Elementary Precedents in Conveyancing. A Collection of Practical Forms designed for Professional, use, and suited to the emergencies of Actual Prac tice. By THOMAS WILKINSON, Esq. London: LAW TIMES Office. Pp. 303.

This convenient little volume is a reprint, with some corrections and additions of a Collection of Practical Precedents in Conveyancing which appeared in these pages, and which were found to be so useful to the readers of the LAW, TIMES that a general request was made for their reproduction in the more convenient and accessible form of a volume, and it was thought that other members of the profession might find them as great an assistance as had the subscribers of this journal. There is no need to describe that which is so well known. It will suffice to state that Mr. Wilkinson has now arranged his numerous precedents in groups, so that every subject will be found in its proper place. A manual like this, so small that it may be carried in the pocket, and comprising all that the solicitor is likely to require for conveyancing in his own office not of sufficient difficulty or importance to be sent to counsel, will doubtless be placed upon every desk for daily service, and the more so as it is very inexpensive as compared with any other

books of the same class.

THE COURT & COURT PAPERS.

CHANCERY ORDER. Whereas by the 5th of the Consolidated Orders of this Court, rule 6, it is provided that the Lord Chancellor may from time to time by special order direct the offices to be closed on days other than those mentioned in the 1st rule of the said Order. And whereas Saturday, the 28th day of May has been appointed for the celebration of Her Majesty's birthday, and such event has been heretofore observed as a general holiday in the several offices of this court, his Lordship doth therefore order that the several offices of this court be closed on Saturday, the 28th day of May, and that this order be entered and set up in the several offices of this court. HATHERLEY, C.

LAW AMENDMENT SOCIETY.

A meeting to consider the High Court of Justice Bill of the Lord Chancellor, was held at the society's rooms, in Adam-street, Adelphi, on Monday evening last, the 2nd inst. There was a very large attendance of the Bar.

Mr. Mellish, Q. C., occupied the chair.
Amongst those present were Messrs. Montague
Chambers, Q. C., Grove, Q. C., Powell, Q. C.,
Quain, Q. C., Prideaux, Q. C., Hastings, Wills,
Cave, Mortmer, C. J. O'Malley, Cohen, Snagge,
Speke, Lanyon, Byrth, Petheram, Tennant, Shortt,
Lloyd, Humphreys, C. Hopwood, Finlay, Udall,
Hollings, Brandt, Gibson, Williams, Patchett,
Yeatman, Junner, Herschell, Jelf, Thesiger,
Streeten, Pooley, Ryder, McDonald, Maclachlan,

&c.

Mr. G. Hastings addressed the meeting at considerable length on the subject of the Lord Chancellor's Bill. He said the Bill did not make any further alterations in our law, but only in our system of procedure, a matter of a purely mechanical nature, which was, in his opinion, capable of

being brought to a state of perfection. It was a las they were at present. The real question at
merit of the Bill that it left the divisions of courts present was, whether the committee of the Privy
in great part still existing, but it was objection- Council are fit to be trusted with so great a powe
able in keeping up the division of the Common and discretion. He confessed that he could no
Law Courts as at present. The proposal to throw trust them with it. He could not trust the judges
the duty of framing a system of procedure on men with it, and he had little more confidence in the
who had already so much to do as the judges was Committee of the Privy Council He could no
absurd, in proof of which he pointed to the large think that calling judges or ex-judges who bai
volume containing the code of procedure of New retired on pension members of the Privy Counc
York. The Lord Chancellor had now altered made them any better fitted for the duty. He
this, and proposed to substitute for the judges could not help thinking that the real question as
the Committee of the Privy Council. The prin- to the framing of a code of procedure was one of
ciples, at any rate, of this system of procedure economy: the Government does not choose to go
should be contained in any Bill that passed Par- to the expense of getting a code of procedure
liament. As to the constitution of the Judicature framed as it ought to be done. It could not be
Commission, though the individual members of it done without the appointment of a paid commis
were entitled to the highest respect, still it, sion for the purpose, and a certain expenditure of
should be remembered that there were on it only time. Of late years he had seen a good deal of
five practising members of the Bar, and only one the procedure in Scotch cases in which there
Mr. Quain, Q.C.), a member of the independent was a most perfect amalgamation of law and
Bar, unaffected by official influences. The com- equity which rendered their procedure mue
mission had not been, in the strict sense, a com- superior to ours, which proceeds on the suppos
mission of inquiry-openly taking evidence-but tion that all questions are to be determined by a
rather in the nature of a cabinet promulgating its jury, unless the parties consent to have it the
had a right and a duty to perform in making their a mode. In the Scotch procedure each party told
own views. Both branches of the legal Profession otherwise, however unfit it may be for trial in sic
voices heard on the matter, and there should be his own story in short sentences, instead of, as in
some independent expression of opinion on the our system of pleading, merely stating the lega
subject. To the principle of the Bill he gave his results of the facts. In this way it is seen how
hearty assent, but he thought that the matter had much of the facts the parties are agreed upon:
not received all the investigation that its import- whereas with us, though a pleader may be told
ance demanded; and he hoped that a general all the circumstances of the case and if he had
meeting of the Bar would be called by the to tell the story of his client in the Scotch way,
Attorney-General to consider the question.
would be compelled to admit, perhaps, three-
the preceding speaker as to the advisability of side-he nevertheless begins by traversing every
Mr. M. Chambers, Q. C. could not concur with fourths of the facts alleged to exist by the other
calling a
consider the matter. for his experience was that a system the question between the parties naturaly
general meeting of the Bar to allegation made by the other side. In the Scotch
definite resolution could never be obtained from turned itself into the form of a special case, which
such a meeting on any subject dealing with an with us, can only be done by consent. There were
abuse relating to the Profession. The only effect no doubt some points in the Scotch system which
of calling such a meeting would be to cause delay, were worse than our own. and a wrong issue is
and it was most desirable that there should be no sometimes found after the trial to have been raised
delar carrying on the reforms of the Lord between the parties, and the wholets in those
Chancellor. He considered that some of the nothing: and in such simple actions as those for
noble Lords who took part in the recent debate in goods sold and delivered, and for libel. their pro-
he was of opinion that something should be done it quite possible to frame a system of procedure
the House of Lords were rather hypercritical; and ceedings are more dilatory than ours. He thought
at once, and defects in the new system could which would embody the good points without the
easily be remedied afterwards.
defects of the Scotch system. In framing a system
of procedure, great care must be taken not to
sacrifice the present generation for the benefit of
posterity. It had been said by one of the preceding
speakers that the system should be framed at once,
and whatever required alteration might afterwards i
be altered; but in our excessive zeal to amalgamste
law and equity, the common and ordinary actions
and suits in both might be made more expensive
and dilatory than they are at present. He had
come to the conclusion that the whole gist of the
matter lay in the framing of an entire system of
procedure; and if, for that purpose, it were neces
sary to postpone the Bill of the Lord Chancellor,
he was of opinion that it ought to be postponed;
but he did not think it would be necessary to post-
pone the Bill for that purpose, because it was
not intended to come into operation till 1871, and
with a properly paid commission appointed to
frame a code of precedure, and present it to Par-
liament before that time, he did not see why the
Bill should not be passed this year. If Parliament
approved the code of procedure thus framed, they
might then appoint a body, whether composed of
the judges or others, to alter, from time to time,
any defects which might be found in the code to
require amendment. But he doubted whether it
would be safe to pass the Bill in its present form,
a Bill which contained some sections unlike any.
thing he had ever seen in an Act of Parliament
before. He hoped he should not be thought to be
less zealous than others in carrying out the great
reforms proposed, but he thought it exceedingly
important that they should be carried out properly,
and that a system of procedure should be framed
before the Act was finally passed.

Mr. E. Field was also of opinion that the passing of the Bill should not be postponed till the system of procedure was perfected. The broad principles of the code of procedure should be settled by Act of Parliament, and a board appointed to draw up the particular rules; but he considered that it would be better to pass the Bill without any system of procedure than to post| pone it.

!

Mr. Quain. Q.C., said the question before the
society was whether they should help the Lord
Chancellor, so far as they could, in passing his
Bill or not, and he should be sorry that the Law
Amendment Society should refuse its assistance.
The Bill was no doubt imperfect, but that was
only saying that it was the work of human beings.
He agreed with Mr. Chambers, that the calling of
a meeting of the Bar by the Attorney-General,
would not advance the question one iota. The
question was not one of substance but merely of
procedure as to the manner of giving the courts
the power of giving suitors a complete remedy,
and in his opinion a completely perfect system of
procedure could never be arrived at. The system
of procedure must vary with the varying circum-
stances and wants of society. He considered that
the Lord Chancellor was entitled to very great
credit for having had the courage to introduce his
Bills into Parliament. If the House of Lords
would refer the Bill to a select committee of their,
own House, it could put into the Bill the grand
outline of the system of procedure, and then leave
the rules of court to be worked out by a com-
mission or in any other way. The particulars of
a code of procedure could not be inserted in the
Bill, but the broad principles might. He urged
the society to accord their approval to the Bill,
and to do nothing to impede its progress.

Mr. Mellish, Q. C., who on rising was greeted
with loud cheers, said that there seemed to be an
almost unanimous opinion as to the desirability of
effecting the substance of the legal reforms re-
commended by the Judicature Commissioners, and
the only question was as to the best and most
efficient mode of carrying them out. He, for one,
was clearly convinced of the great importance of
the legal reforms recommended, and he believed
that a system of procedure might be framed, which
would be very much better than the present system
of procedure of our courts, both of law and equity,
and which might make the procedure almost
entirely similar in all courts. The great difficulty,
he could not help thinking, would be in framing
the particulars of the system, and not in laying
down the broad principles. If the Bill of the Lord
Chancellor passed in its present form, the committee
of the Privy Council might make rules of procedure
which might either revolutionise our whole system
of trial, or rules which would leave matters exactly

A resolution having been passed expressing a general approval of the Lord Chancellor's Bill, the proceedings terminated with a cordial vote of thanks to Mr. Mellish for presiding.

LONDON AND PROVINCIAL LAW ASSUR-
ANCE SOCIETY.

The annual general meeting of the proprietors in this society was held at the office, No. 21, Fleet

street, London, E.C., on Wednesday, April 27, H. S. Law, Esq., the deputy-chairman, presiding.

Mr. R. P. Hardy (the actuary and secretary) read the advertisement convening the meeting, and the directors' report. The report which appeared in our advertisement columns last week having been read, the statements of receipts and expendi ture during the year ending the 31st Dec. 1869, was taken as read.

The Chairman said-I will first refer to the amount of new business effected during the past year. This falls a little short of the amount effected in the year 1868. In that year the number

The Chairman thanked them most cordially, and plexity, sat an old gentleman, who was evidently the meeting then dispersed.

J

were of a very inferior quality, charged the jury Fieber, B. and J. ommasters, second, 19 Kinnear. Bir-
in the following sensible language—” Gentlemen
Aes. P. P. and T. S. fearen I each the Parkyns. Bas.ng-
of the jury-Pare and unadulterated Byaor is a bail-sa-Baras, J. race
Pure Basin Lupo. I ace-
wholesome pleasant beverage, and as far as the
maker So Earns Saw. R and J. woostap iers,
experience of the court extends, conduces to health 4 Im Ya-paper but id BATTA
Xngham-Gs career £ 5. Partyza, Bang-
of Park & Cravencr-ig, frst in new
proofs. 3. Lam. Parts BACK-E R. P. and J Chop |
merchants. 3. Puren Bueng-a-ir dauer
I SAT
E SE RET 49
Kinnear BTS- kas. 8. sporeda dealer, frst and
11 BI breat HATA
Deuter ceter
Xxzzer and A Banter Cone mandatarers, int sep.
*A Eber Jat
Tamer verpack – 7. Cand 246 Kizer. Birmore

and longevity; but a bad article of liquor, or.
what is worse, a drugred article, gentlemen, can-
not be sclersted; and if dealers from below will
send up in this country, so blessed with the smiles
of a benignant Creator, such a miserable quality fee
of brace as the proof shows this to have been, in
this court. gentlemen of the jury, they cannot
recover. The verbet, was, of coarse, for the
defendant.

LAW STATIONIS, PATER, AND

BIRTES

A

LAW FARKA

& CHANCERY LANE TC

C free} = Fr.

DVERTISEMENTS INSERTED J

The LONDON GAZETTE

EDINBURGH GAZETTE.
DUBLIN GAZETTE

And every known Paper in the Worl
By ABBOTT, BARTON, & 00,

H

LONDON GAZETTE #buted by au
LONDON and COUNTRY ADVERTISEMENT
CHANTESY-LANE, FLEET-ST
ENBY GREEN (many years with te
George Bede Ace
the attention the inn. Pro in the a
TRAPE p si pro trad schon er i b
ADA TLE VOORbest care and propo

AW EXAMINATIONS—A Gentleman

LAW

IMPE

MPERIAL LIFE INSURANCE.
COMPANY.

Churd -X 1, OLD BRADSTREET, LOSS
Arsack ice-So. & PALL-MALL, LONDOS.

The Ligbrim respect of BAR E Bronzes, 1 Tɔ, MMČ; acid m respect of Amm

The A curs serally invested in First-class Sa

Of time subscribed capital of 739 wc, my_out, is pood-27
A cols of Aetrance effected at moderate rates, DÍ =
THEY LOS SUDÁT, DA

Prospectus and Bance Street to be had an applicant
ANDREW BADES, Armary and Year.
ANNUUMES AND REVERSIONS
REVERSIONARY INTEREST

LAW

SOCIETY.

CHANCERY-LANE, LCSICS.

206

L'

AW EXAMINATIONS —A

THE LAW TIMES.

To Readers and Correspondents.

All anonymous communications are invariably rejected.
All communications must be authenticated by the name

and address of the writer, not necessarily for publica-
tion, but as a guarantee of good faith.

359

CHARGES FOR ADVERTISEMENTS.

361

Four lines or thirty words..

Every additional ten words

3s. 6d.
Os. 6d.

36

Baptist congregation-Trust deed-Dismissal of minister 368
BUCKINGHAM v. SELLICK-

Practice-Order for sale under 31 & 32 Vict. c. 40 (Partition
Act)

MOYE v. SPARROW

Amendment of decree-Mistake..

370

370

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.

PENTON . MURDUCK

Infectious disease-Bailment of animal infected with-
Liability of bailor

371

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.
BROOMFIELD AND OTHERS v. THE SOUTHERN INSURANCE
COMPANY-

Bottomry bond-Insurance of-Constructive total loss...... 371 FAIRLIE v. FENTON AND OTHERS

Contract-Principal and agent-Broker-Right to sue......

373

COURT OF PROBATE.

In the Goods of SAVAGE

Will destroyed-Codicil remaining-Codicil admitted to probate

375

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES-IN ADMI

RALTY.

LAW. WALLERSTEIN; THE GRAPESHOT

Bottomry-Necessity for repairs-Necessity for credit

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.
THE UNION OF EXETER (apps.) v. THE UNION OF ST.
THOMAS, DEVON (respa.)-

Settlement by payment of public taxes of a parish-Local improvement and lighting rates..

CLIFF v. THE MIDLAND RAILWAY COMPANY-
Railway-Level crossing-Negligence
LONGBOTTOM v. BERRY AND ANOTHER-

Fixtures-Equitable mortgage-Bill of sale..

376

379

draw his signature. The opportunity is seized,
however, by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL to say that
"if a certificate of indemnity can even now be
obtained from Baron MARTIN it would give him
continuing this prosecution." At present, there-
great satisfaction to be relieved of the duty of
fore, there is an utter want of consistency and
uniformity in our treatment of offenders against
We have elsewhere pointed
our electoral law.
out the absurdity attaching to the Bridgewater
cases, but Beverley adds considerably to the

Advertisements specially ordered for the first page are catalogue. It would seem that in addition to
charged one-fourth more than the above scale.
Advertisements must reach the office not later than
five o'clock on Thursday afternoon.

SEVERAL meetings of the Judges have been held this week on the subject of the Judicature Bills, and we have reason to believe that the result of their discussions and of communications with the LORD CHANCELLOR may be to obviate their objections to the Bill in its present form, and to obtain their valuable supTheir port to these most important measures. objections it is understood apply only to two or three points-the destruction of the distinctive 385 jurisdictions of the courts, the giving the supreme power to the CHANCELLOR and CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, and the appointment of appellate Judges for a year. There are some minor points, but these are the principal and 21 most important. And we believe they are likely to be satisfactorily settled.

382

26

AN important step has been taken in the Queen's 23 Bench, it having been announced that in future, except during the first four days of Term, and the last four days of Term, when a court sits in the Bail Court, this court will sit as two divisions on every Wednesday, but there will be on those days no sittings at Nisi Prius; and that in the 27 full court the new trials will be taken, or such other business as the court may from time to time direct in its order, and in the Bail Court the Crown paper, with the exception of such cases as may be postponed as of importance. It is said that there would also be sittings at Nisi 30 Prius when the two divisions sit, but there is no court available. This is a difficulty which ought to be disposed of without delay.

27

29

30

SOLICITORS' JOURNAL:

Notes of New Decisions..

Court of Common Pleas-Action by an attorney for penalties 31
Middlesex Sessions

31

Propertied Women

31

Unclaimed Stock and Dividends in the Bank of England
Joint-Stock Companies Winding-up Acts..

31

31

Heirs-at-Law and Next of Kin

Creditors under Estates in Chancery.

Creditors under 22 & 23 Vict. c. 35.

THE BENCH AND THE BAR

MAGISTRATE AND PARISH LAWYER:

Co-Defendants in Criminal Cases-How Far Competent to
Testify.

Notes of New Decisions..

REAL PROPERTY LAWYER:

31

31

32

33

Norfolk County Justices-5 & 6 Will, 4, c. 63, sect. 28..
Cambridge Borough Magistrates-Affiliation-Appeal

33

Notes of New Decisions

JOINT-STOCK COMPANIES' LAW JOURNAL:

Notes of New Decisions..

these queer doings as regards Sir H. EDWARDS a prosecution was commenced against a man named NORFOLK, when it was discovered that he had a certificate of indemnity.

ALL parties have fallen into a singular error
as to the position of the CHANCELLOR of the
EXCHEQUER with reference to the proposed
High Court to be formed of all the Superior
Courts. It was evidently forgotten by the
framers of the Bill that he was not only a
member of the Court of Exchequer, but its
head. The history of the matter is curious.
The Exchequer was the most ancient of our
courts, as Superior Courts of general juris-
diction, for the simple reason that it attended
to the revenue, the only thing our ancient
monarchs cared about. For the sake of revenue
they allowed it to usurp a common jurisdiction
between subject and subject, which by Magna
Charta was vested in the Court of Common Pleas.
The Exchequer, however, retained exclusively
its revenue jurisdiction, and retains it to this
day. The High Treasurer of England was its
head, as the Chief Justice was head of the
King's Crown Court, afterwards the King's
surer as head of the Court of the Exchequer,
Bench. Ancient statutes recognised the Trea-
and down to the Revolution he sat as its head.
Even after the Revolution he and the Under-
Exchequer, were regarded as constituent mem-
Treasurer, then called the Chancellor of the
bers of the court, and assumed judicial powers.
This old form, handed down to us by tradition
from the days of HENRY II., when the Treatise
on the Exchequer was written, and the Barons
of the Exchequer were simply the king's barons,
sturdy soldiers rather than lawyers, shows that
the Treasurer was head of the court, and that his
successor, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, is
so still. That being so, he would, as a member
of the Court of Exchequer, be a member of the
High Court, though not a judicial member.
What the Judges very naturally object to is,
to give to him and the LORD CHANCELLOR the
sole and supreme power and control over the
court. By a simple recurrence to the Bill as it
stood, the objections will be obviated, all diffi-
culty avoided, and all desirable objects attained.

THE LORD CHIEF JUSTICE ON THE

JUDICATURE BILLS.

31 GOVERNMENT has been somewhat premature in 32 congratulating itself upon its economical ar- THE LORD CHIEF JUSTICE has put forth a letter rangement in the Court of Appeal in Chancery. to the LORD CHANCELLOR on our Judicial system, that is, in reality, on the Judicature 32 A Chancery barrister points out that the consequence of appointing no successor to the late Bills. He was not, he complains, consulted Lord Justice SELWYN, is that the Lord Justice about them, and considers he was treated with scant courtesy; and he moreover views with GIFFARD, although empowered to sit alone and avowed dislike what he calls a proposal to make to decide bankruptcy appeals, lunacy petitions, the ancient courts divisions of a new court 34 appeal motions, and appeal petitions (upon which headed by the Chancellor. He is, therefore, an the nicest and most difficult points often 34 arise), is unable by himself to hear appeals adverse witness,-a hostile critic, and his testi(properly so called), while the LORD CHANCELLOR mony on that account is only more reliable, and has been occupied during the whole of the pre-his opinion more valuable. Lord ST. LEONARDS Birmingham County Court-Validity of deed of composition 35 sent term with one single appeal, which is not has also published some objections on the Bills, 3yet finished, and was in his Lordship's paper and is opposed to them because they would tend to the fusion of law and equity, and he recalls on the last day of his sittings in term. 38 the commencement of the term the list of ap- with pride how he defeated such a measure in peals numbered thirty, and has not only not been 1860. The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE, who concurred diminished even by one, but has been increased in that proposal, avows that he is still in favour by the appeals since set down. It is hardly of the fusion, though he views with dislike the necessary to add that grave inconvenience is proposal to effect it by a fusion of the Judicature. He is averse to his court becoming a mere hereby occasioned to suitors. member or division of another, and this feeling has influenced his whole view of the subject. Hence, although in 1860 he disregarded the opposition of the Equity Judges, he now appears to adopt their view, that the object shall not be carried out until a careful revision should have been made of the whole law, i.e., with reference to equity, a work which might be delayed for another half century. The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE Would prefer to a fusion of the judicature, an alterati law, on those heads in which equity law. And he supports this opin torical view of the rise and grow

37

Stonehouse County Court-Non-attendance of witnesses
Wallingford County Court-Is insanity "sickness"?.

ECCLESIASTICAL LAW:

Notes of New Decisions.

38 PROCEEDINGS in the House of Commons on
38 Tuesday revealed additional facts connected
with the bribery commissions and prosecutions
38 under them, which prove conclusively that some
different machinery must be provided in the
future for detecting corrupt practices. It seems
39 that a great deal of doubt surrounds the case of Sir
HENRY EDWARDS, but the singular circumstance
39 is that one of the commissioners signed a report,
40 in which Sir H. EDWARDS was scheduled as
40 guilty of bribery, without meaning it; and then,
under a misapprehension, he applied to with-

39