LEGAL MUSICAL SOCIETY. THE HON. FRANK RUSSELL, K.C., took the chair at the first smoking concert of the present season of the Legal Musical Society, at the Connaught Rooms, Great Queen-street, Kingsway, on Thursday, the 7th inst. The guests included Mr. Justice Parker, Messrs. P. S. Stokes, J. H. Watts, Montague Shearman, E. B. Knight, W. H. Bradley, P. G Robinson, Herbert C. Wright, and Norman Gillett. At the interval Mr. J. W. Honess (president) proposed the health of the chairman. He observed that the society had now entered on its twentieth season, and it had grown from very small beginnings to a membership of something like 800. To what must be attributed this remarkable progress? The answer was that the society had throughout its history had the moral support of every branch of the Profession-His Majesty's judges, the law officers of the Crown, eminent barristers, and equally eminent solicitors, had given it their countenance by occupying the chair on occasions like the present. They had done so because they believed the society was fulfilling the purpose for which it was formed-namely, to promote cordiality and friendship amongst those engaged in the work of the Profession. The chairman of the evening had occupied the same position on a former occasion, and he had supported the chair at many of their gatherings. The Chairman returned thanks in a very humorous speech, in the course of which he said he was glad to see from the society's report that they had kept up the old practice of helping their brethren who had fallen into adversity. That was one of the great charms, to his mind, of the society. Charity and conviviality went together, charity of the best kind, charity that helped friends and fellow-workers who fell by the wayside, and to this was added conviviality a glorious thing conviviality - and what better ending could there be at the close of an arduous day of work than such a gathering as this? For their days were arduous, whether they were solicitors' clerks or barristers' clerks-his own private opinion was that the solicitor's clerk had the more arduous day of the two, but they both devoted themselves to the work of their principals. When one thought it out in cold blood and remembered that, after all, the solicitors' clerks were not paid by piecework, but a fixed sum, it was quite astonishing. Everybody knew how different a thing it was to be paid by piecework from being paid by salary. They saw the difference when people got to the Bench! People who received a fixed amount were in a very different position from the struggling barrister who was paid by piecework. But the zeal the solicitors' clerks gave to the work of their principals-work for which the principal got credit which more often was due elsewhere was remarkable. They were not paid on a fixed scale, and, notwithstanding that, he thought it was true to say that every solicitor's clerk worked to the utmost of his power, the utmost of his ability, in the interest of the firm he served. Then, as to the barristers' clerks-that was a delicate topic, because theirs was a different position. They were in the peculiar position of being remunerated by somebody else's piecework. Notwithstanding that, the zeal and ardour they displayed to get the utmost amount of "pieces" for themselves and the barrister in the chambers where they were employed was astonishing. The great charm of the attitude of both the solicitors' and the barristers' clerks was the way in which they always contrived to identify themselves with their principals-spelt" pals." He might tell them a story illustrating this point, a story which had at least the merit that it was true. In the old days, when his father was a junior in chambers in Brick-court, the following incident happened-it was the Long Vacation. His father had a pupil-who afterwards became a very well-known County Court judge, Daniel O'Connell French-who had to go up to town for a book he required from his chambers, and, accordingly, he bent his steps towards Brick-court. It was a fine day, and the small boy who looked after the chambers of Russell was engaged with the small boy who looked after certain other chambers on the same staircase, down in the sunshine in Brick-court, playing a friendly game of marbles; and, just as the small boy belonging to Russell had made a principal shot, his friend spied the large and bulky form of Daniel O'Connell French coming round the corner, whereupon he said, "Look out, Russell, here comes your pupil!" Thereupon Russell gathered up his marbles and bolted upstairs. An excellent entertainment was provided by Miss Rose Loader, Miss Olive Twain, Messrs. Gwilym Wigley, Harry Thornton, Rex Harold, Ambrose Thorne, and Ernest Hastings. At the piano, Mr. W. G. Emerson. BROUGHTON'S REMINDERS FOR CONVEYANCERS.-With References to some of the best Precedents. Fourth Edition. Crown 8vo. Price 3s. 6d. net, post free.-HORACE Cox, "Law Times" Office, Windsor House, Bream's-buildings, E.C. [ADVT.] LAW STUDENTS' JOURNAL. To SECRETARIES.-Reports of meetings should reach the office not later than first post Thursday morning to ensure insertion in the current number. LONDON UNIVERSITY. ANCIENT AND MODERN LAW COMPARED. SIR JOHN MACDONELL, as Quain Professor of Comparative Law, London University, delivered the final lecture of his course upon "Some Points of Likeness and Difference between Greek and Roman Law and Modern Systems of Law: a Chapter in the History of Comparative Law," at University College, Gowerstreet, on Wednesday. He pointed out that it was one of the great services of Roman jurists that they had clearly separated the law of obligations from the law of property-a distinction which lay in the nature of things, and which had been retained in modern systems, though at certain points, as he explained, weakened it had necessarily been or effaced. Dealing first with the subject of obligations, and taking in the first instance Attic law and contrasting it with Roman law, he drew attention to the many signs of imperfection and want of development it exhibited. Its terminology was limited and loose, technical phrases were rare, many of the necessary tools of the jurists were wanting. There were no technical expressions precisely corresponding to creditor, debitor, debitum, obligatio, and so far it might be justly said that Greek law was more primitive than Roman. Yet, in some respects, it was distinctly more modern. There was nothing corresponding to the technical forms of which Roman law was so tenacious, or to the verbal contracts with their precise formula; nothing corresponding, for example, to the stipulatio-in fact, with regard to contracts, forms accounted for nothing. Every contract freely entered into by competent parties was enforceable by action. Attic law had arrived, apparently per saltum, at the view that consent alone was necessary for the validity of a contract. No doubt contracts were vitiated if force or coercion had been employed. In one respect the Attic law with regard to contracts was of an archaic character. Apparently a contract brought about by fraud was not void or voidable, but in this respect it resembled Roman law, which only in later years admitted the exceptio de dolo. A further point of similarity with modern law was the great stress that was laid upon the use of writing, in that it appeared to have been absolutely essential to the validity of any class of contracts. The lecturer also drew attention to the very large variety of mercantile contracts, and to the special remedies granted in such cases. He further pointed out that, unlike the primitive conception of contracts, which attaches rights to a particular person, there had grown up in Athens recognition of the right of transfer or assignment of contracts. In regard to delicts or torts, the line of demarcation between private delicts and public delicts, or crimes, was drawn with an uncertain hand. In respect of the damages awarded against a wrongdoer, there was evidence of the survival of the principle that the law was only a substitute for the vendetta or blood feud. He spoke also of the absence of contracts necessary in our civilisation in consequence of our credit system. Even if we had no access to the literature of antiquity, and were acquainted with it only from its laws, we should say, looking to the absence of all provisions as to negotiable instruments, bonds to bearer and the like, that it was a ready-money world; that it had nothing at all like the gigantic system of credit with which we are familiar. Next, turning to modern law obligations, and taking the German and English law as types, he drew attention to similar features in both, but noted that the German law, more modern in this respect than others, had frankly broken with certain old rules. For example, it had recognised in a way which English law had not, the right of third parties to enforce contracts to which they were not parties, but for whose benefit such contracts had been made. It was also more modern in the fact that it permitted the transfer of obligations more freely than the English law, even since the Judicature Acts. Passing next to the subject of property, the lecturer drew attention to the fact that the laws relating to property in land in Greece seemed to have been comparatively few. The Greeks had evolved a number of rules of a simple kind with respect to rural servitudes-rules, for the most part, such as a sense of neighbourliness, a desire not to be the dog in the manger, would inspire. He quoted some of these rules and pointed out that the Roman jurists acknowledged their indebtedness to Greek law for some of such rules which they recognised. It had often been alleged by Burkhardt and others that, in consequence of the claims made by the ancient States over individuals, the supremacy of the former over the latter, there were larger limitations of the rights of property, particularly in immovables, than in modern law, but for the truth of this statement there was comparatively small evidence. On the contrary, many of the restrictions which existed nowadays in all countries were then absolutely unknown. The lecturer contrasted some of the simple rules to be found in Greek law with the elaborate provisions of a modern Building Act. He spoke also of the profound impress which feudalism had left upon modern law relating to land, and which differentiated it from ancient law. In countries which had largely adopted Roman law the distinction between movables and immovables became an important distinction. In those, on the other hand, in which feudal conceptions of property in land dominated, the distinction between personal and real property became a prominent distinction. The lecturer concluded by pointing out that neither Greek nor Roman law seemed ever to have arrived at a conception of property which included such matters as patent rights, trade marks, goodwill, all of which were the subject in modern times of contracts. The two ancient systems differed from the modern systems scarcely less than an ancient trading vessel differed from a modern liner, with all its equipments. STUDENTS' SOCIETIES. LAW STUDENTS' DEBATING SOCIETY.-At a meeting held at the Law Society's Hall, Chancery-lane, on the 12th inst. (chairman, Mr. P. B. Skeels), the subject for debate was: "That this House regrets the puritanic tendencies of present-day reformers." Mr. R. W. Handley opened in the affirmative, and Mr. C. H. Woolrych seconded. The following members continued the debate: Messrs. C. F. King, H. G. Meyer, F. Burgis, S. Hocking, Cosgrove, W. Pleadwell, C. F. Woodbridge, S. Hands, and A. R. N. Powys. The motion was lost by two votes. MANCHESTER.The second ordinary meeting was held at the Law Library on Tuesday, the 5th inst., Mr. F. S. Oppenheim, solicitor, in the chair. After the chairman had read out the result of the speaking competition at the last ordinary meeting, which was as follows: First, Mr. J. A. Hislop; second, Mr. G. P. Morris; third, Mr. E. G. Lord; fourth, Mr. L. Bingham, the following debate was considered: Law Notes Moot No. 1: "By a will which came into operation in 1908 a freehold estate (Whiteacre) was vested in Mrs. Harkness, a married woman, upon trust for sale. In Sept. 1912 she entered into a contract to sell the trust property to Alsop. Alsop insists that Mr. Harkness must concur in the conveyance. Is this contention correct? Mr. M. B. Newell, ordinary member, opened for the affirmative; and Mr. A. Desquesnes, ordinary member, replied for the negative. The following gentlemen also spoke for the affirmative: Messrs. Hugh Vaudrey, A. Barrie, A. C. Carver, E. G. Lord, and R. Somers Gilmore; and Messrs. G. P. Morris, R. B. Knott, R. Higson, L. Bingham, E. A. Chatham, J. A. Hislop, F. Wills, and H. Marks for the negative. Messrs. E. Brodrick and W. White also spoke. The moot was then put to the vote, the result of which was twenty-six to six for the negative. A hearty vote of thanks to the chairman terminated the meeting. There were thirty-three members present. PROMOTIONS AND APPOINTMENTS. Information intended for publication under the above beading should reach us not later than Thursday morning in each week, as publication is otherwise delayed. Mr. Justice BAILHACHE has been elected a Bencher of the Society of the Middle Temple. Mr. HENRY MILNE SCOTT, barrister in the Supreme Court of Fiji, has been appointed Counsel for that colony. Mr. KENNETH J. MUIR MACKENZIE, barrister-at-law, has been appointed by the Archbishop of Canterbury to be Actuary of the Lower House of Convocation in succession to the late Mr. Hugh Childers. Mr. F. BRINSLEY-HARPER, J.P., has been appointed a Judicia Authority under the Lunacy Acts 1890 and 1891 for the county of London. Mr. ARTHUR C. DOWDING, Solicitor, of 14, South-square, Gray'sinn, has been appointed;a Commissioner for Oaths. Mr. Dowding was admitted in 1906. NOTES AND QUERIES. This column is intended for the use of members of the Legal Profession, and therefore queries from lay correspondents cannot be inserted. Under no circumstances are editorial replies undertaken. None are inserted unless the name and address of the writer are sent, not necessarily for publication, but as a guarantee of bona fides. Queries. 2. WILL-SALE-RECEIPT FOR PURCHASE MONEY.-A. by his will appointed B. and C. his executors and gave his real estate to D. (his widow) for life. He then proceeded: "I will and direct that at the decease of my said wife all my real and personal estate shall be sold," the net proceels to be divided as appeared in the will. A. is dead, and D., the tenant for life, has contracted to sell the property. The executors can sell under the Land Transfer Act 1897 and the tenant for life can join to give a good title. But who can give a valid receipt for the purchase money? The executors are not trustees for the purposes of the Settled Land Acts. They are not trustees at all. Can an executor who is not a trustee come within sect. 16 of the Settled Land Acts? If so, the executors can give a receipt, but, if not, will not the beneficiaries all have to join in the conveyance for this purpose? T. 3. RAILWAY CARRIAGE-OBLIGATION TO LIGHT.-A passenger at a railway station at night was shown by a porter into a carriage without a light. On the carriage arriving at the passenger's destination the lamps in the station, at the part where the carriage drew up, were not lit. The passenger, getting out in the dark, fell and sustained injury. Is there any obligation on railway companies to light their carriages or to light their stations either under any statute or at common law, and would the passenger under the above circumstances have any claim against the company? TRAVELLER. 4. LEASE-BREACH OF COVENANT-ASSIGNMENT.-A. sells to B. a farm in the occupation of C., who is quitting at Michaelmas. The completion of the purchase also takes place at Michaelmas. Would B., the purchaser, taking the farm with vacant occupation, have the benefit of the lease under which C. held and be able to sue him for dilapidations although the lease has expired? A reply with authorities will oblige. X. Y. Z. 5. LICENCE DUTY.-Can you or any of your correspondents give any assistance in the interpretation of the very obscure provision contained in sect. 2 of the Finance Act of 1912 whereby a portion of the increase of licence duty payable under the Finance (1909-10) Act 1910 is thrown upon the lessor? The amount to be paid by the lessor is to be proportionate to the increased rent payable in respect of the premises being let as licensed premises, but no indication is given in the Act as to how the proportion to be calculated. Three factors are requisite to work out a sum in proportion, but the Act only supplies two-i.e., the excess licence duty and the increased value of the licensed premises. What is to be taken as the third factor? The clause is analogous to sect 46 of the Finance (1909-10) Act 1910, which applies only to tied houses. Has there been any judicial ruling either in the High Court or by a County Court judge, or has there been any interpretation generally agreed to and accepted in the trade? J. K. W. 6. LOCAL AUTHORITY-ISOLATION HOSPITAL.-Will any of your readers inform me what are the steps to take to compel a local authority of under 10,000 inhabitants to provide an isolation hospital for their district, also with power for the medical officer of health to forcibly, if necessary, take those suffering from infectious disease out of their homes and strictly isolate them in the hospital? I do not see any such powers in the various Public Health Acts. Authorities would oblige. H. S. Answers. (Q. 26). STAMP DUTY ON TRANSFERS OF MORTGAGE.-Subsect. 6 of sect. 74 of the Finance (1909-10) Act 1910 provides that a transfer made on the appointment of new trustees is not to be charged with duty under that section, which means that it is not to be charged with the ad valorem duty of 10s. or £1 per cent. imposed on voluntary conveyances by sub-sect. 1. But subsect. 6 does not remove such a transfer from the category of voluntary dispositions as defined by sub-sect. 5, and volunevery tary disposition must be adjudicated under the provisions of sub-sect. 2, and, unless it is so adjudicated, it is not to be deemed duly stamped. FRED. H. STAPLEY. Neither of the replies given to this question directly touches the latter part of it. On investigating a title, in the case of a purchase of lands, we come across a transfer of a mortgage debt of (say) £100, reciting merely that the transferees had become entitled in equity to the debt, and the deed is stamped with 6d., but not adjudicated. Before the passing of the Finance (1909-10) Act 1910 apparently no objection could be made in regard to such stamp duty, and the purchaser was not considered to be affected with notice of a trust. Has that Act made any difference on these points? By sect. 74 (5) a transfer (not being a disposition made in favour of a purchaser or incumbrancer or other person in good faith and for valuable consideration) shall be deemed to be a voluntary disposition inter vivos, and by sub-sect. 2 is not deemed to be duly stamped unless the commissioners have expressed their opinion thereon. But by sub-sect. 6 a transfer made for nominal consideration [Query: Does this include the case of no money consideration at all?] for effectuating the appointment of new trustees shall not be charged with duty under sect. 74, even though the circumstances exempting the transfer from such charge are not set forth in the transfer. The question is: If a purchaser, in the case above mentioned, objects that the deed is à voluntary disposition inter vivos under sub-sect. 5, and must be adjudicated under sub-sect. 2 and the vendor replies that the case falls within sub-sect. 6, can the purchaser not require extrinsic evidence of the fact, and has he not forthwith notice of a trust which it was intended not to disclose? Adjudication therefore seems advisable in all the cases mentioned in subsect. 6. But (assuming that the circumstances are disclosed to the commissioners) it is difficult to see why stamp duty in all cases, whatever the amount of the debt transferred, is not 6d. per cent.; and why, if 10s. is accepted in cases over £2000, 10s. is not required in cases of £1900 or under. P. P. (Q. 1.) GIFTS inter vivos-SECT 59 (3) OF FINANCE (1909-10) ACT 1910.-There is no estate duty payable on the inter vivos gifts mentioned in the query as no child received a sum of more than £100 within three years of deceased's death. LANGHORNE AND BARNES. LEGAL OBITUARY. Mr. GEORGE HARWOOD, barrister-at-law, M.P. for Bolton, died on the 7th inst. at his house, 70, South Audley-street, W., aged sixty-seven. Mr. George Harwood was the second son of Richard Harwood, founder of the firm of Richard Harwood and Son, cotton spinners. He was educated at Mr. Gilbert's school at Rivington, and later at Charlton High School, under Mr. Kendall. On leaving school Mr. Harwood went into his father's business, continuing at the same time to study at Owens College. Later he read (for the Bar, and was called by Lincoln's-inn in 1890. He then removed to London and started to work at the Bar. He was a member of the Standing Committee on Law and of the Royal Commission on Ecclesiastical Discipline. The diversity of his public interests is evidenced by the facts that he, in association with Dean Stanley, Tom Hughes, the Rev. Llewelyn Davies, and others, founded the Church Reform Union, and that he was treasurer of the National Society for the Prevention of Consumption. His first wife, by whom he had two daughters and a son, died in 1894. In 1904 he married Ellen, eldest daughter of Sir Alfred Hopkinson, K.C., Vice-Chancellor of the University of Manchester, who with a son and two daughters, survives him. To surrender at their respective District Courts. ALDERTON, CHARLES, Southend-on-Sea. Ct. Chelmsford. Oct. 23. ANDREWS, G. W. (male), Bosconibe, late cycle dealer. Ct. Poole. Nov. 4. ATKINSON, ARTHUR HERBERT, late Kingston-upon-Hull, builder. Ct. Kingston-upon-Hull. Nov. 5, BASSETT, MADELINE, Oxford, lodging-house keeper, spinster. Ct. Oxford. Nov. 5. BLIGH, WILLIAM HODGES, Ramsgate, printer. Ct. Canterbury. Nov. 5. CRUTTENDEN, WILLIAM, Hastings, solicitor. Ct. Hastings. Nov. 5. GILL, HENRY, South Kilworth, small holder. Ct Birmingham. Nov. 6. KIRKLEY, JOSEPH JACKSON, late Burnley, plumber. Ct. Burnley. Nov. 6. LEACEY, JAMES STANLEY, Churchdown, baker. Ct. Gloucester. Nov. 2. LONG, ARTHUR GEORGE, Newcastle-under-Lyme, licensed victualler. Ct. Hanley. Nov. 4. M. PHILLIPS AND SON, Manchester, tailors. Ct. Manchester. Nov. 6. NICHOLSON, JOHN HENRY, Bridlington, stationer. Ct. Scarborough. Nov. 6. PILKINGTON, ALEXANDER, Blackpool, general smallware dealer. Ct. Preston. Nov. 5. FORTLOCK, WALLACE MARK, Keighley, coal dealer. Ct. Bradford. Nov. 5. POSTLEWHITE, JOSEPH, late Scarborough, fancy goods dealer. Ct. Scarborough. Nov. 6. POULTON, FAVILLE CLEMENT (trading as F. C. Poulton and Co.), Eccles, consulting engineer. Ct. Salford. Nov. 5. PRIKLER, WILLIAM, South Godstone, farmer. Ct. Croydon. Oct. 24. Nov. 6. RUSSELL, CHARLES, Whepstead, farmer. Ct. Bury St. Edmunds. Amended notice substituted for that published in Gazette, Nov. 5. EKYNON, OWEN EDWARD, Llandebie, farmer. Ct. Carmarthen. Oct. 31. GAZETTE, Nov. 12. To surrender at the High Court of Justice, in Bankruptcy. FITZGERALD, THOMAS EDWARD JOSEPH, late Hare-ct, Temple. Nov. 8. MUXWORTHY, FRANCIS HENRY, Hoxton-st, Hoxton, clothier. Nov. 7. STILES, THOMAS, Blythe-rd, West Kensington, butcher. Nov. 7. SUMNER, ORLANDO, Victoria-st, Westminster. Nov. 7. To surrender at their respective District Courts. DOLBY, GEORGE FREEMAN, Uppingham, bookseller. Ct. Leicester. Nov. 9. FINCH, EDWARD, Shifnal, timber haulier. Ct. Shrewsbury, Nov. 8. HANNAM, THOMAS (trading as Thomas Hannam and Son), Leeds, builder. Ct. Leeds. Nov. 9. HUGHES, HENRY REES (trading as the Western Valley Tailor), Newbridge, tailor. Ct. Newport, Mon. Nov. 9. MILLS, JAMES, late Ambleside, retired draper. Ct. Kendal. Nov. 7. Ct. SHAW, RICHARD, and SHAW, TOM (late trading as Shaw Brothers), Kingston-upon-Hull, late butchers. Ct. Kingston-upon-Hull. Nov. 9. SHEFFIELD, THOMAS ARNOLD, late Thorne, merchants' clerk. Ct. Sheffield. Nov. 8. SMITH, JAMES, Derby, coal dealer. Ct. Derby and Long Eaton. Nov. 7. STAPLES, EDWARD CLEMENT, Leeds, pork butcher. Ct. Leeds. Nov. 9. STEPHENS, DAVID JOHN, Brynmawr, draper. Ct. Tredegar. Nov. 5. THORNE, WILLIAM, West Bagborough, farmer. Ct. Taunton. Nov. 9. WATKINS AND LANE, late Aberdare, bakers. Ct. Aberdare and Mountain Ash. Nov. 7. WHITE, JESSIE, Hemel Hempstead, principal of a girls' school, spinster. Ct. St. Albans. Nov. 7. WILSON, WALTER, late Scunthorpe, painter. Ct. Great Grimsby. Nov. 6. Nov. 5. LIGH, WILLIAM HODGES, Ramsgate, printer. Ct. Canterbury. Nov. 5. ERANSON, JOHN BERTRAM; BURNIE, PHILIP HERBERT; and SMITH, SAMUEL Nov. 5. EVANS, WILLIAM REES, late Llandilo, railway plate layer. Ct. Carmarthen. Nov. 6. FRIZZELL, CHARLES JAMES, Bournemouth, fishmonger. Ct. Poole. Nov. 4. HAGELL, ALFRED LATHEM (trading as A. and M. Hagell), The Exchange, KIRKLEY, JOSEPH JACKSON, late Burnley, plumber. Ct. Burnley, Nov. 6. LACY, JOHN, Belbroughton, farmer. Ct. Worcester. Nov. 5. LAWSON, TOM GEORGE, Manchester, warehouseman. Ct. Manchester. Nov. 5. LEACEY, JAMES STANLEY, Churchdown, baker. Ct. Gloucester. Nov. 2. LONG, ARTHUR GEORGE, Newcastle-under-Lyme, licensed victualler. Ct. Hanley. Nov. 4. Court. Nov. 6. PILKINGTON, ALEXANDER, Blackpool, general smallware dealer. Ct. Preston. Nov. 5. PORTLOCK, WALLACE MARK, Keighley, coal dealer. Ct. Bradford. Nov. 5. PRICE, HENRY HERBERT, late John-st, Bedford-row, solicitor. Ct. High L'OSTLEWHITE, JOSEPH, late Scarborough, fancy goods dealer. Ct. Scarborough. Nov. 6. ROBERTS, EDWIN INWOOD, West Green, grocer. Ct. Edmonton. Nov. 6. RYE, LYDIA, Ilford, confectioner, spinster. Ct Chelmsford. Nov. 5. SHIPLEY, ENOCH (trading as E. Shipley and Co.), Nottingham, lace curtain manufacturer. Ct. Nottingham. Nov. 6. SMITH, ARTHUR THOMAS, Luton, picture frame maker. Ct. Luton. Nov. 4. TOSELAND, WALTER, Kettering, florist. Ct. Northampton. Nov. 5. Amended notice substituted for that published in Gazette, Oct. 22. MARTIN, ALFRED THOMPSON (trading as Martin and Martin), Ambleside, provision merchant. Ct. Kendai. Oct. 19. Amended notice substituted for that published in Gazette, Oct. 25. RASON, THE HON. SIR CORNTHWAITE HECTOR (described in the receiving order as the Hon. Sir Cornthwaite Rason), Copthall-av. Ct. High Court. Oct. 23 GAZETTE, Nov. 12. BARON, SOL. (described in the receiving order as S. Baron, male), Argylepl, Regent st. Ct. High Court. Nov. 9. COKE, REGINALD GREY, St. James'-st, gentleman. Ct. High Court. CLEGG, JOSHUA, Heaton Park, contractor. Ct. Salford. Nov. 7. HUGHES, HENRY REES (trading as the Western Valley Tailor), Newbridge, tailor. Ct. Newport, Mon. Nov. 9. LENNARD, JOHN MILNER, Leadenhall-st. Ct. High Court. Nov. 7. MAXWELL, FRANCIS JOHN WILLIAM, Trevor-sq, Knightsbridge. Ct. High Court. Nov. 9. MOSES, MORRIS HARRIS (trading as M. Summerfield and Co.), Goswell-rd. Ct. High Court. Nov. 9. MUXWORTHY, FRANCIS HENRY, Hoxton-st, Hoxton, clothier. Ct. High NAYLOR, ERNEST JAMES. St. Helens, late clogger. Ct. Liverpool. Nov. 9. Ct. ROBERTS. GERAINT, Penygroes, draper. Ct. Bangor. Nov. 9. SMITH, JAMES, Derby, coal dealer. Ct. Derby and Long Eaton. Nov. 7. WILSON, WALTER, late Scunthorpe, painter. Ct. Great Grimsby. Nov. 6. ADJUDICATION ANNULLED. GAZETTE. Nov. & ROBINSON, LILIAN MOSSE, Edenbridge, widow. Ct. Tunbridge Wells. Oct. 11. BIRTHS, MARRIAGES, AND DEATHS. BIRTH. DAVEY. On the 1st inst, at Fernhyrst, 80, Stapleton Hall-rd, Stroud EDE--SHARP. On the 5th inst., at St. Mary's Church, Southampton, APRAHAMS.-On the 6th inst., at Plympton, South Devon, Frederic CLAR On the 1st inst., Alfred Clare, Solicitor, of 9, Queen's-av, Muswell Hill, N., aged 61. SETON-On the 30th ult.. Walter John Seton, Barrister-at-law, in bis forty-eighth year. Any contributions that may be sent on approval will be carefully considered by the Editor; but no responsibility whatever can be accepted in respect thereof, although, if unsuitable, every effort will be made to return them, provided that a stamped addressed wrapper is inclosed for that purpose. The copyright of all contributions (including reports paid for) shall TO SUBSCRIBERS. PREPAYMENT TERMS OF SUBSCRIPTION. WITH REPORTS. For One Year For Half-Year 1 7 0 For Half-Year Foreign. WITHOUT REPORTS. For One Year 1 10 0 For Half-Year £2 2 1 1 0 £2 4 4 1 2 2 Portfolios for preserving the current numbers of the LAW TIMES, price 58. 6d. LAW TIMES REPORTS, price 3s. 6d. Parcels of Volumes for binding should be sent to the Publisher, Law TIMES Office, Windsor House, Bream's-buildings, E.C. TO ADVERTISERS.-SCALE OF CHARGES FOR ADVERTISEMENTS. Four lines of 30 words or £ s. d. less than 30 words in body type One page Half page 3 6 One column 6 ........... ............ 10 0 0 5 0 0 8 10 0 Each additional line Advertisements ordered for a series of three insertions are charged 10 per cent. under scale, and for six or more insertions 20 per cent. under. Paragraph Advertisements ls, per line, minimum 58. No series discount. Advertisers whose reference is under initials to this office, should remit 6d. additional to defray postage in transmitting replies to their Adver tisements. Advertisements must reach the office not later than five o'clock on Thursday afternoon, and must be accompanied by a remittance. Post-Office Orders payable to HORACE Cox. Vol. 184.-No. 3634. The Law and the Lawyers. Delay in the King's Bench. Up to the time of going to press, no announcement has been made as to the names of the who are persons to constitute the Royal Commission that is to inquire into the delay now obtaining in the King's Bench Division. Although six weeks of the term have passed, the number of actions disposed of has been more than counterbalanced by those set down during that period, and the return of a few more judges in December will be hardly sufficient to make any appreciable inroad on the lists. Special jury cases set down in May last are still untried, while common jury cases date back to June. It certainly looks as though by the end of the legal year the lists will reach a state of arrear unequalled in the past fifteen years, and this although the judges of that division have done their utmost to cope with the business. Railway Companies and Strikes. How far a railway company is responsible for delay in delivery of goods owing to a strike of their servants was discussed this week before the Divisional Court. The company had been held liable by the County Court judge on the ground that the failure to deliver was due to the default of the company's servants, but this view was not |