE BUSINESS HAS BEEN TRANSACTED, in rate able proportion to the sum paid by each during the year for which such profits are calculated; or, at the option of the party, policies may be taken in lieu of such share of the profits. This share of the profits to be in addition to the usual commission, which will be allowed on all transactions. It is further proposed to secure for the Profession an advantage it has long wanted; namely, to connect with the establishment a Widows' and Orphans' Fund, or Nominee Society, by which Solicitors may secure Annuities for their families in case of death. It is to the increase of this Fund that the deduction of ten per cent. from the profits to be divided among the Shareholders and Solicitors is to be applied. The Scales of Premiums will be the same as those adopted by the safe and respectable offices. Periodical Sales (established in the year 1803) of Reversions, Life Interests, Annuities, Policies of Assurance, Advowsons, Next Presentations, Rent Charges in lieu of Tithes, Post-obit Bonds, Tontines, Debentures, Ground Rents, Improved Rents, Shares in Docks, Canals, Mines, Railways, Insurance Companies, and all Public Undertakings. Sales by Auction. HAMPSHIRE.-Capital Freehold Landed Estate for vestment, consisting of an extensive Farm, compo about 730 Acres of Land, situate close to the borough we of Andover. MESSRS, WINSTANLEY have recer directions from the representatives of the late J., Shedden, esq. to offer for SALE by AUCTION, at the tion Mart, London, on Tuesday, October 28, at 12 fa valuable and most desirable ESTATE for Investment, in hold and land-tax redeemed, called East Stanton and Fr Down Farms, eligibly situate little more than a mile the borough town of Andover, a fine sporting part of county of Hants, intersected by the turnpike-road to An bury, from which place it is distant 15 miles, from Huz ford 11, from Salisbury 16, and about 63 from London two contemplated railroads will in all probability p if not through the property, which includes two e farm-houses, with suitable barns, stabling, sheds, pizz granaries, &c. together with near 730 acres of very produ meadow, pasture, arable, and down land (about 29 as which are water meadow), in the occupation ef J. B. an. Mundy, on lease for a term, whereof seven years are m pired, at a low rent of only 6501. per annum. Printed particulars m by permission of the tenants. had at the principal inns in Andover, Winchester, Sabs Basingstoke, Newbury, and Hungerford; of Mr. G solicitor, 16, New Bridge-street, Blackfriars, Londr Messrs. Farrers and Parkinson, solicitors, Lincolz'siz fields; at the place of sale; and of Messrs. WINSTANLE Paternoster-row. To be In SURREY.-A small compact Farm, comprising 1 Farmhouse and Outbuildings, with about 125 Ar Land. ESSRS. WINSTANLEY have rece MESSRS. SHUTTLEWORTH and SONS parish of Oxted, near Godstone, in the county of Se respectfully inform the public, that upwards of 40 years' experience having proved the classification of this species of property to be extremely advantageous and economical to vendors, and equally satisfactory and convenient to purchasers, the PERIODICAL SALES of reversionary interests, policies of insurance, tontines, debentures, advowsons, next presentations, all securities dependent upon human life, shares in docks, canals, mines, railways, and all public undertakings, will be continued through 1845, as follow: IRELAND.-IN THE COUNTY OF MEATH. Very Valuable FEE SIMPLE ESTATES, comprising nearly 4,000 statute acres, let to most respectable tenants, at rents amounting to Three Thousand Pounds per annum. R. PHILLIPS begs to announce that he ping, esq. to submit to SALE by AUCTION, at the Com. mercial Buildings, Dublin, on THURSDAY, November 13, 1845, in lots (unless an acceptable offer for the whole Estate should be made in the mean time by Private Contract), part of the valuable FEE SIMPLE ESTATES, situate in the county of Meath, extending over nearly Four Thousand Statute Acres of rich arable, meadow, and pasture land, in a high state of cultivation, comprising the following denominations: First. Rathcarron and Little Woodtown, containing toThe Solicitors' Office will avail itself of all the arrange-gether 898 acres of prime pasture and arable land; distant ments which, in other offices, have been found to offer con- four miles from Trim, two from Athboy, both of which veniences to the Assured. are large market-towns, and only twenty-five miles from Dublin. It will make Loans on Deposit of Life Policies, on the principles adopted by the best modern offices. It will grant Annuities. It will purchase Reversions and Policies of Insurance. It will grant Endowments for Children. It will meet the difficulties so often experienced by Insurers, in consequence of the necessity for fixed Annual Payments required under all circumstances, or forfeiture of the Policy, by a plan that permits the Premium to be varied according to the necessities of the Assured; and by which, even if the payment should cease, the policy would not be forfeited, but the value of the sums actually paid would be secured to his family. The Profits of an Insurance Office being wholly dependent upon the amount of business, it is obvious that if the Solicitors of the United Kingdom will avail themselves of their own Office for the purpose of securing to themselves the large profits they now take to others, the business of their Office must speedily exceed that of all the other offices in the kingdom; and the profits will, consequently, be so great, that the division of them between the Assured and the Solicitors in the manner proposed will secure to both advantages such as could be offered nowhere besides. It may be added, in conclusion, that this plan has been long in preparation. It has been already submitted to the Profession and received their warm approval. The Shareholders incur no risk, for interest will be allowed upon their advances from the date of payment; and the arrangements of the Office, and the names of the Directors and Officers, will, it is believed, be such as to guarantee the utmost respectability and the most prudent management. As it is desirable that all or as many of the shares as possible should be taken by the Solicitors of the United Kingdom, preference will be shewn to them in the allotment; and in order to exterd the allotments over as many applicants as possible, no more than one hundred shares will be allotted to any one person. The selection of the trustees and directors is deferred until all or the greater portion of the shares are applied for, in order to secure the widest choice, and to regulate the com Second. Philpotstown, Jordanstown, and Blundelstown, which lands adjoin each other, in the barony of Skreen, and comprise 723 acres, situated on the road to Navan, from whence it is three miles, four from Dunshaughlin, six from Drogheda, and eighteen from Dublin; together with the lands of Caliaghtown, containing 304 acres, lying about four miles from Navan, two from Dunshaughlin, and one from Skreen and on which there is a large limestone quarry. Third. The lands of Curraghtown, Great Woodtown, and Wetherstown, in the barony of Upper Deece, comprising together 1,479 acres, distant only sixteen miles from Dublin, two from Dunshaughlin, four from Dunboyne, six from Trim, four from Summer Hill, and five from Kilcock; all of which are excellent market-towns, contiguous to the demesnes of Lismullin, Ballinter and Tara House, and on the Great Woodtown Estate it is confidently believed extensive coal-mines exist. Fourth. The lands of Tullaghmeden, containing 347 acres, situated fifteen miles from Dublin, on the road to Trim, and contiguous to the demesne of Dunsany Castle. This desirable property is let on leases, and for lives, to most respectable and opulent tenants, having valuable interests under their holdings, at present rents amounting to upwards of three thousand pounds per annum, and is situated in one of the finest counties in Ireland, surrounded by other noblemen and gentlemen's mansions and domains, and the famed Tara Hill. abounding with capital roads, and having the Drogheda Railroad passing within about a mile of the property; while other lines already granted, and those projected, will pass immediately through parts of the estates, thus giving increased value, and affording the greatest facility to the tenants of transit to the various markets. The Estates may be viewed on application for orders to Messrs. Smith and Gil son, solicitors, 39. Lower Ormondquay, Dublin, of whem descriptive Particulars with Plans annexed may also be had, after the 15th October, and at the Bar of the Commercial Buildings. Particulars may likewise be obtained at the offices of Messrs. Capron, Brabant, and Capron, Saville-place, London, and at Mr. PHILLIPS'S Auction Office, 73, New Bond-street, London. will of the late Joseph Hurlock, esq. to offer for SALE AUCTION, at the Auction Mart, London, on TUESDA October 28, at Twelve, an eligible and very com. FREEHOLD ESTATE (with possession), situate about twenty-four miles from London, four from Gods! five from Westerham, and fourteen from Croyden; c prising a very neat farmhouse, containing a sitting-room! kitchen, washhouse, seven bedchambers, &c.; two bar į stabling, cattle sheds, and other outbuildings, with adjacent enclosures of productive meadow, pasture, ana and wood land, containing altogether about 126 acres, w have been cultivated by the late owner for many year approached by good roads in every direction, and surment by a most excellent neighbourhood.-To be viewed by appl to J. Haynes, the bailiff, on the premises, of whom prim particulars may be had; particulars also at the ins Godstone, Oxted, Westerham, Riverhead, Sevenoaks. Ea Grinstead, Croydon, and Bromley; of Mr. Millard, sout Cordwainers'-hall, London; at the Auction Mart; and Messrs. WINSTANLEY, Paternoster-row. Just published, price 1s. the 4th edition (translated from the Nineteenth French edition), 6s. 6d. DESTROYED; or, Er CONSTIPATION, Simple, Agreeable, and Infa Means, not only of overcoming, but also of completely stroying habitual Constipation, without using either pitte tives or any artificial means whatever (discovery rem tificates from eminent physicians and other persons of t tinction. Free by post, 1s. 6d. Sold by JAMES YOUENS and Co. Tea Dealers, 45, Lo gate-hill, London; and by all booksellers in the Uni Kingdom. Page been referred to was the Solicitor-General, and the 65 67 67 67 68 68 69 cause, the court is deprived of that assistance, and of that guard and protection which is required alike for the good of the charity, and for the benefit of the public. The inquiry is the more necessary in the present case, because there is a charge against the Twiss admitted that the matter had not been before relators in the original information that they have the Attorney-General, speaking strictly; but that not diligently fulfilled their duty. The Attorneylearned gentleman was represented by the Solicitor-General is, under such circumstances, to tell the Court General, and technically, and for the purposes of the whether he approves of the sum offered as a comthe recommendation he supported was that of promise; but it is very unusual to see him appearing 69 the Attorney-General, who had given authority to the to argue in favour of it. Solicitor-General. Repeating, therefore, the opinion Twiss.-The Attorney General, taking all the pecu70 that the identification of the property was difficult, liar circumstances of the case into his consideration, and considering the construction of the charter a ques- and looking to the great difficulty and expense of tion of very great doubt, the Attorney-General, identifying the property, and the great doubt on the looking at these questions, and looking also to the construction of the charter, had resolved to submit claims of the leaseholders of Ludlow, who had been the matter in its present form to the judgment of the 72 in undisputed possession of their holdings for h n-Court, and to abide by any order his lordship might 72 dreds of years; looking also at the amount offered by think fit to make. 73 the corporation as amply sufficient for all the pur73 poses of the charity; he conceived that the better plan would be to, as it were, strike an equitable 73 balance, and, instead of pressing for all that might 74 be recovered, to accept without further litigation the sum of 1,500l. now proposed to be secured by a parliamentary charge on land. 71 72 72 72 Sham Conveyancers. The LORD CHANCELLOR.-Unless I can be satisfied as to the question of whether the corporation took the lands as trustees for the whole of the profits or for a part, which is a very doubtful one, there seems to be no alternative but to send the matter back to the Master. Tuiss thought he could shew that the claims of the charity under the charter were doubtful, but that part of the subject would be more properly brought under his lordship's consideration when he came to the petition of the Attorney-General in favour of the compromise. At present his object was to shew that in every case from the beginning to the end, when the subject was a charity, the Attorney-General had the power, when he thought proper, to stay either information or petition, and say that the matter shall this at any period of the proceedings, and had a control over them all through, independently of their form. With respect to the present petition, the Attorney-General objected decidedly to that part of it which sought to take the management of the cause, although there were some parts of it which he would not oppose. Sir C. Wetherell.-The proposal was to give up land of the charity worth 1,2001. a year at present, 77 but which, at some future period, would be worth 77 1,500l. The lands they had identified as belonging to 77 the charity were at that moment bringing in, with the nominal reut from the houses, a sum of 1,6291. 77 The LORD CHANCELLOR.-Among the circumstances stated as swaying the mind of the Attorney 78 General, you say, Mr. Twiss, that be considers 1,5001. a year as sufficient for all the purposes of the charity.proceed no further. The Attorney-General might do 78 What right has the Attorney-General to assume any 79 thing of that kind? There is a school connected with the charity. Who can place a limit to the wants of a place for education? It might be that, with sufficient funds, such a school would attain eminence, and become like that of Manchester. 78 February 14, 15, and 20, and June 25. Compromise of information-Attorney-General's authority and discretion as to such compromise-Identity of charity estates-Principles on which charities are administered. Turiss.-The school is only open for the education of the children of the inhabitants of Ludlow and the neighbourhood. The LORD CHANCELLOR.-An objection ought to have been taken on that ground at first. If the Wray. The inhabitants of Ludlow and its neigh-Attorney-General had no objection to a part, the rebourhood, which might comprehend a wide circuit. The LORD CHANCELLOR.-Mr. Twiss spoke of the compromise being for the benefit of the leaseholders of Ludlow. That is a very unusual thing to influence the mind of the Attorney-General. What we have to look to is the benefit of the charity, not the benefit of any other persons. We are to consider what is for the benefit of the charity, and nothing else. The Court must be satisfied that what it is about to do will be for the benefit of the charity; and the usual course is, that on the AttorneyGeneral giving his consent, a reference is sent to the Master to inquire if such and such things would be for the benefit of the charity. One of the principal questions is the identification of the property; and if, on a reference to the Master, the whole is identified as the charity estate, then he may be ordered to report whether the compromise is for the benefit of the charity. That is the whole question. Twiss.-The Attorney-General did not want any new reference. He thought the identification would be productive of endless expense, and he recommended the compromise, and asked that it might be confirmed. mainder was a mere question of costs. Tuiss thought that could be disposed of on the second petition. If the Court decided on the propriety of the compromise, there would be no occasion for further directions in the cause. Indeed, the Attorney-General had the power to stop one petition until the other was heard. The LORD CHANCELLOR.-I apprehend that I have authority to let the petitioners in to complain that the relators have not done their duty. Wray. The Court has much more authority, inde... pendently of the Attorney-General, than Mr. Twiss is disposed to allow it. He cited the Attorney-General v. Smart (1 Vesey, jun. 72); Andrew v. The Merchant Tailors' Company (5 Sim. 288), and the AttorneyGeneral v. The Ironmongers' Company (2 Myl. & Keen, 576); for the purpose of proving that the Attorney-General could not compromise the rights of a charity, although the trust was proved to be a general one, a matter which had not been proved in the present case. In this case an information had been filed, at the relation of Lord Powys and others, against the Corporation of Ludlow, to recover various estates in their possession alleged to belong to the freeschool there; after much litigation a compromise had been suggested, by which the corporation would have paid 800l. per annum to the school, and an order had been obtained for a reference to the Master to inquire into the propriety of such a compromise. In the course of the inquiry before the Master, so strong a case appeared against the corporation that he declined to report in favour of the compromise, and an offer of 1,2001. a year to the school was then made by the corporation, which the Master thought should be accepted. Some delay having occurred in the matter, partly from differences amongst the partics and partly from changes in the law officers of the Crown, a further offer of 1,5001. had been made to the school by the corporation, and a petition was presented by the relators and supported by the corporation to carry such new arrangement into effect. The Attorney General also supported the compromise. The whole income claimed for the school amounted to 4,000l. a year, and as the only difficulty in the way of that claim was to identify the school lands, the compromise was opposed by the Rev. Arthur Willis, the schoolmaster, and other inhabitants, as not a beneficial one for the charity. The schoolmaster had, therefore, presented a petition against the compro-approve of what was proposed. If the Attorney-relators, who had certainly deserved credit for their Lloyd, for the relators. Romilly and Bacon, for the corporation. Twiss and Maule, for the Attorney General, were heard in support of a recommendation emanating from that officer, that the offer of a compromise should be accepted. They were quite ready to admit that the petitioners had gone a great way towards an identification of the land given to the corporation as trustees under the charter, but it was the opinion of the Attorney-General, and on that opinion he acted, that the complete identification of the property in land and houses was nearly impossible, and that it could not be completed without an expense and delay that would be most injurious to the charity funds. Sir C. Wetherell protested against such a use of the name of the Attorney-General, who had given utterance to no such opinion. The gentleman who had VOL. VI. No. 135. The LORD CHANCELLOR.-I conceive that the Attorney-General is in this matter taking a novel and a very inconvenient course. The Attorney-General has a duty to perform with respect to these charity informations which is clear and well defined. Without the consent of the Attorney-General the Court cannot act; but then the Attorney-General, before he makes any recommendation to the Court, usually has summoned the parties before him, inquired narrowly into all the facts and circumstances, and then declares, without any besitation, whether he does or does not an Twiss.-The Court could sanction an application for an Act of Parliament to do so, at the request of the Attorney-General. The Attorney-General v. The Ironmongers' Company (2 Beavan, 313), was answer to the cases cited by Mr. Wray, for it proved that the relators were merely appearing for the Attorney-General. In the present case he could not agree to have the matter heard, as the petitioners wished, on further directions, because the AttorneyGeneral would have the responsibility of carrying these directions into effect. The Attorney-General had desired a public hearing, but he would not consent to have his power taken out of his hands by the petitioners, who were at best mere supplementary discoveries and exertions, but who were not entitled to dictate the course that ought to be pursued. Wednesday, February 26.-The hearing of the petition of the Rev. A. Willes and Others, against the proposal for a compromise of the claim made on the corporation by the trustees of the charity, was this General says in the present case that he is of opinion Romilly, for the corporation, contended that the mere question was, whether the lands were held in trust for the charity, or given absolutely to the corporation, subject to certain specified annual payments. That question was one of very great doubt, and had been so considered by every one who had directed his attention to it. He then proceeded to an examination of the charter, and the various documents connected with it, for the purpose of shewing that the grant by Edward the Sixth was to the corporation, with certain specified conditions in relation to the charity; and that having so enjoyed it for two hundred years, the Court would not now, in a doubtful case, take it away from them without a very clear case being made out on the other side; for he submitted that, as the corporation was in possession, the 'onus was on the other side of proving that the corpo ration had no title. The costs amounted to between ten and twelve thousand pounds; and if it was again sent to the Master's office, it was not improbable that the whole of the property would be sacrificed, and the charity ultimately administered for the benefit of the legal practitioners of the Court of Chancery. He therefore implored his lordship to decide the matter at once. There was abundant evidence before the Court for that purpose; and unless a stop was put to the proceedings, the inquiry before the Master might be protracted for years. Romilly and Bucon declined, on the part of the corporation, to take any share in the discussion on this second petition. Lewin, for the trustees, was content with the defence already offered, with respect to their management of the cbarity, and their conduct with reference to the information. other side. Common Law Courts. JUDGES' CHAMBERS. October 25 and 27. THE QUEEN t. CLINTON. On Saturday John Cornstock Clinton was brought up under a writ of habeas corpus before Mr. Baron Platt, at his chambers, in Rolls'-garden, for the purpose of obtaining his discharge from custody. It may be remembered that the prisoner was committed from Bow-street on the 6th instant on proceedings taken under the late Acts of the 6 & 7 Vict. c. 76, and 8 & 9 Vict. c. 120, for the surrender of persons fugitive from justice in certain cases, in pursuance of a treaty made for that purpose with America, upon a charge of forgery alleged to have been committed by him in the United States of North America several years Mr. Baron Platt, on originally granting the habeas corpus, signified, that if on hearing counsel he should entertain a strong opinion in favour of the prisoner, he should at once discharge him; but that if his opinion were adverse, he should adjourn the matter for argument in the Queen's Bench. The return to the writ having been enlarged at the desire of the prisoner's counsel, the argument stood over until Saturday, when ago. Sir John Bayley appeared for the prosecution; at- Sir C. Wetherell, in answer to the petition of the Attorney-General, then argued that the boasted compromise which that functionary was supporting with On behalf of the prisoner, and to shew him to be so much earnestness, was unjust on the very face of entitled to his discharge from prison, it was urged it, for the sum of 1,500., which the corporation that the operation of the 6 & 7 Vict. c. 76, must be offered, was not a moiety of the value of the property, taken to be prospective. To give it a retrospective even if the question of the right of the charity was a doubtful one, under the charter. He maintained still, which abhors all ex post facto legislation. It could effect would be contrary to every principle of justice, however, that the right of the charity to the whole of the property was clear, under a proper construction not have been the intention of the contracting parties to the treaty or of the British Parliament, when they of the charter, and what he now suggested was, that passed this statute, that offenders resident in this the information, which was now ripe for hearing, country should be arrested and delivered up to the should be forthwith heard, making the Rev. American authorities for offences committed before Mr. Willis and the hospitaliers the defendants. the passing of the Act, because it was impossible that That could be done within a week, and then there could be any reciprocity on the side of America the question of charter could be argued and decided in this respect, as an article of the federal constitution without any of that interminable delay in the proceed-(which it is not within the competence of any one of ings, of which they had heard so much from the the states to alter) expressly provided that no ex post If that course were adopted, he did not facto law should be passed in the United States. care which side the Attorney-General might be pleased (Article 3, section 9, of the United States Constituto take in the course of the argument, for the question.) The meaning put upon the term "ex post tion of the construction of the charter would be de-facto law" in the courts of the United States was a cided; and if decided, as he believed it must, in favour law which alters the nature of the evidence required of the charity, then all these proceedings and petitions for the purpose of convicting of the alleged crime. with respect to compromise fell to the ground at once. (1 Kent, Commentaries, 408.) And this would be the The LORD CHANCELLOR.-The corporation say case here if the Act was to be held to have a retrothe Rev. Mr. Willis and the hospitallers have nothing active effect by applying to crimes committed before to do with the question. the passing of it, because it empowered a magistrate Sir C. Wetherell submitted that it was a new doc- to act upon depositions taken behind the back of the trine for trustees to maintain in the Court of Chan- prisoner, on which the magistrate could not have taken cery, that their cestui que trusts were not to complain of a neglect or violation of the trust, or to file a bill any step whatever, much less have deprived the prito make them account. He then proceeded to argue statutes highly in restraint of the liberty of the subsoner of his liberty, before the Act passed. These being upon the construction of the charter. in it sufficient to make out his case; but if his lord-ject, as well in other respects as in enacting that the magistrate's warrant under them, shall have effect ship thought it required any assistance, then he found everywhere in the kingdom without being backed, that assistance in the Statute of Charities, which ought to be construed strictly according to the estaauthorized the Crown to take the lands, or to demand blished rule of interpretation, that statutes giving a surrender of them from the corporation. If that new remedies, or creating new jurisdictions, ought was not enough, then he added to it the external not to have a liberal construction. (Bacon, Abr. evidence; the petition of the corporation, which was Statutes, 1. 10; Dwarris, Statutes, 681.) On the for a grant of the lands, and the other documents analogy of the construction which other statutes conrecording the proceedings after the surrender. It taining similar language had received, these statutes was unnecessary at the present stage to argue whemust be held to he prospective in their operation, ther or not that external evidence was admiss ble, and not to include offences committed before the but he believed the case of the Irish Society was a passing of then. clear authority for its reception. The language of the the lab of evidence did not apply to cases arising preLord Denman's Act for amending charter clearly gave the property to the corporation viously. Lord Tenterden's Act, it was true, dil so for no other uses than those of the charity; and that apply; but then, in the Act itself, the legislature gave the Crown could not, under the Statute of Charities, notice to all the world that it was intended to do so; have given it for any other purpose, because that and the legislature would have followed that precestatute did not empower it to seize any lands or pro-dent, doubtless, had it been their intention to give perty, except that devoted to superstitious uses, and to report it for other pious uses not superstitious. He cited for this the authority of Lord Coke, although the matter was clear from an examination of the two statutes; the one passed in the last year of Henry VIII. and the other on the first of Edward VI. With respect to the external evidence, he thought the petition of the corporation for the report of the property was a proper means of construing the charter; and if so, there could be no doubt that the whole of the income was to be devoted to the charity. There was I The LORD CHANCELLOR.-I repeat the opinion have expressed frequently in the course of the argument, that the sum taken from superstitious uses tallied with the sums given to the assistant preacher and the usher; and that this identity is a strong reason for believing that nothing was taken from the charity that was not restored to it for purposes of charity and uses not considered superstitious. This matter was argued on several subsequent days, but it ultimately stood over, the Lord Chancellor saying it was unfortunate that some satisfactory settlement could not be made without incurring such enor mous costs. same thing, and therefore its provisions ought to construed strictly in favorem libertatis, and the p soner was consequently entitled to be discharged. For the prosecution it was admitted, that the who argument resolved itself into the narrow point, whe ther a person charged since the Act of Parliament ma be taken under it for an offence committed before but, it was argued, there was nothing in the languag of the Act to give it a confined construction. It reasonable to look at the language, in order to what was the true construction to be put upon a Act of Parliament, and if there were any other at passed about the same time for similar purpos they should be examined to find the intention of t legislature. Now, in the Act for carrying in effect a similar treaty with France, for the appre sion of offenders, which received the royal assent t same day as the 6th and 7th Victoria, c. 76, war were inserted expressly excluding all offences con mitted antecedently to the date of the treaty. In omission of all such exclusive words in the Act now in question went to shew, under these circumstance that it was not intended in the case of Amerist exclude such offences. This was not making Such a law was one creati ex post facto law. that an offence, and giving a punishment for i which was no offence, and for which there was punishment before. It had been contended on t other side, that to give this act a retrospective ef would be to make an ex post facto law, because: | would alter the nature of the evidence of the offe charged; but the fact was that the Act made so s alteration; it left to the law of America to dece what should be the evidence to establish the charge forgery against the prisoner. All the magistrate ke against the prisoner to send him to trial upon, if thi had to do was to decide whether there was enoug crime charged had been committed in this country With respect to the argument that the phrase "committing the said crimes," in the treaty America, meant "who shall commit," it was maters to observe what were the words next following,-"-| being fugitive from justice," which could not bas been employed if the parties had not contemplazi that the treaty was to operate on past as well as fast offences. Had it been intended to confine the trea to the latter case, the words "shall fly from justic. would probably have been used. As this was first case that had arisen under the treaty, the decisi of it must be of immense importance to the Gover ment of the United States and of this country, a if his lordship felt any difficulty in deciding up sitting alone, probably he would be inclined to sen for argument before the full Court. The other learned counsel concurred in the sa request, adding that there were believed to be parties at present, and for twenty and thirty y past, resident in this country, who might be serioz affected by the decision. Mr. Baron PLATT having in the course of th the parties had not applied to the Court in the proceedings, expressed some degree of surprise t instance, said he should think over the matter, the prisoner must be brought up again on Mon at 3 o'clock, when he should deliver his decision. Oct. 27.-Mr. Baron PLATT said, that be considered this matter since Saturday, and made his mind upon it; and in order that his opinion not be mistaken, because he should act upon it. should say one or two words more than it otherwise have been necessary to use. Gener speaking, a foreigner while in this country po all the rights of a British subject, as regards pers possessions and liberty. He was subject to our a as he did not infringe them so as to make hi and those laws gave him correlative rights, 60 liable to the criminal jurisdiction of the country: if he did that, he was equally liable to be t for such crime What, then, was the situation of this prices as any subject of the Crom! Against the law of this country he had not e that power in this case. In the first year after the fended; his liberty, as regards the law of th passing of the Statute of Frauds it had been at- country, was intact. But the Act of Parliament tempted to extend the words of that Act," that from which these proceedings had been built might br and after the 24th of June 1677, no action shall be given power to restrain his liberty for some cause. brought upon an agreement in consideration of mar- appeared that, in 1843, treaties had been signed riage, unless it be in writing," to promises made be- France and with America for the surrender of cert fore, though not to be performed till after, the specified criminals between each of those two count making of the statute; but it was solemnly de- respectively, and the object of the contracting pa cided that such was not the meaning of the words. in both cases was evidently reciprocal protect Helmore . Shuter, 2 Shower, 16.) The opera- That he considered to be perfectly clear, and he th tive words in the 6 & 7 Vict. c. 76, s. 1: Any fore thought there was a good deal in what had bee person charged with forgery, &c. committed within urged on the score of reciprocity, because the the jurisdiction of the United States of America, procity would not be perfect if, on the one hand who shall be found within the territories of Her United States had not-as had been alleged, and Majesty," must receive the like construction. The denied the power of making an ex post forte recital of the treaty with America was material to the while, on the other, in England the Act was dient, &c. that persons committing the crimes speci- that it might be taken for granted, each party to same purpose: Whereas it has been found expe- held to have a retrospective effect. He considere was conclusive as showing the intention of the parties procity when they entered into it; that it relativt fied be delivered up."--Not having committed. This treaty contemplated a complete and practical that the treaty should have a prospective effect only. obligation on one side accompanied by a Even if it should be considered that the law did not create a new offence or punishment, yet it certainly gave a power of punishment which did not exist before, and a new mode of punishment, which was the correlativ right on the other. The question then was, A description of persons did the words of the Act Parliament attach? It must not be considered thi this statute was within the category of a remedial la s 著 tand to be construed accordingly; for that principle applied only to the construction of laws operating within our own country; this statute must be construed by the rules of justice, not those of technicality. To give an ex post facto operation to this enactment would be very mischievous, because, though it was not possible to say that such a thing was hostile to the spirit of English law, inasmuch as till within a few years back an Act of Parliament passed at the end of a session was held to relate back to the beginning, so that it might in that way be possible that a man should have been committed to prison for a crime created after the thing was done for which he was charged, yet this was very harsh, and a late Act had provided that, unless when otherwise provided, all Acts should come into operation from the day of the passing. That was the 22nd of Angust, 1843, in this case. The object of the Act was to give effect to a treaty for reciprocally rendering up persons" being charged" with forgery, &c. * committed " within the jurisdiction of either party, &c. Now, "being charged," in his opinion, clearly meant " being then charged," but the word "committed" might stand for "which have theretofore been committed," or "which were then committed," or "which should be committed after the passing of the Act." Looking into the treaty for the purpose of giving effect to which this Act was passed, he found the terms were, such persons as having committed," &c. and "being fugitive from justice," &c. On this he would remark, that it appeared to him very doubtful whether under this treaty a merchant committing forgery of a bill of exchange in the United States with the intention of providing for it at maturity, and coming over here animo re vernment. vertendi, and, therefore, not a fugitive from justice, could be taken and given up to the American Gotime when the law was to be put in force. If so, "Being fugitive," meant being so at the then it would appear that the word "committed" meant committed after the treaty. According to the common course of reasoning and of justice, it must be considered that the treaty was meant to attach only on those whose crimes as well as flight had taken place since the making of the treaty. That must be the construction of the treaty, and the His construction of the Act of Parliament must correspond; for he considered that they were bound to advert to the treaty to discover the meaning and intention of the Act of Parliament; and, therefore, he thought that the word "committed" could not be referred to transactions before the date of the treaty. The word could have no other application. That was his opinion; and he thought he was bound to act upon it--because it seemed to him that in this country laws to tax or to restrain liberty must be clear, and if this was defective in expressing the intention of the legislature, it was for them to alter it. opinion was founded on the treaty; and, taking that ground, he thought that the Act of Parliament could only apply to those who had committed the crime after the passing of it, and also fled here from justice after the passing of it. It seemed to him, therefore, that he could only order that this man be discharged. Sir J. Bayley submitted that as there was some time to elapse before the beginning of Term, when they could apply to the Court, if his lordship let the prisoner go now, the parties whom he (Sir J. Bayley) represented would lose all remedy, for they would assuredly never catch the prisoner again. If the Court of Queen's Bench should decide that the Act was retrospective, his clients would be placed in a very inconvenient situation. Clarkson observed, that that objection would arise in every case in which a judge, acting alone, decided finally upon having arrived at a clear opinion upon the matter. PLATT, B.-I am clear about the point. Sir J. Bayley submitted that it was the first instance under the Act, and of great importance. PLATT, B.-I cannot temporize; I am bound by my oath. The prisoner was accordingly discharged. THE LEGISLATOR. Summary. NEW SETTLEMENT BILL. the sessions. No. II. parties to such appeal within the provisions and for all the purposes of this Act, so far as the same is applicable to such other parish. THE alleged object of the monstrous invention of a dictator-barrister is, that every appeal may be It is somewhat amusing, that while the overseers tried upon the merits only. But it is the principle of the appellant parish are required not to send of all dictatorships, that although reasons may be as copies to themselves, they are required to send plentiful as blackberries, none shall be deigned to true copies of the order of removal and of the exenlighten those subject to their sway: nor has this amination, the originals of which are not in their been forgotten by the framers of this Bill. By sec. possession. It is a frequent ground of appeal that the copies sent are not true copies; then how can 7 the barrister is "authorized and required "words clearly imperative-to "regulate, arrange, the appellants send true copies to the third parish? settle, and amend" all appeals and all proceedings, The party upon whom the duty of informing the &c.; and, as before observed, only simple traverses third parish of the settlement set up against them, of fact, touching the settlement, can be referred to clearly ought to be the respondents, and not the The clear inference then is, that the appellants. They possess all the materials after amendments and alterations are to be made on defects in the copies so sent should be followed by they have received the grounds of appeal, and any points, not on the merits, so that substantial ques- the same results as defects in the copies now sent to tions shall alone be tried. But by sec. 9 the dictator may quash any order of removal, or dismiss the appellants. With this alteration, the suggestion any appeal in which the question of settlement (!) is might be found very useful, as it would prevent the not disputed. Now, a quashing must be either on necessity of a double order of removal in all such form or on substance. If on form, how absurd is cases. The above would be a fatal objection to the such a power, when the dictator is created to get working of the clause as it now stands; but morerid of all formal objections. But if he is to quash over, the framers of the Bill, still dazzled by the an order upon the merits, how manifestly unjust is brilliancy of the dictator-barrister idea, have quite the proviso that "no such quashing shall have the forgotten to provide for the course of proceedings to be adopted by the third parish. How the reeffect of preventing the respondents from obtaining a fresh order upon the same parish." We cannot spondents are to learn that the third parish have see how the horns of this dilemma are to be avoided. become parties to the appeal nowhere appears, nor But further we wish to know the effect of dis- even how the barrister is to ascertain the fact, or the missing an appeal. The responIs it to be conclusive or not? appellants the grounds of appeal. On what principle is a quashing of an order to be dents are forthwith, upon receiving the grounds inconclusive, and the dismissal of an appeal conof appeal from the first appellants, to bring for a fresh appeal? what the mode of giving it? also the third partics, who shall have given notice clusive? If it be not conclusive, what is the term the matter under the consideration of the barrister, who is to summon the appellants, and what the limitations as to objections? These are questions which cannot be answered from the four as aforesaid; but these third parties have twentycorners of the bill. Provisions more calculated to one days to consider whether they will give the encourage speculative removals it would be impos- notice; and the only notice required is notice to sible to frame. No attention need be paid to evi- the appellants that they intend to dispute such setdence received before the removing magistrates; barrister has summoned them all before him, to tlement. But assume that, somehow or other, the none to the drawing up of the order, or, in fact, to any part of the proceedings. All the landmarks of what extent is the third parish a party? Can they previous decisions will be at once swept away, and object to the original order? or to the notice of guesses at the probable "discretion" of the bar-chargeability? or to the copies of examination? All is dark, rister-by statute made infallible-will be the only If not, to what are they confined? subject for consideration. misty, and obscure; all we suppose left to rays of light which may glimmer from the regulations issued But the very clause which compels the respondents to bring the matter before the barrister is as vague as his " discretion" may be expected to be. It enacts that they "forthwith" bring the matter under his consideration. Now, what is the legal meaning of "forthwith?" The Court of Queen's Bench has decided that it means a reasonable time. (Reg. v. Robinson, 12 A. & E. 672) But what is a reasonable time? It is not so easy to know at a glance whether the notice and grounds of appeal "are bad upon the face thereof." Yet in Spencely v. Robinson (3 B. & C. 658), it was seriously argued whether a delivery of a copy of rate in the morning after the day it was demanded was a sufficient compliance with the statute, which required it to be delivered "forthwith." And as the parties are to be heard by affidavit or otherwise, and affidavits must be answered, the increased delay and expense will be great before the meaning of this word can be settled; for it must vary with the circumstances of every case. The only excuse for such inattention to so important a clause we can find is, that the idea of "the merits" has engrossed the minds of the framers, so that all forms were held beneath their regard. Hence, too, we have a characteristic vagueness in sec. 6, which, however, contains a valuable suggestion for the diminution of litigation. It enacts that where the appellants set up a settlement in a third parish, The overseers or guardians of such appellant parish shall, and they are hereby required, to send or deliTHERE is a rumour of a meeting of Parlia-ver, by post or otherwise, to the overseers of the said ment in the course of the present month; but, if confirmed, it will only be to consider the state of the food-market. THE MAGISTRATE. Summary. No event of moment in the administration of justice has occurred during the past week. under the 12th section, which enacts That such barrister may from time to time make such general regulations as to the practice at his chambers, and as to the forms of summonses, orders, notices, issues, and other documents, for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of this Act, as shall to him in his discretion seem expedient. Such wilful disregard of all practical details in a Bill to settle every thing according to merits, deserves the strongest reprobation. If the subject is not worth the trouble of a little reflection and thought, why meddle with it at all? The members of both houses must be taught that legislative capacity is not instinctive; that to vote or even to take part in a debate is one thing, but to draw a statute is quite another, and demands much more consideration and qualifications of a very different nature. When the barrister has possessed himself of the appeal, and when the affidavits are come to an end, he is to frame certain issues of fact to be tried at the sessions, and oddly enough to determine whether the third parish is to be a party or not. So that, after they have done all they can to bring the point of settlement to a conclusion, they may be prevented by the discretion of the barrister. It were vain to search for reason in such a see-saw system, in spite of the "intent that every appeal being tried upon the merits." But one more instance must be given. Sec. 20 empowers the sessions to order the removal of the pauper to the third parish, provided the barrister has allowed the said parish to be a party to the appeal; and it would be too monstrous, even in this Bill, to enact otherwise. But yet observe the words of the 19th section : parish other than the appellant or respondent parish, true copies of the order of removal, of the notice of chargeability, of the examination, and of the notice and grounds of appeal, and such copies shall be sent, That if it shall appear at the trial of an appeal as aforesaid, on the same day on which the overseers against an order of removal that the grounds of appeal of the appellant parish shall send statement of the disclose or entitle the appellants to take any objecgrounds of their appeal to the overseers of the respon- tion to such order, or to the examination or proceeddent parish; and thereupon the overseers or guar-ings connected therewith, other than a denial of the dians of the said other parish, if they intend to dispute settlement upon which such order appears to have such settlement, shall, within twenty-one days next after the sending to them of such copies as aforesaid, send to the overseers of the said appellant parish, by post or otherwise, notice of such intention, accompanied by the name and address of some attorney practising in London, and authorized to act as attorney or agent on their behalf, and shall thereupon become been made, and the respondents shall not, in such case, shew to the Court that they have made application to the said barrister under the provisions of this Act, it shall not be lawful for the said Court to try the said appeal, but the said Court shall quash the said order, and direct the respondents to pay the costs of the appellants thereon; and in case it shall be shewn on the trial of any such appeal that the said barrister has directed what issue shall be tried by the said Court, it shall not be lawful for the said Court to bear or determine any question or matter whatsoever upon the trial of such appeal, other than that which has been settled and arranged by the said barrister as aforesaid; and the determination of such Court upon all such questions and matters shall be binding and conclusive upon all parties. Conclusive upon all parties! By sec. 6 the notice constitutes the third parish parties to the appeal; but should they not be parties to the issue, what is the effect of this clause? Again, if taken from the Morning Chronicle in lieu of the The Legal year commences on Monday, and quired by the pressure of reports and intelli- they are made parties, and are successful in dis. Pensated by double numbers without increased same causes also required that contracts to a sin charge. LEADING CASES.-No. XVI. HALL V. THE MAYOR, &c. OF SWANSEA. The mode in which a corporation aggregate may true in theory, was intolerable in practice; the ver act of affixing the seal, of lifting the hand, or ope ing the mouth, could only be done by some indir dual member, in theory, quite distinct from the bot politic, or by some agent. The management of th corporate property, the daily sustentation of the members, the performance of the very duties fr which the corporation was erected, required inces santly that acts should be done, sometimes of da recurrence, sometimes entirely unforeseen, yet t mitting of no delay, sometimes of small imp ance, or relating to property of little value. T amount should often be entered into. In all these cas proving the alleged settlement, how are their costs to require the affixing of the common seal was in to be paid? Sec. 20 gives costs against them if possible; and therefore, from time to time, as t unsuccessful, but there is no provision for the other exigencies of the case have required, exception contingency, for the power of the barrister as to have been admitted to the rule; and what we de costs under sec. 11 is confined to "regulations, to draw attention to is this, that these exceptio amendments, arrangements, and settlements of are not such as the rule might be supposed to he matters brought under his consideration," which provided for, but are in truth inconsistent with its I could not well include such an issue, even if the The rule that a corporation aggregate cannot con- principle, and justified only by necessity." We br words did not plainly refer to the exercise of the tract except by deed is sufficiently well known. On here concisely stated the origin of the rule, and tr powers conferred by sec. 7 prior to the trial. If, this occasion we shall endeavour to show under what reasons on which the exceptions to it are founde! therefore, third parties ever did avail themselves of circumstances the above general rule does not the exceptions themselves relating to matters this permission to become parties to the appeal, apply; and in so doing, we must necessarily call at- frequent recurrence, trifling individual importa they would find themselves involved in great diffi- tention to several very recent cases, which are im- and admitting of no delay in their execution. The culties of detail. But the fact is, that this clause portant, as throwing light on this subject. In a corporation, it is said, which has a head, m would be a dead letter, for why should a third Beverley v. The Lincoln Gas Light and Coke Com- give a personal command, and do small at parish thus voluntarily place themselves in this pany (6 A. & E. 829) a very elaborate judgment It may retain a servant, or authorise another unfavourable position? There is no power of was delivered by the Court of Queen's Bench, de- drive away cattle damage feasant, or make a di forcing them to do so. They can only become par- ciding that the action of assumpsit would lie against tress, or the like. These are all matters so conties by giving notice to that effect, and therefore a corporation aggregate for goods sold and delivered stantly recurring, or of so small importance, or s they would clearly sit quiet until they were in under a parol contract, such goods being of trifling little admitting of delay, that to require in every danger of having the pauper thrown upon them. value, and necessary for the very existence of the such case the previous affixing of the seal would be Parishes have not hitherto courted orders of re- corporate body. "It is well known," observed greatly to obstruct the every-day ordinary on moval against themselves, nor will the blandish- Patteson, J. delivering the judgment referred to, venience of the body corporate without any adequa ments of a dictator barrister induce them to place" that the ancient rule of the common law, that a object. In such matters the head of the corpo themselves within his power. No attempt there- corporation aggregate could speak and act only by ration seems, from the earliest time, to have bee fore would be made to work this impracticable its common seal, has been almost entirely superseded considered as delegated by the rest of the member clause; it would stand simply as a record of good in practice by the courts of the United States in to act for them. (Judgment, Mayor of Ludice. intentions, and good intentions are frail mate- America. The decisions of those courts, although Charlton, 6 M. & W. 821.) Moreover, in moden rials for the construction of an amended law intrinsically entitled to the highest respect, cannot times, a new class of exceptions to the general r of settlement. At the same time we should be be cited as direct authority for our proceedings, has arisen. "Corporations," observes Rolfe, E well pleased to see this suggestion put into a and there are obvious circumstances which justify delivering the judgment just cited, "hare of lat working form, and embodied in a short sta- their advancing with a somewhat firmer step to the been established, sometimes by royal charter, mor tute, with a few other selections which may be discussion of ancient rules of our common law than frequently by Act of Parliament, for the purpose of gathered from the list of abortive Bills, to which would be proper for ourselves. It should be stated, carrying on trading speculations, and where the this is most surely fated to become another addition. however, that, in coming to the decisions alluded to, nature of their constitution has been such as t those courts have considered themselves not as render the drawing of bills, or the constant making previous decisions in this country and in America. the purposes of the corporation; here the Court altering the law, but as justified by the progress of of any particular sort of contracts necessary fr We, on our part, disclaim entirely the right or the have held that they would imply, in those who ar wish to innovate on the law upon any ground of in- according to the provisions of the charter or Act convenience, however strongly made out; but when Parliament, carrying on the corporation contr we have to deal with a rule established in a state of an authority to do those acts without which the society very different from the present-at a time corporation could not subsist." Precisely the sa when corporations were comparatively few in num- view is taken of the law respecting the mode ber, and upon which it was very early found neces- which a corporation may contract by the Cour sary to engraft many exceptions-we think we are Queen's Bench in Church v. The Imperial justified in treating it with some degree of strict- Light and Coke Company (6 A. & E. 861). " THE legal event of the week has been the principle of any relaxation in it which we find to ness, and are called upon not to recede from the general rule of law," says the Lord Chief Justi opening of the new Hall of Lincoln's Inn, by have been established by previous decisions. If mon seal; as a general rule, it is only in that "is, that a corporation contracts under the co the Queen in person. We had desired to put that principle, in fair reasoning, leads to a relaxation that a corporation can express its will or do upon record in the journal of the Profession a of the rule, for which no prior decision can be act. That general rule, however, has, from minute account of the proceedings on this in- found expressly in point, the mere circumstance earliest traceable periods, been subject to exceptis teresting occasion, and accordingly we ad- of novelty ought not for it the decisions as to which furnish the principle dressed a letter to the Treasurer, requesting that is the principle of every case which is to be which they have been established, and are instan our reporter might be admitted for the pur-regarded, and a sound decision is authority for illustrating its application, but are not to be fa pose. That letter did not receive so much as all the legitimate consequences which it involves." as so prescribing in terms the exact limits, th the courtesy of a reply. Still anxious to gratify We have been tempted to give the above passage more circumstantial difference is to exclude fr the curiosity of the Profession on a matter of at length, not only because it is applicable to the the exception. This principle appears to be t particular rule under consideration, but because it venience, amounting almost to necessity. Where such special interest to them, we requested our reporter to make a personal application. He mod in which our judges apply themselves to the great inconvenience, or tend to defeatreated, th sets forth in clear and perspicuous language the to hold the rule applicable would occasion ver did so, and was told that, consistently with investigation of legal principles, and modify them object for which the corporation the arrangements, he could not be admitted. according to the exigencies of particular circum- exception has prevailed; hence the retainer We know not with whom rests the blame in stances, and the reasons upon which they are founded. parol of this matter, but certainly the proceeding is in the same judgment (UA. W E. 84.1) we find the Pets very frequently recurring, or too insig an inferior servant, the doing altogether so different from the courtesy usually following remarks as to the origin and meaning of cant very frequently the trouble of affxing accorded to the press in this country, that we that maxim of the common law which precludes a common seal, are established exceptions. can only express our surprise and regret that corporation from contracting otherwise than by deed. the same principle stands the power of acoples our Profession should be the only one that has" At first the rule appears to have been exclusive, ing bills of exchange and issuing promissory notes ever given well-grounded cause for complaints as, indeed, its principle required it to be. A cor- by companies incorporated for the Pre on this head. The daily papers were treated poration, it was said, being merely a body politic trade, with the rights and liabilities consequent in the same manner, and the consequence is, that the public has been deprived of could only act or speak by its common seal. The laid down, it was held by the Court in the c indivisible, subsisting only by supposition of the law, thereon." In accordance with the principles thes a gratification, and the occasion shorn of somecommon seal, in the words of Peere Williams, in Rex Church v. The Imperial Gas Light and Coke C thing of its honours. We hope that it was dic- of the corporation. The rule, therefore, stood not pose of supplying gas may maintain assumpsit for v. Bigg (3 P. Wms. 423), was the hand and mouth pany, supra, that a corporation created for the pur but that it was the result of negligence some- equally licplicable to email is to great matters; to from year to year at the charge of god to be the 194, The following buildings are certified as places duly registered for solemnizing marriages therein, pursu ant to the Act of the 6 & 7 Wm. 4, c. 85:-The Wesleyan Chapel, Diss. Norfolk; J. Hotson, superintendent registrar. Harpurhey Independent Chapel, Manchester; Ner. Gardiner, superintendent regis trar. THE LAWYER. to deter us; was a where. At all events, our readers must be acts of daily or of rare occurrence; to what regarded annum, the consideration being alleged to be the content with the meagre statement we have personal as well as real property. But this, though promise on the part of the corporation to supply it |