BANKRUPTCY LAW. BIRMINGHAM COUNTY COURT. (Before H. W. COLE, Q.C. Judge.) Bedford's possession. His Honour said he did not regard that fact as one of any importance, as the box and its contents were unquestionably sent to Bedford by way of security for his debt, and not merely for safe custody. The question was whether the remaining jewellery stock now in the possession of Bedford could be retained by him as against the claim of the trustee in the bankruptcy. His opinion was that the deposit of that jewellery with Bedford was not the voluntary or spontaneous act of the bankrupts, or either of them, but the result of pressure, which, under the advice of Mr. Fowke, was put on Morrell by Bedford on the 22nd Aug. Under such circum. stances, although Bedford knew that the bankrupts were then in a state of bankruptcy, his Robert Duke, solicitor, Birmingham, appeared Honour considered it to be well established by for the trustee, and James Motteram (of the Oxford the case of Ex parte Topham, Re Walker (L. Rep. Circuit), instructed by J. C. Fowke, solicitor, Bir-8 Ch. App. 614), that this was not a fraudulent mingham, opposed the motion on behalf of Mr. preference, and that Bedford was entitled to retain Bedford. the jewellery stock now in his possession until the whole debt due to him was satisfied, including the £95 for which the acceptance was given by the bankrupts. He, therefore, declared that Bedford was entitled to a valid lien upon such of the jewellery stock deposited with him on the 22nd Aug. as still remained in his possession for the £183 6s. 5d., which was due or owing to him from the bankrupts at the time of the bankruptcy, and that such deposit was not a fraudulent preference; but he declared that Bedford had no lien upon the thirteen rings, except for the sum of £11 14s. (part of the £183 68. 5d.) due to him for work and labour thereon. He ordered that, on payment by the trustee to Bedford of such £11 14s., Bedford should deliver up the rings to the trustee; and he ordered the assessed jewellery stock now in the possession of Bedford to be sold by him, and that he should retain thereout the balance of the said £183 6s. 5d., together with his costs of or relating to the present application; the surplus, if any, to be paid over to the trustee. The application was heard on the 28th Nov. last, and the court reserved judgment. His HONOUR, in delivering judgment, said it appeared that on the 30th July last, Bedford sold and delivered some 9-carats brilliants for £95 to the bankrupts, Morrell and Gaites, who were jewellers, carrying on business in Birmingham, and took their acceptance for the price bearing date 30th July, and payable about six months after date. On the same day the bankrupts sent back the brilliants to Bedford to be mounted, and he mounted them in thirteen rings, for which work the further sum of £11 148. became due to him. On the 16th Aug. he sent the rings to the bankrupts' place of business too late for them to receive them, and they were brought back. But on the 18th Aug. he again sent the rings, when they were duly received and a receipt given for them. Under these circumstances all lien on the part of Bedford in the rings was of course gone at that time. It appeared, however, that later on the same day, Morrell, one of the bankrupts, sent back the rings to Bedford, and shortly afterwards called upon him and asked him to hold them for a few days, as he (Morrell) and his partner were then quarrelling. This Bedford promised to do, and he had since retained possession of the rings, which were part of the goods in question. Besides the £95 and £11 14s., there was in August a further debt of £76 6s. 5d. owing from the bankrupts to Bedford for sundry goods sold. On the 18th Aug. the bankrupts were served, at the instance of a French creditor named Grillot, with a trader debtor summons, dated the 16th Aug., and therefore Morrell went to Bedford and informed him of the facts, and expressed a desire that Bedford should co-operate with him in taking such steps as might be necessary in the interest of the English creditors. Bedford then went with Morrell to the office of Mr. Duke, his solicitor, and under the advice of Mr. Duke, who appeared to have considered the interests of the general body of English creditors rather than the interests of Bedford personally, signed a trader debtor summons on the bankrupts for the debt due to him, and it was served on them. Thus far Bedford had had no advice except that of Morrell's solicitor, Mr. Duke, who appeared never to have been consulted, except to protect the interests of the whole body of English creditors. On the 22nd Aug. Bedford consulted his own private solicitor, Mr. Fowke, and in consequence of the advice which that gentleman gave him, he sought an interview with Morrell, and asked him for some security for his debt. A request from Bedford at that critical time was nearly equivalent to a command, and Morrell did not attempt to resist it, but at once agreed to send Bedford some goods as security for the debt of the firm owing to Bedford, and another debt owing to another creditor, named Cohen, who had since repudiated all claim to the security; and if anything was left after paying them, Morrell stated that he wished it to be held for the English creditors generally. In consequence of what had been agreed to at that interview, Morrell, on the evening of the same 22nd Aug. sent on behalf of the firm, two boxes of jewellery to Bedford. Later in the evening, Morrell and Mr. Robeson, the traveller of the firm, called on Bedford, and represented to him that the jewellery was more than enough to pay off Bedford's debt and Cohen's also; and, as that was the fact, Bedford allowed them to take away part of the stock deposited, leaving one box and a parcel, together worth £700. Bedford's debt being now satisfactorily secured, he determined not to go on with the trader-debtor summons, which he had taken out through Mr. Duke, and he communicated that intention to Morrell on the 25th Aug. On the 25th Aug. Grillot, the French creditor, presented his petition in bankruptcy, returnable on the 10th Sept., on which day Morrell and Gaites were adjudicated bankrupts. Bedford had since given up to the trustees a further portion of jewellery stock, not necessary to answer his claim, but he still held the remainder, which was said to be in a lockedup box, the key of which had never been in BRISTOL COUNTY COURT. (Before E. J. LLOYD, Q.C., Judge.) Composition Adjudication Bankruptcy Act adjudged a bankrupt. By that means, all claims on the part of the debtor would be entirely got rid of, and also all claims on the part of Mr. Owen, and it would simply be a matter to be dealt with by the assignee under the bankruptcy on the one hand, and Mr. Morris on the other. If they should be unable to come to a proper understanding about it, the assignee would have his remedy in bringing the matter before the court, and taking his Honour's direction, giving Mr. Morris notice of the intended application. His HONOUR inquired what amount of the estate had been got in. Beckingham replied that he was unable to state. Mr. Owen received portions of the estate, but not half what the composition amounted to at 2s. 6d. in the pound. His HONOUR-What is the amount of the debts? Beckingham-The total amount of liabilities was £602 16s. 9d. His HONOUR observed that it seemed to him to be a very proper application, but he would hear the other side. Essery (who appeared for the debtor)'said he had no opposition to offer to the application. His HONOUR thereupon adjudged the debtor a bankrupt. LIVERPOOL COUNTY COURT. (Before PERRONET THOMPSON, Esq., Judge.) A., in consideration of B. giving him his acceptance Held, subject to any further evidence to be adduced, that the agreement was a bill of sale, and invalid without registration. THIS was a case which by consent was left to a jury under the provisions of the 72nd section of the Bankruptcy Act. It was the second instance at Liverpool, in bankruptcy matters, where the assistance of a jury had been invoked. The facts of the case were shortly these: In September last year Mr. Christopher Malley, a rag and rope merchant, made application to Mr. Robert Hewitson, also in the same trade, with whom he had previously transacted business, for his acceptance of two bills for £150 each. Hewitson assented conditionally upon being secured, and accordingly Malley gave him railway advice notes for certain flax tow ropes lying at the railway station of the value of about £300. The terms of the arrangement were reduced to writing, and were as follows: C. Malley, Liverpool. 30th Sept. 1872. To R. Hewitson & Co., Liverpool. Gentlemen,-In consideration of your accepting bills for the sum of £300, I hereby hand you warrants for 30 tons tow ropes, and I draw on account at £7 per ton. I also agree to sell them for your account at the best terms and price I can get, and hand you over cash for them as sold, guaranteeing you a profit of £1 per ton; should I at any time prior to the goods being sold, hand you over the cash for the amount of the bills, you will hand me warrants, and I will give you £1 per ton profit, and all over the above price to be equally divided, less expenses. CHRISTOPHER MALLEY. In December last, Malley's affairs went into liquidation, and Mr. Bolland was chosen trustee. He at once put a stop upon all goods lying at the different railway stations in the name of Malley, and amongst other goods those now in question, The for which Hewitson held advice notes. trustee subsequently obtained delivery of these goods and caused the same to be sold by auction. Hewitson thereupon commenced an action against the trustee for the value of the rope, but the court restrained the proceedings, and directed the issue between the parties to be tried by a jury in the County Court. Kennedy (instructed by Masters and Fletcher), appeared for Hewitson; and Timpron Martin, solicitor, for the trustee. Kennedy, after briefly detailing the facts of the case, called Mr. Hewitson, who produced the agreement between the parties. Martin objected to its reception on account of its being unstamped, and the court sustained the objection, and thereupon the stamp duty, and a penalty of £10, was deposited with the registrar. The witness then produced the railway advice notes, and Martin took exception to their being received without being stamped. He submitted that, like a dock warrant, they required a penny stamp, that is, assuming that they were of any value. His HONOUR, after referring to the authorities, decided that they did not require to be stamped. Gazette appeared only four days before the meeting. Gill, in reply, said the practice was not imperative as to the length of notice in the Gazette, as already in this very matter the court had considered resolutions passed at a meeting which had only been advertised seven days. The main question for the court was, had all the creditors been apprised of the meeting? He submitted that they had, and the best proof of that was the fact that every creditor of the bankrupt, except one for a Mr. Hewitson then deposed to the facts already very small amount, was present or represented at stated, and added that he had given the trustee the meeting. The only meeting which the rules formal notice not to sell the property. On cross-required to be advertised ten days was that called examination he admitted that in March last he by the registrar, namely, the first meeting of creeffected a composition with his creditors of 1s. 6d. ditors; but all other meetings, even those called in the pound. He could not state the amount of by the court, under sect. 20, were to be summoned his liabilities, but thought they were under as the court might direct, and, without such £2000; the amount that the composition came to direction, by notice being sent to each creditor, he could not tell. The acceptances which he gave as had been done here, stating the object of the to Malley formed part of his liabilities, and meeting. although he had paid only a composition upon them he claimed the full value of the goods from Mr. Bolland. He had not, when arranging with his creditors, disclosed the ropes in question as part of his assets, as he was advised by his solicitor that it was not necessary. Mr. Malley corroborated the last witness as to the nature of the transaction; and on crossexamination stated that his liabilities were, at the date of his liquidation, £15,000. Several witnesses were then called, who deposed that it had been their custom to regard railway advice notes as symbols of ownership, and that in both buying and selling goods they regarded the possession of the advice notes as equivalent to possession of the goods. His HONOUR said it appeared to him clear, on reference to the prescribed form of advertisement under sect. 28, that notice of the meeting must be advertised in the London Gazette and a local newspaper, and he understood the Chief Judge had so laid down the practice. The meeting, therefore, having to be advertised in the Gazette, the only question was as to the length of notice to be given, and as other meetings called by advertisement in the Gazette required ten days, he thought it would be a salutary practice to adopt here. If there was not some such rule, meetings might be called on the same day on which the advertisement appeared, and thereby the notice would be nugatory. With respect to the court having on a former occasion considered resolutions passed at a meeting called by a seven days' notice, it was only done on Mr. Cotton waiving his objection to the notice. In the present case he did not consider the resolutions had been passed at a meeting duly convened, and therefore he should decline to entertain them. Majesty who may desire to resort thereto. 2. That it is desirable, in the establishment of such school, to provide for examinations, to be held by examiners impartially chosen, and to require certificates of the passing of such examinations as may respectively be deemed proper for the several branches of the legal Profession as necessary qualifications (after a time to be limited) for admission to practise in those branches respectively." In support of these resolutions a petition was presented, which was signed by about 900 members of the Bar, including 18 Queen's counsel, and by 6000 out of about 10,000 solicitors practising in England and Wales. Though the Government opposed the resolution chiefly on the ground that there was not likely to be time for dealing with the question by Bill, the resolutions were only defeated by a majority of 13 in a House of 219 members. Since then the four Inns of Court have adopted a new scheme for teaching and examining students for the Bar. The committee of the Legal Association, however, say that what is wanted is a school of law not confined to one branch, but open to students in both branches of the legal profession, as well as to such of the public as wish to study law as a science, and that this school should be administered by a public and responsible governing body, not by selfelecting bodies which claim to be irresponsible, and which may at any moment modify or abandon the schemes they have set in operation. The deputation appointed to wait on the Lord Chancellor (who ceased to be the president of the association when he was appointed to the Woolsack) were: Mr. Amphlett, Q.C, M.P., Professor Sheldon Amos, Mr. Bryce, Mr. Fry, Q.C., Mr. Kay, Q.C., Mr. Lindley, Q.C., Mr. J. C. Mathew, Mr. Osborne Morgan, Q.C., M.P., Mr. Pearson, Q.C., Mr. Westlake, Mr. Arthur Williams, and Mr. Alfred Wills, Q.C. (representing the Bar); with the following solicitors: Mr. Janson, presi dent, and Mr. F. J. Bircham, vice-president of the Incorporated Law Society; Mr. Clabon, Mr. Cookson, Mr. Hollams, Mr. Jevons (of Liverpool), Mr. B. G. Lake, Mr. Marshall (of Leeds), and Mr. Ryland, of Birmingham, members of the council of the Incorporated Law Society; Mr. W. J. Farrer, Mr. H. B. Freshfield, and Mr. J. V. Long This evidence concluded the plaintiff's case; and Martin, after a lengthy discussion as to the particular issue to be left to the jury, said he should ask for a nonsuit on the ground that the agreement between the parties amounted to a bill of sale, and required registration to be of any validity. He had no wish to impugn the bona fides of the transaction between the parties, but he submitted that as the agreement amounted to an authority or licence to take possession of the ropes, it came within the 7th section of the Act, and was a bill of sale. He cited Re Steele and Keeling, and also the case of Sheridan v. Macartney, in the Irish Court of Queen's Bench THE question in dispute in this case was as to the deputation, thought they might fairly claim to be (5 L. T. Rep. N. S. 27). Kennedy cited Ex parte North-Western Bank, re Slee (27 L. T. Rep. N. S. 461), and maintained that the agreement was no more than a letter of hypothecation and a transfer of goods in the ordinary course of business, and did not require regis tration under the Bills of Sale Act. His HONOUR said he should be prepared to charge the jury that the agreement amounted to a bill of sale, and therefore, without registration, was null and void. It was a point, however, which he should like to consider further, and, as there was no dispute as to the facts of the case, but the whole question was one of law, he would suggest that the jury be discharged and the matter left for the decision of the court. The parties ultimately agreed to that course, on the understanding that the right to adduce further evidence was reserved. The jury were then discharged. Re JOHN CROSS. Bankruptcy Act 1869-Sect. 28-Practice. Held that meeting of creditors must be convened by a ten days' notice in Gazette and local newspaper. THIS was a case which had been before the court for several months. The bankrupt, who was for. merly a colliery proprietor at St. Helens, in the first instance presented a petition for liquidation, and, after several futile attempts to effect a composition with his creditors, he was declared bank. rupt, and Mr. Bewley chosen trustee. The lia bilities were about £8000, and assets £50. A meeting of creditors was afterwards called under the 28th section, and an offer of 6d. in the pound accepted, but, owing to some informality, it was not approved by the court. Another meeting was then called at which 4d. in the pound was accepted, but again the court refused to approve thereof. On appea to the Chief Judge, he at first directed the court to confirm the resolutions, but afterwards changed his mind, and affirmed the decision of the court below. Another meeting has since been held, at which the creditors again resolved to accept 4d. in the pound, and, Gill (solicitor) now applied for the approval of the court to the resolution. Cotton (solicitor) on behalf of the Roughdale Fire Clay Company, dissentient creditors, objected to the court taking the resolution into consideration, seeing that it had been passed at a meeting which had not been duly convened. According to the practice of the court it was necessary that notice of the meeting should be given in the Gazette and one local newspaper ten days prior to its being held; but in the present case the notice in the (Before J. F. COLLIER, Esq., Judge.) Friday, Dec. 5. Re TRUMBLE. Proof of debt by a partner against the estate of Held, that until the partnership debts were dishis late partner. charged there was no right of proof. admission of a proof of debt for over £1000, which had been tendered by Mr. George Trumble against the estate of the debtor, and rejected by the trustee. It appeared that for some time prior to 1866 the debtor was a partner of George Trumble, and that they then made an assignment of their estate for the benefit of their creditors. At the date of the assignment the partners stood indebted to the Adelphi Bank in a considerable sum on open account, and also on promissory notes to the extent of £1650. George Trumble has since paid in settlement of the bank's claim £950, and is now the holder of the promissory notes, and in respect thereof sought to rank upon the estate of his late co-partner, the present liquidating debtor. The claim, it was stated, had been the subject of previous litigation, and although it involved a nice legal question as to the right of a solicitor to bind his client to a compromise, yet its solution was not necessary for the disposal of the issue before the court. His HONOUR (after hearing Goffey and Etty, solicitors for the parties concerned) said that nothing was clearer than that one partner could not prove against the separate estate of his co-partner, unless he had paid the co-partnership debts in full, or in some other way satisfied those that he had paid none of the joint creditors except debts. Here Mr. George Trumble expressly stated the Adelphi Bank, nor was there any evidence that the debts had been in any other way satisfied. On that ground he thought the proof of debt property rejected, and should dismiss the appeal with coste. Notice of appeal was given. LEGAL NEWS. A GENERAL SCHOOL OF LAW. A DEPUTATION from the Legal Education Association waited upon the Lord Chancellor at his private room in Lincoln's-inn, on Friday afternoon, the 12th inst., for the purpose of ascertaining what steps the Government are prepared to take in order to give effect to the object of the Association. It will be remembered that in the Session of 1872 Lord Selborne (then Sir Roundell Palmer, and President of the Association) submitted to the House of Commons the following resolutions: "1. That it is desirable that a general school of law should be established in the metropolis by public authority for the instruction of students intending to practise in any branch of the legal Profession, and of all other subjects of her bourne. Mr. Amphlett, Q.C., M.P., in introducing the a representative body. He reminded the Lord Chancellor that in March 1872 his Lordship, in the House of Commons, proposed two resolutions embodying the principal object of the association, that object being to establish a general school of law where the students of both branches of the Profession might receive instruction, and also to insure compulsory examination before any student is allowed to practise either branch. These resolutions, though opposed by the Government, were only defeated by a majority of thirteen. This result was very encouraging, and still more encouraging were the speeches made by the eminent persons who opposed the resolutions, especially by the Attorney-General and the Prime Minister. What they then said amounted to approval of the principle advocated by the associa tion, though they thought that the time was inopportune, and that the House was not called Mr. Gladstone said the House could hardly be upon to pronounce upon an abstract resolution. tion was before them in a practical shape, and he expected to give a decided opinion unless the quesadded that no man could be more competent than his Lordship was to prepare a Bill on the subject. Since then the Inns of Court had established a new scheme of education and examination for their own students, and, although there might be honest attempt on the part of the Inns of Court defects in this scheme, he believed it was an to meet the requirements of enlightened opinion on the subject. Still, it did not cover the whole ground. There was no security in it for perma nence, because any one of the four societies which now concurred in supporting it might at any moment retire from the scheme, and, owing to the constitution of the governing bodies of the Inns of Court, it was difficult to procure from time to time in such a scheme any changes which the circumstances of the case might require. Under these circumstances, the association had criticised, though not in any offensive spirit, the details of the scheme as far as concerned the instruction proposed for members of the Bar. "The essential point," they said, "in which this scheme is, in the opinion of the committee, wholly inadequate to supply an efficient school of law is that it seeks to establish an organisation for teaching law con fined to students for one branch of the legal Profession only." And they added: "The committee feel that, under these circumstances, it is the duty of the association to persevere not less earnestly than hitherto in its endea vours to accomplish the objects for which it was formed. The committee venture to think that the time has arrived when, in the words of the Solicitor-General, it is practicable and desirable for the Government to take action in the matter. They believe that, to repeat his own words, that 'opinion has been so far formed and decided that a definite course can be marked out by so much general assent as shows that another system is earnestly desired and wished for,' and they feel assured that when the proper time comes for considering the details of a scheme embodying the views of the association, it will receive the favourable consideration of those who are most able to decide what is most likely to accomplish the greatest good that can be done by education.'" It might be asked why had they taken no steps to bring the subject before Parliament during the last session? It would be no breach of confidence to say that his Lordship was so occupied with the details of the Judicature Bill that it was thought better to let the matter rest for another year. The Association, however, were of opinion that the object they had in view would suffer prejudice if another session were allowed to pass without calling the attention of Parliament to it. Their principal object to-day, therefore was to ascertain whether individually, or, what would be much better, because it would open up a better prospect of success, as a member of the Government, his Lordship would be able to bring forward a Bill on the subject the next session of Parliament. The Lord Chancellor said it gave him much pleasure to see so many of his old friends and co-operators in this work, and he was glad to assure them of his continued and unabated interest in the object for which this association had been formed. His opinions respecting it had already been publicly expressed, and they were in all respects entirely unchanged. He should not, therefore, omit to use any opportunities which might occur in promoting the objects of the association. Last session his hands were too full of other things, and it would not have been prudent for him then to take charge of this additonal measure. He reminded those that were present that one only of the important measures of Law reform then introduced by him had become law; and the other measure, which he hoped to re-introduce in an improved and amended form, would occupy considerable time and require great attention in the approaching session. He was not, therefore, now able, on the part of the Government, to enter into any engagement with regard to the Bill which the association desired to pass. When the time came for the Government to decide upon that question they would take into account the whole of the measure which they desired to promote, and they would, doubtless, consider, among other things, whether the last session of the present Parlia ment was, with regard to this particular measure, a desirable time for pressing it forward. The Government would no doubt consider this question with a disposition to forward the objects which the association and he also had in view; and if he could persuade his colleagues to adopt his view, they would then also, no doubt, be disposed to support, either in the next session or some other session-supposing they were in office -such a measure on the subject as he might recommend to them. For his own part, however, speaking now as an individual, he did not intend to allow more time to pass without reducing into proper form a measure which should be fit to be submitted to the Government for their consideration, provided that he could obtain such information as he desired, and in taking this course his present intention was not to confin. himself to the scheme for a general school of law This would form an important part of his measure, which would so far proceed in the lines and upon the principles laid down by the association. But he thought it would be expedient also to deal with the constitution and government of the Inns of Court, and he proposed to do so in accordance with the principles put forward in the report of the Royal Commission which some time ago sat upon that subject. When he should have succeeded in formulating a proper measure for this purpose his intention was-and he had some reason to believe that Mr. Amphlett agreed that this would be the proper course-to communicate the draught Bill, not only to the Inns of Court, but to the Incorporated Law Society and the Metropolitan and Provincial Law Society. He should then have the advantage of considering their observations upon the draught Bill before he finally invited the Government to consider it. This was the course he proposed to take. He thought he should thereby be furthering the ultimate success of the object they had in view, and he need not say that if, without prejudice to other business which would Occupy the Government, it were in his power to propose the Bill next Session, he should be most happy to do so-the earlier the better. On the other hand, if the Government took the view he had already indicated-that to promote such a Bill in the last Session of Parliament would be to invite a party conflict upon it-he should then reserve to himself the right of adopting the course which seemed at the time most expedient. But whatever course might be taken by the Government or by himself, and whether the Bill were introduced as a Government measure or privately, those who were present might be assured that, as far as he was concerned, he should act with a view to promote, as far as was possible the cause in which they all took an interest, and to secure its ultimate success. Mr. Pearson, Q.C., said he had heard with great satisfaction his Lordship's intention to enlarge the scope of the Bill. At the same time, he did not think the new scheme of the Inns of Court quite so narrow as it had been represented. His own Inn now admitted to the law lectures all persons, whether they were students for the Bar or not. Such admission, however, came too late, and the result was that they had not made the start which they ought to have made, and would have made had there been a larger measure dealing with the position both of barristers and solicitors. Mr. Amphlett, as chairman of the Association, thanked his Lordship, for the reception he had given to the deputation. Mr. Farrer, on the part of the solicitors, also thanked his Lordship, congratulating the Association on the wise and bold measure which the Lord Chancellor was ready to introduce. The deputation then withdrew. PROPER RETALIATION.-At Warwick Assizes Baron Pigott, in charging the grand jury, drew attention to the large increase which had occurred in cases of violence in the county, and said his experience was that no punishment was so efficacious as that of flogging. He had noticed that the most hardened and dangerous criminals, who evinced no emotion when penal servitude was mentioned, showed signs of concern and apprehension at the slightest reference to a flogging. As cases of violence had gone up from two to thirteen, he intended to avail himself of Adderley's Act in all proper cases. ON Friday, 12th Dec., Sir John Duke Coleridge, Knight, was by Her Majesty's command, sworn of Her Majesty's Most Honourable Privy Council, and took his place at the Board accordingly. On the same day the honour of Knighthood was conferred on Henry James, Esq., Q.C. M.P., Her Majesty's Attorney-General; on William George Granville Venables Vernon Harcourt, Esq., Q.C., M.P., Her Majesty's Solicitor-General; on Charles Hall, Esq., a Vice-Chancellor; on Archibald Paull Burt, Esq., Chief Justice of the Colony of Western Australia; and on William Henry Doyle, Esq., Chief Justice of the Bahama Islands. Mr. Justice STRONG expressions in courts of justice, according to present views, must be repressed; and the fastidiousness of people's ears is not to be allowed to form their rule of conduct. It is curious to notice the change which a few years has produced in this respect. Mr. Hayward, Q.C., in his "Biographical and Critical Essays" says (p. 140), "During the first quarter of the century the best bred people swore. Best (the first Lord Wynford) during the trial of Carlisle for blasphemy, audibly exclaimed to a brother judge, I'll be d-d to h-1 if I sit here to hear the Christian religion abused.' Lord Eldon was in the habit of revising drafts of bills during prayers in the House of Lords. He had just risen from his knees when, in reply to an ironical comment of Lord Grey, he said, 'D-n it, my lord, you'd do the same if you were as hard worked as I am.'" Swift's line is adopted by us in its integrity :-"We never mention Hell to ears polite." THE DUC D'AMAULE ON THE DUTY OF A JUDGE. It is known (says Galignani) that the president of a court-martial must be the last to reply to the questions put by the prosecution. Nevertheless, he is allowed to address some words to his colleagues before the opening of the deliberations properly so called. That is what the Duke of Amaule should have done, and what he did. We are in a position to give, if not the text, at least the exact sense of his address :-" Gentlemen," said he, after having pointed out that he was speaking before the opening of the deliberations, 'you must have remarked the attitude which I have taken up in the course of these debates. Contrary to what is done by many presidents of courts-martial, I have neither taken part with the defence nor at all with the accusation. I have treated all the witnesses in the same manner, whatever their rank, and in whatever sense they might come to depose. I contracted that habit in England, during my long exile, in attending the judicial pleadings of that country, and I think in that I have had your approbation. I take the liberty of expressing here the desire that, henceforward, military justice in France may inspire itself with that rule. There is another custom of English Judges and law courts which I would equally recommend to your attention. not here only as Judges charged to call for the application of the penalty, we are also jurymen, and in that quality we have to pronounce on the guilt or innocence of the accused. Well, you We are know that on this question the English law requires that the jury should decide unanimously. Let us therefore try, gentlemen, to be in accord, and to be so seems the more easy that the mili tary law excludes, in such circumstances, all extenuating circumstances." After that address the Judges voted thanks to the President for the manner in which he had exercised his functions. They were each in turn then consulted for their verdict, commencing with General de Malroy, the youngest of them. The law forbids the publication of the opinions expressed by the members of the court.-Pall Mall Gazette. A DEPUTATION of employers recently waited on the Home Secretary, in reference to the questions involved in the proposed repeal of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, the amendment of the law of master and servant, and the alteration of the law of conspiracy. The deputation included more than one solicitor, who explained the actual operation of the Acts in question, as well from the employers' point of view as from that of the employed. JUVENILE THIEVES.-A boy, aged eleven, has been convicted at Birmingham, for stealing three sovereigns from his mother. Mr. Kynnersley, the stipendiary magistrate, observed: "Here is another boy who ought to be sent to an industrial school, but the School Board has just taken that power out of our hands. Very likely the boy will turn out a professional thief; and if so, the Borough may thank the School Board for it. The boy will be discharged." It deserves notice whether a dozen strokes with a birch rod would not be salutary in cases of juvenile theft. A JUDICIAL MUDDLE.-The makeshift arrangement by which Lord Selborne sat for some time as Master of the Rolls has produced a curious conflict of authority. We will mention two cases. The first involves rather a nice point of equity, but perhaps may be made intelligible out of Lincoln's-inn. A portion of certain land devised to a tenant in tail is taken by a railway company by virtue of its compulsory powers. The purchasemoney is paid into the Court of Chancery under the provisions of the Lands Clauses Consolidation Act. Ought the court to allow this fund, representing land, to be paid to the tenant in tail without requiring the execution of a disentailing deed? The late Master of the Rolls held that under like circumstances no such deed was necessary. So also did Vice-Chancellor Malins, and the practice was generally regarded as settled. Lord Selborne, however, declined to follow the cases upholding this doctrine, and made the order for payment conditional upon the production to the registrar of a properly executed disentailing deed. A case involving the same question came before Vice-Chancellor Malins last Friday, and he adhered to his own decisions. "I consider," said his honour, "that I am bound to regard the Lord Chancellor when sitting for the Master of the Rolls simply as if he were the Master of the Rolls, and only therefore as a judge of the first instance -that is to say, of no higher authority than the Vice-Chancellor himself. His Honour had previously held the same language in another class of cases, where the two courts upon the same facts unhappily also came to diametrically opposite conclusions. Lord Selborne, at the Rolls, decided, in opposition to recorded cases, that the purchasemoney of land sold under the Settled Estates Act is not to be regarded as "cash under the control of the court," the result of which decision is that, for the purposes of interim investment, the money can only be laid out in the purchase of Exchequer Bills or in the Three per Cents. Sir Richard Malins, on the other hand, treats such purchasemoney as cash which is under the control of the court, the result of his decision being considerably to enlarge the power of investment. "It appears from the reported cases," said the Vice-Chancellor referring no doubt to successive decisions at the Rolls by Lord Romilly and Lord Selborne-" that the Master of the Rolls has first held that such purchase-money is cash under the control of the court, and has subsequently decided the opposite way. I have always treated it as cash under the control of the court, and I adhere to my previous decisions. I should be very sorry to see any disposition to narrow the construction of the Act under which the power of investment has been extended." Technically, of course, Lord Selborne, while sitting for the Master of the Rolls, may for the time have divested himself of his authority as Lord Chancellor. But as it is more than probable that his opinions in the Lord Chancellor's Court would be the same as those he held at the Rolls, it is clear that the unsuccessful litigants in the two cases we have mentioned would appeal against Sir Richard Malins' decisions with a certainty that they would be reversed. Perhaps the respective suitors, having in view the costs of appeal, will hardly be comforted by this knowledge. Meanwhile it seems that, for judicial purposes, a Lord Chancellor is not always a Lord Chancellor, but in a lower court may lose his dignity of a judge of appeal, and be regarded, both in theory and pragtice, as somebody else.-Pall Mall Gazette, CORRESPONDENCE OF THE PROFESSION. NOTE.-This Department of the LAW TIMES being open to free discussion on all professional topics, the Editor is not responsible for any opinions or statements contained in it THE CHARGES OF THE INCORPORATED LAW SOCIETY.-There can be but one opinion as to the new scale of ad valorem charges promulgated by the Incorporated Law Society, namely, that in small cases the fees allowed are inadequate. It occurs to me that a satisfactory scale might perhaps be framed by a combination of an ad valorem fee, and special fees for particular parts of the work, somewhat on the principle of the scale for probates and administrations. Sufficient fees ought to be allowed for investigating the title, or else the client ought not to expect the practitioner to be responsible. EDWIN HYDE CLARKE. LAW SOCIETIES, THE UNION SOCIETY OF LONDON. of C. D. disclaiming the legacy of £100, is entitled per cent. JUSTITIA. 45. FEE FOR SEARCH.-In obtaining a marriage certificate, is the fee of ls. for a search payable where the exact day of the month and year are given ? A. C. C. ARTICLED CLERKS' SOCIETY. A MEETING of this society was held at Clement's Girling, in the chair. Mr. Wingfield opened the Inn Hall,on Wednesday, the 17th Dec., Mr. T. B. subject for the evening's debate, viz., "That it is desirable to make military service compulsory on all." The motion was lost by a majority of two. 46. ALLOTMENT OF STOCK.-Will any of your readers say what is the practice with reference to allotments of new shares in respect of ordinary stock held under setRailway have lately issued new shares to the holders of tlement? The Great Western Railway and Midland ordinary stock which command a premium from the date of allotment. Supposing £1000 ordinary stock in either of the above lines held by trustees under marriage settlement in trust, say for the lady for life; an allotment of new stock is made; the trustees have refused to take it up. Would the trustees in this case be justified in handing over the premium which may be obtained on selling the new stock to the lady, treating it as division or bonus, or are they bound to treat it as capital. The question must have arisen continually of BEALL V. SMITH.-The order against Messrs. late, but we are not aware of any decision on the point, Merriman and Co., the solicitors for the plaintiff and we should be glad to know what is the practice. civil form of marriage to be made compulsory in B. AND W. 47. EASEMENT.-A. purchased a house and garden in the case of Beall v. Smith is, as you will 48. PRACTICE-COVENANT FOR PRODUCTION OF DEEDS AND INDEMNITY OF VENDOR AGAINST LIABILITY UNDER FORMER COVENANT.-A., who is seised in fee simple of an estate, sometime since sold a portion of it to B. in executors, administrators, and assigns, entered into an unqualified covenant to produce the deeds, &c., to B., his heirs and assigns. Of course, every tyro in conveyancing knows such a covenant runs with the land. A. has recently contracted to sell the estate to C. Is A., on conveying the estate, and handing over the deeds, &c., to C., entitled to require a covenant from C. to himself to produce the deeds, &c., and to indemnify him against liability under the former covenant. In an old edition of Dart and of Sugden on Vendors and Purchasers it is stated that A. would be so entitled. Will any of your correspondents kindly communicate their views on the point, and say whether there has been any recent decision either relaxing or abrogating the rule. A SUBSCRIBER. 49. COUNTY COURT-REMITTED ACTION.-The defendant in an action commenced in Exchequer for £25 (on contract) gets it referred to a County Court under the Act of 1867. The plaintiff's attorney unreasonably delays to lodge the writ, &c., at the County Court office. What steps should defendant's attorney take to &c? Should defendant's attorney give plaintiff's attorcompel the plaintiff to obey the order, lodge the writ, ney the original judge's order to lodge with the writ or only the usual copy order. An early reply will much oblige. Answers. GEORGIUS. ་ (Q. 12.) POOR LAW-The insertion of the following correspondence with the Local Government Board on the above subject will oblige."Sir,-Will you kindly favour me with a reply whether a grandson is liable to support his grandfather? I am referred by some to 43 Eliz. c. 2, ss. 6 and 7, and the last edition of Archbold's Poor Law, in the index of which I find, under grandfather, liability to maintain grandchildren and to be maintained by them. I cannot, however, discover anything in the page referred to in the index bearing on the subject, but the cases cited may contain some observations of the judges who tried them and considered as law. I am told by others that this was the existing state of the law until overruled by a case reported in the Justice of the Peace, vol. 31, p. 755. I have not been able to obtain a copy of this, being rather an old number. The favour of your replying to the simple question of liability or non-liability will greatly oblige.-I beg to remain, &c. The Secretary, Local Government Board.". "Sır,-I am directed by the Local Government Board to acknowledge the receipt of your letter, and in reply to inform you that a grandson is under ordinary circumstances liable by the general law to contribute towards the support of his grandfather.-I am Sir, &c., DANBY P. FRY, Assistant SecrePAUPER. 44. LEGATEE-DUTY.-A. B. by his will bequeathed £100 to C. D. the illegitimate son of his brother H. D., but A. B. after the execution of his will gave C. D. £100 which was intended in lieu of the legacy given by the will. A. B. is dead, and C. D. does not claim the legacy of £100 from the executors of A. B., and is prepared to execute a disclaimer of the legacy of £100. The residuary legatee of the will of A. B. (who, in consequence' tary." E. N. AYRTON, ESQ. THE late Edward Nugent Ayrton, Esq., who died very suddenly on the 28th ult., from an attack of serous apoplexy, at his residence at Bexhill, Sussex, in the fifty-eighth year of his age, was the second son of the late Frederick Ayrton, Esq., an advocate in the Supreme Court of Bombay, by Julia, daughter of the late Lieut. Col. Nugent, and he was brother of the Right Hon. A. S. Ayrton, M.P., the present Judge Advocate-General. Mr. Ayrton was born at Richmond, Surrey, in the year 1815, and was educated at Ealing, of which then large and well-known school he was captain at the early age of thirteen. He subsequently went to Trinity College, Cambridge, where he graduated in honours in 1836. After taking his degree he spent some years in foreign travel, and was called to the Bar by the Honourable Society of Lincoln's Inn in Michaelmas Term 1845. Mr. Ayrton practised at the Equity Bar, and as a conveyancer, and though not widely known to the public, he was appreciated highly by those who knew him for his deep and scientific knowledge of the principles of equity and real property law, and for his varied learning and cultivation; he contributed leading articles to various newspapers quently in the LAW TIMES. Mr. Ayrton published of advanced Liberal politics; he also wrote fre one or two pamphlets on the subject of a decimal coinage (which he maintained should be established without disturbing the existing copper currency), and on improvements in the law of real property. On the passing of Lord Westbury's Transfer of Land Act, he was also the author of an exhaustive work upon the same subject. Outside his profession also he was a man of high and varied accomplishments, and his friends regarded him as an excellent scholar. Mr. Ayrton's health failed in the summer of 1871, and from that time he ceased to practise at the bar. His loss will be severely felt by many to whom he had endeared himself. E. S. CHANDOS-POLE, ESQ. THE late Edward Sacheverell Chandos-Pole, Esq., of Radburne Hall, Derbyshire, barrister-at-law who died on the 30th ult., in the forty-eighth year of his age, was the eldest son of the late Edward Sacheverell Chandos-Pole, Esq., of Radburne, & magistrate and deputy-lieutenant, and formerly High Sheriff of Derbyshire, who died in 1863; his mother was Anna Maria, daughter of the Rev. Edward Sacheverell Wilmot, and he was born in the year 1826. Mr. Chandos-Pole was educated at Eton and at Oriel College, Oxford, and was called to the Bar by the Honourable Society of the Middle Temple in Hilary Term 1867. He was a magistrate and deputy-lieutenant for Derbyshire, and served as High Sheriff of that county in 1867. According to Sir Bernard Burke, there is scarcely an existing family which can deduce so ancient a pedigree, combined with historic im portance, as that of the gentleman whose death we here record. Representing the great house of Chandos, of Radburne, and a younger branch of the Ferrars, Earls of Derby, the Poles derive an uninterrupted descent from the time of William the Conqueror, and have ever maintained a leading position in the counties in which they have been seated. In 1807 Sacheverell Pole, Esq., of Rad. burne, grandfather of the gentleman now deceased, assumed, by sign manual, as representative of the great Sir John Chandos, K.G., the additional surname and arms of Chandos. The late Mr. Chandos-Pole married, in 1850, Lady Anna Carolina, elder daughter of Leicester, fifth Earl of Harrington, by whom he has left a family to lament his loss. H. R. SOUTHEE, ESQ. THE late Horace Robert Southee, Esq., solicitor, of Ely-place, London, who died at his residence in Guilford-street, Russell-square, on the 12th inst., in the forty-fourth year of his age, was the eldest son of Robert Southee, Esq., solicitor, of Ely. place, and of the Rue d'Amsterdam, Paris. He was born in the year 1830, and was admitted a solicitor of Trinity Term, 1861, and was in partnership with his father in Ely-place. He was also a commissioner to administer oaths in the Courts of Queen's Bench, Common Pleas, and Exchequer. 4. In cases to be argued before the arbitrator the facts and submissions are to be agreed (if possible). Where the party taking out the sum mons thinks it reasonably possible that the facts and submissions may be agreed, he is to deliver a draft case to the opposite party or his solicitor (if any) within fourteen days from the return day of the summons. The draft case is to be returned within fourteen days from its receipt either agreed or not. If it is not agreed the separate case of the other party is to be delivered within fourteen days thereafter. 5. If the case is agreed it is to be headed as an agreed case. If the case is not agreed the case of each party is to be headed as a separate case. 6. Where either party considers it necessary that there should be separate cases, the party taking out the summons is to deliver his separate case to the opposite party or his solicitor (if any) within fourteen days from the date of service of the summons. Within fourteen days from the delivery thereof the respondent is to deliver in return his separate case. 7. A case is not to set forth extracts from the deeds of settlement or other deeds or documents printed in the arbitration, but is only to refer thereto specifying the clauses. 8. Three copies of the agreed case, or of each separate case, are to be lodged at least three clear days before the day appointed for hearing. livered to the opposite party or his solicitor at least 9. Six copies of a separate case are to be dethree clear days before the day appointed for the hearing. R. J. BERKELEY, ESQ., Q.C. THE late Robert James Berkeley, Esq., Q.C., of Upper Mount-street, Dublin, who died recently at Monkstown, near Dublin, in the sixty-eighth year of his age, was educated at Trinity College, Dublin, where he graduated B.A. in 1826, and proceeded M.A. 1832. He was called to the Bar at Dublin in Hilary Term, 1830, and was appointed a Queen's Counsel in 1832. Mr. Berkeley married, 10. A separate case must be proved by affidavit in 1837, Clara Maria, youngest daughter of the late Hon. Major Edward De-Moleyns, and grand-fore the arbitrator at the hearing of the case. or deposition, or by examination of witnesses bedaughter of Thomas, first Lord Ventry in the Peerage of Ireland. 11. Evidence is to be adduced in the same manner as in the Court of Chancery, and examina. tions and cross-examinations are to be taken before the assessor, unless the parties or either of them desire that they be taken before the arbitrator at the hearing of the case. 12. Every affidavit is to be brought in for filing as soon as possible after it is sworn. There is to be a note thereon, stating by whom and on whose behalf the affidavit is filed, and notice of the filing is to be forthwith given by the party filing to the opposite party or his solicitor. H. S. P. WINTERBOTHAM, ESQ. THE death is announced of Henry Selfe Page Winterbotham, Esq., M.P., barrister-at-law, and Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department. The deceased gentleman had gone to Italy with the view of benefiting his health, which had been somewhat impaired by excessive application to his official duties, and the change of scene and relaxation had, it was thought, produced the desired effect; he was, however, suddenly seized 13. A written copy on Chancery affidavit paper with illness at Rome on Saturday last, and died of each exhibit to an affidavit (other than arbitrain a few hours. Mr. Winterbotham was the tion printed deeds or documents, or documents second son of the late Lindsey Winterbotham, set forth in the case or an appendix thereto), is to Esq., a banker, of Stroud, in Gloucestershire, who be lodged at least three clear days before the day died in 1871, and his mother was Sarah Ann Selfe, appointed for the hearing of the case by the solidaughter of the Rev. Henry Page. He was born citors to the party on whose behalf the affiin March 1837, so that he was now in the prime davit is filed, and the solicitors to the joint official of life, being only in the thirty-seventh year of his liquidator are within the same time to lodge a age. Born of Nonconformist parents, Mr. Winter-like copy of all admissions entered into. botham was educated at Amersham School, Bucks, whence he proceeded to University College, London, where he graduated with honours, taking his B.A. degree in 1856, and LL.B. in 1859. He was Hume Scholar in Jurisprudence in 1858, Hume Scholar in Political Economy in 1859, and University Law Scholar in the same year. In 1860 he was elected Fellow of his college. He was called to the Bar by the Honourable Society of Lincoln's-inn in Michaelmas Term 1860, and practised at the Chancery Bar, and as a conveyancer, till he was appointed Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department in March 1871. He had represented Stroud, in the Liberal interest, in the House of Commons, since August 1867, when, upon the retirement of Mr. Poulett-Scrope, and again at the general election of 1868, he was elected by a considerable majority over Mr. Dorrington, the Conservative candidate. Mr. Winterbotham was one of the most rising new members in the ranks of the Liberal party, and his promotion to a higher office in due time was confidently expected by his friends, when he was thus suddenly cut off by the stroke of death. 14. Notice will be given by the secretary to the solicitors in each case of the day when it will be in the paper for hearing. 15. The arbitrator will hear one counsel or solicitor only on each side. 16. The party in whose favour an order is made is to bring in a draft order in the form in schedule B to these rules, and to obtain from the secretary an appointment to settle the order with Notice of the appointment, with a copy of the draft order, is to be delivered to the opposite party or his solicitor. the assessor. 17. Cases, affidavits, and other documents required to be filed or lodged, are to be filed or lodged with the secretary at this office. 18. Solicitors are to enter appearances with the secretary at this office. 19. Bills of costs are to be brought in to the secretary at this office. Requests for taxation are to be obtained from him, and taxing master's certificates are to be lodged with him. 20. Summonses, cases, and other documents required to be printed, are to be printed on Chancery Bill paper. 21. All communications respecting calls and THE COURTS & COURT PAPERS. other pecuniary matters in the arbitration are to be made to Messrs. Samuel Lowell Price, and John Young, the joint official liquidator, at this office. EUROPEAN ASSURANCE SOCIETY ARBITRATION. GENERAL RULES. 22. All communications respecting the general business of the arbitration are to be addressed to the secretary at this office. By order of the Arbitrator, THOMAS PRESTON, Secretary. COURT OF CHANCERY, 1873. During the Christmas Vacation :-All applications which are of an urgent nature, are to be made to the Master of the Rolls. The Master of the Rolls will, if required, sit at the Rolls House, on Wednesday, the 31st Dec., 1873, and Wednesday, the 7th Jan. 1874. Any person desirous of making any application on either of those days, must give notice at the Rolls House before 4 o'clock on the previous Monday. In cases of great emergency, applications to the Master of the Rolls may be sent by book-post, accompanied with the brief of counsel, indorsed with the terms of the order applied for, and a copy of such indorsement on foolscap paper with an envelope addressed to the solicitor making the application, and an envelope addressed to the Vacation Registrar, and such other papers as may be thought necessary. On applications for injunctions or writs of Ne exeat Regno, there must be sent in addition to the above, a copy of the bill, a certificate of bill filed, and office copies of the affidavits in support of the application. The counsel's brief sent to the Master of the Rolls, will, when any order is made thereon, be returned direct to the registrar, and a copy of the indorsement on counsel's brief of the order made will be sent by post to the solicitor making the application. The address of the Master of the Rolls can be obtained at the Rolls House. The chambers of the Master of the Rolls will be open on Wednesday, the 24th, and Tuesday and Wednesday, the 30th and 31st Dec. 1873; and Thursday, Friday, and Tuesday, the 1st, 2nd, and 6th Jan. 1874, from 11 to 1 o'clock. The Equity Judges' Chambers (other than those of the Master of the Rolls) will be closed on Tuesday, the 23rd Dec. 1873, at 4 p.m., and be re-opened on Wednesday, the 7th Jan. 1874, at 10 o'clock a.m. PROMOTIONS & APPOINTMENTS N.B.-Announcements of promotions being in the nature of advertisements, are charged 2s. 6d. each for which postage stamps should be inclosed. MR. THOMAS KING, of Brighton, solicitor, has been appointed a Commissioner for taking Affidavits in Her Majesty's Courts of Queen's Bench, Common Pleas, and Exchequer, for Sussex and the adjoining Counties. THE GAZETTES. Bankrupts. Gazette, Dec. 12. Pet. To surrender at the Bankrupts' Court, Basinghall-street. EVANS, GRIFFITH E. builder, the Crescent, Stamford-hill. Dec. 9. Reg. Hazlitt. Sols. Messrs. Miller, Sherborne-la. Sur. Dec. 23 HAZARD, GEORGE, draper, Albany.pl, Commercial-rd. Pet. Dec. 10. Reg. Pepys. Sols. Bannister and Co. Basinghall-st. Sur. Jan. 13 HOWSE, H. W. chemist, Staple-inn, Holborn. Pet. Dec. 10. Reg. To surrender in the Country. ELAM, EDWARD, builder, Liverpool. Pet. Dec. 10. Reg. Watson. Sur. Dec. 30 GAZE, ROBERT, sailmaker, Runham. Pet. Dec. 8. Reg. Walker, Sur. Jan. 3 GUY, HENRY, commission agent, Clifton. Pet. Dec. 8. Reg. Perkins. Sur. Dec. 23 |