Dublin, that the whole Corporation burst into a most uncontrollable fit of laughter when he promised the litigants who patronised the Court that "Councillor Deuueby would give them more law than they ever got there before." Since that occasion the waggish prophecy of Councillor Doyle has been amply justified. When in a happy mood the venerable President of the Court of Conscience has been known to deliver a judgment in a suit for the recovery of ten or twelve shillings worthy a Lord Chancellor or a Blackstone.-Law Gazette.

THE ENGLISH AND COLONIAL BARS.

Mr. C. H. Bromby writes in the Law Journal :— Any English barrister-i.e., a member of any, not either, of our Inns of Court can be admitted to the bar of New South Wales on applying to the Court and proving his English call. He pays no fees and takes his English standing. In Victoria he has the same right, but on paying fees, about £55. He has the same right in the Colonies of South Australia, Queensland, and Western Australia; what the fees are there I do not ki ow. In Tasmania he is admitted to the bar in the same way, but takes his standing from his call there and pays £5 fees.

In New Zealand be has to pass an examination in the Acts peculiar to New Zealand before he is allowed to practise.

I believe in all the Presidencies in India an English barrister has a right to be admitted without any further qualification.

In Australia the bar of every Colony is more or less crowded; especially in New South Wales and Victoria, I should not advise any stranger to attempt either place without some connection. An opening might be more easily obtained in any of the other three Australian Colouies by a good man, especially in Western Australia, where there is the best opening. In South Australia and Western Australis, as well as in Tasmania and New Zealand, solicitors have audience, and in Queensland partial audience, though in point of fact bar practice is confined almost exclusively to those who practise as barristers ouly.

Mr. Fred. Devenish Meares writes:-
:-

I may say that a member of the Inns of Court, or King's Inns (Dublin), has no right of audience; but on producing bis certificate after six months' residence he can be called there, the usual form being to fee counsel, who moves in open Court that the applicaut be admitted. It is usual to return the fee, but I have heard of an instance in which it was retained.

As to his second question, I may say that, while the profession is not quite so crowded there as here, it is just as hard to get work, and the number of men who are making really good incomes is comparatively small.

TORTIOUS SNAILS.-An amusing case occurred in a police court last month. A lady living on one side of a wall complained that a lady living on the other side did not keep her snails in order, but allowed them to come over the top and damage her dahlias. For the defence it was contended that the snail is an "elusive beast" and cannot be kept under control; and further, that the complainant's flowers had been damaged by her own snails. There was no evidence whose snails they were which did the injury, and ultimately the parties compromised. But we imagine that there was a very good defence. The case is somewhat analagous to that where the defendant grew thistles and the seeds escaped on to bis neighbour's land.-Law Notes.

PRUDENTIAL ASSURANCE COMPANY, LIMITED, Holborn Bars, London, E.C. Founded 1848. Invested Funds, £10,000,000; Claims Paid, £12,000,000. District Office-11 UPPER SACKVILLE-STREET, DUBLIN.

INTERVIEWS WITH CLIEN IS.

BY A WORLDLY SOLICITOR.

INNKEEPERS AND MARRIED WOMEN.

W. S. (reading card).—Mr. Hauptman, manager of the Empire Hotel, London. Well, ask him in, Quiller (exit Quiller). New client. Wonder who sent him. Wouder what he wants.

*

W. S. (rising to meet Mr. H.)-Good-morning Mr.Mr. Hauptman-pray be seated.

Mr. II.-Thauk you. I trust you can spare me, say, half-an-hour.

W. S. Certainly certainly.

Mr. H.-Let me then first explain how I come to you. You know Mr. Capel Court?

W. S.-One of my oldest clients and friends.

Mr. H.-He is part proprietor of the Empire hotel-one of the biggest holders in the syndicate; and it is at his suggestion that I am here to seek your advice ou a matter somewhat serious for the hotel.

is

W. S. (settling himself down).—Quite so, and the trouble

Mr. H.-I will tell you. Last season, Mr. Vergilder and his wife stayed with us. After the season, Mr. Vergilder, on business, went to New York. They are, or were, wealthy people, and occupied a good suite of rooms. Mr. Vergilder made payments on account from time to time. After his departure, we presented the accounts to Mrs. Vergilder, who, however, never paid anything. Mr. Vergilder, last spring, was made baukrupt. On the advice of Mr. Capel Court, it was determined not to prove in his bankruptcy for the amount due. Mrs. Vergilder, soon after the bankruptcy, decided to leave, and, when asked by me to settle the account, declined on the ground that we trusted her busband, and not her. I consequently refused to permit her luggage to be removed. This, by Euglish law, an innkeeper, I believe, has the right to do. I am a German, but this I understand is the English law.

W. S.-Yes-as a general principle an innkeeper has the right to retain the goods of a guest till his bill is paid-be exercises, as the lawyers call it, a lien over the goods.

Mr. H.-Yes; well, as we declined to allow the trunks to be taken away, Mrs. Vergilder departed without ber trunks; but these alone are not enough to pay our account-some £500 odd: for this we want to sue her; and I was about to see the lawyer who usually acts for us, but Mr. Capel Court insisted that the proprietors should seek your assistance. He was very particular about it, as he was sure that there would be trouble in the case.

W. S.-Well, I am glad you have come to me of course. No doubt the lawyer who usually acts for you would have advised you correctly. Your claim raises some very interesting questions. If you sue, Mrs. Vergilder's solicitors will be certain to claim the boxes. You see, Mr. Vergilder was the person you trusted: is it right that you should sue the wife? Is it right that you should retain her property to pay his bills?

Mr. H.-Yes, those are the points Mr. Capel Court urged. He said, I remember, "Go to my lawyer. You have not got an easy case here--you never do get an easy case when married women are coucerned; go to Mr. Worldly Solicitor-be will put you right."

W. S.-Well, luckily your case fo'lows another decision which has quite recently interested the lawyers. Surely you must have heard of it. The Hotel Metropole was involved in it.

Mr. H.-Ab, yes. Mr. Capel Court would have it that the question had been before the judges recently.

W. S.-Yes, the case was Gordon v. Silber and Wife

The hotel sued to recover some £300 odd, balance due on the hotel bill, and Lady Silber counter-claimed for her luggage, which she alleged the hotel had improperly detained. The facts of that case are almost identical with this case, except that in Gordon v. Silber the husband came to the hotel first, and was subsequently joined by his wife in your case Mr. and Mrs. Vergilder came together; but this, in my opinion, would make no difference.

Mr. H.-And what did the judges decide?

W. S. Well, it was not a Court of Appeal case, although tried by a judge of the Court of Appeal-Lord Justice Lopes; he was sitting as a judge of the Court of first instance. His lordship held that the botel could not sue the wife, but could retain the luggage.

Mr. H.-Then it was a case of cry quits-a sort of drawn battle.

W. S.-Yes, it was,

Mr. H.-Can you explain to me the reasons of this decision? I am sure to be asked by my syndicate when I explain that I have had an interview with yon.

W. S.-Well, bis lordship seems to have arrived at this conclusion on the ground that the hotel had contracted with the husband, not the wife. This is right and fair enough. If husbaud and wife come to an hotel, the proprietor, you must admit, looks to the husband for payment, not to the wife.

Mr. H.-Well, yes, I suppose I must admit that,

W. S. Very well, then you must sue the busbaud, for although a married woman can now, having separate estate, enter into contracts, you can hardly claim that having entered into a contract with one man you shall be allowed to turn round and sue another man-I mean woman,

Mr. H.-But don't you think that if husband and wife come to an hotel and get into debt, and the busband cannot pay and wife can-as in our case, Mrs. Vergilder has ample private means-don't you think it is very unfair that she cannot be made to pay?

W. S.-Yes, I must admit I do. But then, you see, there are a great many other peculiarities in the law as to the liability of married women equally hard.

Mr. H.-But follow up this decision logically. A rich woman, with a husband absolutely without means, comes to our hotel, runs into debt, and then says, "You contracted with my husband, look to him to pay the billgood morning." That would be most unjust.

W. S.-Yes; but you can stop her taking her luggage

away.

Mr. H.-Ah! you did not tell me that,

W. S.-My dear sir, you did not give me time. Lord Justice Lopes said that the great question was whether the Metropole people had the right to keep the luggage, and he came to the conclusion that they did possess this right, for they were innkeepers and so bound to receive the husband and wife and their luggage. They had no means of distinguishing between the goods of the husband and those of the wife; and it is a rule of our common law that even if a guest brings to an inn goods to which he (the gnest) has no title, an innkeeper is still entitled to his lien on the goods. So, you see, if the innkeeper is allowed to exercise his right of lien substantial justice is done in these

caser.

Mr. H.-I am afraid I must differ. Look at our case. The balance of our bill is over £500; the value of Mrs. Vergilder's trunks and their contents about £200. How can we get the other £300 if this decision is

correct?

W. S.-I am afraid-I am afraid you cannot get it. Mr. H.-Suppose, in spite of this case, we do sue Mrs. Vergilder, and appeal it to the highest Court-in your opinion, is there any chance of getting this case overruled?

W. S.-Well, now, Mr. Hauptman, on that point I would rather not express an opinion without an oppor

tunity for consideration. I must confess, however, that I do not think the decision would be overruled. Without some special contract at the time of arrival, I do not see how an innkeeper can contract with the wife; the contract is entered into with the husband. To get the case overruled we should have to induce the Court of Appeal to look at such a transaction as a The joint and several contract-a bold innovation. liability of partners as a rule is only joint, not joint and several. Man and wife cannot be more than partners. But, pardon me, I am thinking aloud. No, the decision would, I think, hold good.

Mr. H.-And bow are we to protect ourselves against this kind of thing in the future?

W. S.-Weekly payments of account, strictly enforced, would minimise the risk,

Mr. H.-Quite true-quite true. Well, good-morning! I will report the result of the interview to the proprietors. Good-morning!

W. S.-Good-morning, Mr. Hauptman, good-morning! (Shuts door.) Phew! Balance of an hotel bill £500 odd. So this is how friend Capel Court gets rich on the quiet. Wonder if he can get me some shares in that syndicate ! Don't mind the occasional risk of bankrupt husband, and a wife who won't pay.-Law Notes.

LADY LAWYERS.

Room must be made for the name of Mlle. Sarmisa Bilcesco, who has just received from the Faculty of Law at Paris the first doctorate of laws that has been conferred by them upon a woman. Mlle. Bilcesco is described as a tall young woman of twenty-three, brune, very pretty and very shy. She was born at Bucharest, and studied at home under direction of profes-ors of the Bucharest Faculty, taking at the age of seventeen, baccalaureates in science and in letters maxima cum laude. To these she added the first piano prize of the Conservatory at Bucharest, In 1884 she proceeded to Paris to euter herself at the Faculties of Letters and of Law. She was received at once at the Sorbonne, and after only some brief delay at the Faculty of Law, and has been pursuing her studies at both with marked distinction and success during the last six years. The subject chosen for her thesis as doctor was: De la condition legale de la mere en droit romain et en droit francais. It makes, the Temps says, a stout volume of five huudred pages, and would have contained two hundred more if she had not withdrawn from it a discussion of the question of filiation, Mlle, Bilcesco will return to Bucharest and apply for admission to the bar there, not with a view to practising law herself-Je suis trop timide, she says-but in the hope of smoothing the way for other women who may wish to try the bar as a means of getting a living; and at any rate, to obtain a ruling on the question whether women who have passed the same examinations as men will be permitted to plead in the courts. There seems to be no great danger that the bar will be overrun with women if Miss Bilcesco gets a decision in her favour, for she has left behind her in Paris only two other women students at the Faculty of Law.-Exchange.

INNKEEPER'S LIEN.

Innkeepers and hotel-keepers will have reason to be well satisfied with the decision of Lord Justice Lopes on the 9th of Aug. in the case of Gordon and Hollands v. Silber and another, in which a novel point, and one of very great importance on the subject of an. innkeeper's lien upon the goods of his guest, was decided in favour of the innkeeper. The question arose for the first time, how far an innkeeper has a lien on the luggage and goods which are the separate property of a married woman who comes to and stays at his inn accompanied by her husband; and it is evident that such a question could only have arisen since the Married Women's Property Acts. The husband had been staying at the hotel for some time alone, and had incurred expenses which he had paid; he was then joined by his wife, who came to the hotel with a large

quantity of luggage, which it was admitted was her separate property. The husband and wife occupied the same rooms, and they remained at the hotel together for some time, the husband leaving some days before the wife. The husband having become insolvent, it was sought to render the goods of the wife liable for the blance of the hotel bill incurred by husband and wife. A claim made to render the wife directly liable, on the ground that she had con'racted as to her expenses at the hotel in reference to her separate estate, failed, as, in the opinion of the learned judge, the evidence failed to show that she had s contracted as to bind her separate estate. The plaintiffs then relied on their lien as in keepers. Now, it is a well-recoguised principle that by common law every innkeeper is under an obligation to receive every guest who comes to his inu, provided there be sufficient room in the inn; he is also under the common law liability of keeping safely and securely the goods and luggage of every gnest, and, as Lord Justice Lopes said, it is only fair to give him rights co-extensive or commensurate with these liabilities to receive his guest and keep his goods safely and securely, and the learned Lord Justice held, in accordance with this principle, that, as the guests received were the husbaud and the wife, and as all the goods received by the hotel-keeper were received by him as the goods of the husband and the wife, and that as he was responsible for all the goods so received by him, whether they belouged to the husband or the wife, his right of lien was co-extensive with these liabilities, and extended to all the goods which had been brought by his guests to the hotel, whether they were the separate property of the wife or not, inasmuch as such goods satisfied the condition laid down by Chief Justice Wilde iu Smith v. Dearlove (6 C. B. 132), where he said, "The right of lien of an innkeeper depends upon the fact that the goods came into bis possession in his character of innkeeper as belonging to a guest." --Law Times.

Holloway's Ointment and Pills.-Rheumatism and Neuralgia.Though the former disease remorselessly attacks persons of all ages, and the latter ruthless y selects its victims from the weak and delicate, the persevering use of these remedies will infallibly cure both complaints. After the affected parts have been diligently fomented with hot brine, and the skin thoroughly dried, Holloway's Ointment must be rubbed in firmly and evenly for ten minutes twice a day, and his Pil s taken according to the printed directions wrapped round each box of his medicine. Both Ointment and Pills are accompanied by instructions designed for the public at large, and no invalid, who attentively reads them, can now be at any loss how to doctor himself successfully.

CORRESPONDENCE.

We throw open the columns of this journal most willingly for the discussion of subjects of interest to the profession; but it must be understood that we do not necessarily agree with all the opinions expressed by our correspondents.

Letters and co›n nunications intended for publication and addressed to THE EDITOR, 53 Upper Sickville-street, Dublin, must be authenticated by the name of the oriter, not necessarily for publication, but as a guarantee of good faith.

* Letters intended for publication in the same week should reach the Office not later than Thursday morning.

THE EFFECT OF THE LAND LAW ACT, 1887, S. 1, ON FREEHOLD LEASES.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE IRISH LAW TIMES.

SIR,-As one of your correspondents observes, it is impossible to say whether the tenant's interest in lands, falling within the operation of this section of the Act, is turned into a chattel interest by his taking advautage of the provisions of the Act, or whether such interest remains of a freehold character, until the law is settled by a judicial decision, as the weightiest reasons that might be adduced in support of either view would have to give way to the absolute force of that authority. Until the matter is thus settled, he would be a rash solicitor who would attempt to deal with lauds of this kind on the assumption that they possessed either ore or the other of the distinctive characteristics which our law recognises in freehold and chattel real property. I think, however, that the opinion that the lands become chattels real will prove to be the better opinion of the two. As in the case of a lease for years or lives, when the lives drop the tenant's interest becomes a chattel one for the residue, if any, of the term, so in the case we are discussing the election of the tenant to go into Court and the operation of law uuite in bringing about a similar transformation. No lawyer will argue, I am sure, that the tenant could, after taking the benefit of the Act, set up a freehold tenancy in the lands as against his landlord, if it were by any possibility his interest to do so. To say then that, as between the tenant's heir and his personal representative, a different rule should prevail, and that the lands would be other than what they had become by operation of law, would be to say that some equitable principle lay at the bottom of the whole business and demanded this. No equitable doctrine that I am aware of exists, that would answer the purpose of those who couteud that the heir of the tenant would be entitled to the lands as against the personal representative. The policy of the law in modern times has been inimical to the growth of these estates pur autre vie, or merely descendible freeholds. It will either have them one thing or another-estates of inheritance or simply chattel interests. To facilitate a change in one direction we have had the Renewable Leasehold Conversion Act, and I imagine that a shove in the other direction ought to be given to them by the judges under the favourable opportunity afforded by the Land Act of 1887. I am, Sir,

Your faithful servant,
EDWARD E. GETHIN.

New Ross, 9th September, 1890.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE IRISH LAW TIMES.

SIR, I think "A Western Solicitor" should have put bis uame to bis letter appearing in your issue of 6th inst., especially as it is well and sensibly written.

I did not say that Wilson v. Smith was in point or well decided, but, on the contrary, I repeat tuat the decision is inconsistent with the Act.

I read the case with some surprise, and afterwards mentioned it to an eminent Q.C., whose opinion was

that "The fixing of a judicial rent did not alter the character of the estate."

In my opinion, the moment the application is lodged with the Land Commission, followed by the fixing of a judicial rent, the estate becomes a chattel, and as such goes to the next of kin in case of intestacy, and to the executor in case of a will; but to establish this, someone must go beyond the two cases mentioned by me iu my former letter.

If this be not so, the first section of the Act of 1887 has no meaning.

If the freehold lease, on the fixing of a judicial rent, goes to the heir, the clause as to non-alienation remains intact, and hence the consent of the landlord is required for an assignment.

Yours truly,

Strabane, 10th September, 1890.

COURT PAPERS.

P. GALLAGHER.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.

ADJUDICATIONS IN BANKRUPTCY.

[The dates of Adjudications are first given, the Sillings follow in italics.]

DUBLIN.

Farrell, Laurence, of Robertstown, in the county of Kildare, grocer. September 3; Tuesday, September 16, and Friday, October 3. Bouchier Eaton, solr.

Nixon, John, formerly of 80 Upper Dorset-street, in the city of Dublin, grocer and spirit merchant, but now residing at No. 25 Nelson street, in said city. August 27; Tuesday, September 16, and Friday, October 3. John White, solr. Walsh, John, of Kylotlea or Kylo willing, near Carrick-onSuir, in the county of Tipperary, farmer and army pensioner. August 26; Tuesday, September 16, and Friday, October 3. John Henry Menton, solr.

CORK.

Walsh, John, of 87 North Main-street, Youghal, in the county of Cork, shopkeeper. August 26; Monday, September 22, and Friday, October 10. John and James Foley, solrs.

BIRTHS, MARRIAGES, AND DEATHS.

BIRTHS.

BRETT-September 9, at Spencer Villas, Glenageary, the wife of W. J. Brett, solicitor, of a daughter.

HOGAN-September 8, at St. Michael's street, Tipperary, the wife of John Hayes Hogan, solicitor, of a son.

HUME September 8, at Upper Mount-street, Dublin, the wife of G. A. Hume, barrister-at-law, of a son.

MARRIAGES.

BYRNE and BYRNE-August 28, at the Church of St. Saviour, Dominick-street, by the Very Rev. J. D. Fitzgibbon, O.P., D.D., assisted by the Very Rev. M. A. Duhig, O.P., and the Rev. M. J. Byrne, O.P., cousin to the bride, William M. Byrne, solicitor, Tullow, to Mary Imelda, only daughter of the late Patrick Byrne, Wicklow. HICKSON and PETRIE-September 9, at St John's Church, Sligo, by the Ven. the Archdeacon of Elphin, Richard Hickson, Crown and Peace Office, Sligo, to Elizabeth (Lizzie), second eldest daughter of William Petrie, Carrowroe, Sligo.

MORGAN and PENNEFATHER-September 3, in Thurles Church, by the Rev. C. S. Cooke, Rector, Allen H. Morgan, solicitor, eldest son of the late Allen Morgan, D.I., R.I.C., Clontarf, to Caroline Elizabeth, second daughter of the late Thomas B. Pennefather, solicitor, Athlomen, Thurles.

Do.. 5 p c

Gt.South n & West'n, 4 pe Midland Gt. West'n. 4 pc Miscellaneous Debent.

Dub. Cor. Stock, redeem. 1944 .. Rathm. & Rathgar Tship., 31 pc

SEPTEMBER

Fri.

Sat. Mon. Tues. Wed. Thr.

5

6 8 9 10 11

951

95

1

95 95 95 95

་ .

124

ΙΟΥ

| | | | |

951

• Shares not fully paid up are given in Italics. Bank Rate Of Discount-44 per cent. Of Deposit-11 per cent.

121

111

1134

1001

1 x d

HENNIG BROS., Billiard Table Makers, 29 HIGH STREET, LONDON, W.C.,

Undertake to supply new 14 in. slate bed full size solid mahogany Billiard Tables of guaranteed workmanship and finish, replete with every modern improvement and requisites of the value of £10, delivered and fixed for £60; or freight paid to any Colonial Port for £70. Undersize, French, and Magic Billiard Dining Tables from £6 68. New Billiard, Pool, or Pyramid Balls, full size, real Ivory, from 10s. Supr West of England Cloths for full size Tables and Cushions, from 62s. 6d. Cues (well seasoned Ash) 18.; ditto, supr hardwood butted, 28., 2s. 6d., 38, 38. 6d., 48., 48. 6d.; Ebony butted, 58. Cue Cases, 28. 6d. and 3s. Cue Tips (best quality only), 18., 18. 2d., 18. 4c., and 1s. 6d. per box of 100. Restuffing Cushions with Rubber, Cue Tip Chalks, 1s. per gross. warranted not to get hard in any climate, £8 10s. Adjusting and Colouring Balls, 8d. Price Lists, Cloth and Cushion Rubber Samples, post free. Every kind of Billiard Work executed with despatch, carefully and at moderate charges. Billiard Rooms fitted throughout; distance no object. Colonial and Shipping Orders promptly attended to. Estab. 1862. Cut out and preserve for future reference.

TAAFFE and COLDWELL,

81 Grafton Street, Dublin.

OLICITORS having the Carriage of Sales of

that they can have their Printing executed correctly, and with the utmost despatch by

GIVEN ON GOOD HOUSE PROPERTY.

Rate of Interest, 6 per cent. per annum.
Loans also issued repayable by annuity.

Depcsits received, Present Rate of Interest 24 per cent.
Special Rates for Fixed Deposits.

ADDRESS-A. H. MERCER, Secretary,

RISH CIVIL SERVICE BUILDING SOCIETY,

171