chance of getting a verdict. Now in whatever way the jury is attacked by the counsel on both sides, the judge, who comes after them, ought, as I before hinted, to be able to divest the speeches that have been made of all their illegitimate influence, to expose any fallacies that have been advanced, to set aside any extraneous elements that have been introduced, and to bring the jury to a fair consideration of the true questions which they have to consider, and to the conflicting probabilities or arguments which they have to estimate and weigh. Unless this be done with reasonable ability the case has not been well tried, and the administration of justice will so far be defective. I am not here to say anything as to the duties or qualifications of the Bar. These are well understood in the proper quarter; but I must express my cordial approval of every thing that has been done, and that is still doing, to render legal education more systematic, and more scientific. Practical Suggestions. First, we should seek the best security that can be obtained for the grave, mature, and deliberate decision of new questions of law, of an abstract nature and general application, so that, when once decided, they may remain permanently fixed and unquestioned. Secondyl, the improvement by every possible means of the phraseology and general structure of deeds of contract and conveyance, and of our Acts of Parliament, so that as few questions of construction may be raised, and as little doubt entertained, of the true meaning intended. Third, that special consideration should be given to the best manner of ascertaining facts according to the nature of the case, and of separating the facts thus entertained from the law applicable to them. Fourth, that in all procedure, whether for ascertaining facts or deciding law, no pains should be spared, and no care grudged, to convince the lieges that there is every desire in the courts of law to find out the truth and to decree justice, and that, humanly speaking, the best means are taken by which wrong may be put down and right made triumphant. Finally, and consistently with these great leading objects, every means should be employed to make the administration of law as expeditious and as little expensive as possible. Apologising again for the imperfection of this address, in which I fear the unexceptionable parts are likely to appear trite and commonplace, while other portions may be too cold and common for sanguine and enterprising reformers, I conclude with expressing an earnest hope that our deliberations at this time may be conducive to the attainment of those great ends at which we all aim, and which recognise justice as the great prop which sustains society, and its due administration as one of the greatest boons which can be bestowed on mankind. NOTTINGHAM ARTICLED CLERKS' At the ordinary meeting of this society, on Friday last, Mr. Hodgson in the chair, the following subject was discussed:-"That it is desirable that a public trustee should be appointed, in whom all trust estates should be vested, and that the appointment of any other trustee should be invalid." Mr. Hunnard supported the affirmative, and Mr. Burrell the negative. All the members who took part in the discus. sion, spoke in favour of the affirmative, and on the question being put to the vote, it was so decided unanimously. LEGAL OBITUARY. H. DUCKWORTH, ESQ. THE late Herbert Duckworth, Esq., barrister-atlaw, who died at New Milford, South Wales, on the 19th ult., in the thirty-seventh year of his age, was the youngest son of William Duckworth, Esq., of Orchard Leigh Park, near Frome, in the county of Somerset, by his first wife, Hester Emily, daughter of Robert Philips, Esq., of The Park, Prestwich, near Manchester. He was born at Pendlebury, near Manchester, in the year 1833, and was educated at Eton and at Trinity College, Cambridge, called to the Bar at Lincoln's-inn in 1859; he went the Northern Circuit, and he also practised at the Yorkshire and Liverpool Sessions and the Passage Court. Mr. Duckworth was for some time an officer in the North Somerset Yeomanry. He married in 1867 Julia Prinsep, daughter of John Jackson, Esq., M.D., of Saxonbury, Frant, near Tunbridge Wells, by whom he has left several children. The deceased was buried in the family vault at Lullington, adjoining Orchard Leigh. THE GAZETTES. Professional Partnership Dissolved. Gazette, Sept. 30. STEELE, ADAM RIVERS, and STEELE, THOMAS JAMES, attorneys and solicitors, Bloomsbury-sq. July 31. Debts by Adam Rivers Steele. Bankrupts. Gazette, Sept. 30. second year of his age, was the only son of the late Richard Hunt Matthews, Esq., of Buxar, East Indies, and of Cross Deep Lodge, Twickenham, by the eldest daughter of the late Nicholas Donnnithorne Bishop, Esq., solicitor, of London, by Mary Eleanor, daughter of James Andrew Bogle, Esq, He was born at Cross Deep Lodge, Twickenham, on the 1st July 1829, was educated at the London University, and was admitted a solicitor in Michaelmas Term 1852. The deceased gentleman, who was in partnership with Mr. T. Stephens, solicitor, of Essex-street, Strand, was one of the claimants of the Earldom of Monteith and Airth in the Scottish Peerage, which has been dormant since 1645, when, upon the death of William Graham, the then Earl of Monteith and Airth, WEAVER, S. W., grocer, Essex-rd, Islington. Pet. Sept. 28. Reg. unmarried, the title and estate are said to have passed to his sister, who married a Mr. Bogles, of Bogles Hali, near Edinburgh, from whom the de- BROCKLEBANK, THOMAS ROSE, boot dealer, Barnsley. Pet ceased is maternally descended. Mr. Matthews married in 1855 Rosa Robinson, youngest daughter of William Reed, Esq., of The Mount, Sunning Hill, Berks, and Winter Lodge, Kensington, by whom he has left four sons and one daughter. The remains of the deceased were interred at Twicken ham. PROMOTIONS & APPOINTMENTS [N.B.-Announcements of appointments being in the nature of advertisements, are charged 2s. 6d. each, for which postage stamps should be inclosed.] Circuit No. 3, has appointed Robert Fisher ThompTheophilus Hastings Ingham, Esq., Judge of son, of Kendal, Esq., to be Registrar of the County Court of Westmorland holden at Kendal, and such appointment has been approved of by Lord Hatherley, Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain. To surrender at the Bankrupts' Court, Basinghall-street. COUSERS, THOMAS BAGLEY, ship valuer, Cornhill. Pet. Sept. 28. Reg. Roche. Sols. Morley and Shirreff, Mark-la. Sur. Oct. 13 HAINES, JOSEPH CHARLES, auctioneer, Duke-st, Manchester-sq, Wigmore-st, and Oakley-rd, Islington. Pet. Sept. 24. Reg. Spring-Rice. Sol. Maynard, Clifford's-inn. Sur. Oct. 10 Roche. Sol. Piesse, Old Jewry-chmus. Sur. Oct. 10 To surrender in the Country. Sept. 28. Reg. Bury. Sur. Oct. 13 DAVIS, RICHARD OWEN, victualler, Milton-next-Gravesend. Pet. Sept. 28. Reg. Acworth. Sur. Oct. 14 DIXON, WILLIAM, and CLARKSON. EMMA, milliners, Leeds. Pet. LEE, JAMES, builder, Exeter. Pet. Sept. 26. Reg. Daw. Sur. Sept. 27. Reg. Marshall, Sur. Oct. 14 Oct. 12 QUIGGIN, THOMAS, boot dealer, Birkenhead. Pet. Sept. 28. Reg. Wason. Sur Oct. 13 SPANTON, ALFRED, attorney and solicitor, Hunstanton. Pet. Sept. 27. Reg. Partridge. Sur. Oct. 11 THURLOW, LANCELOT, tallor, Newington, near Sittingbourne. Pet, Sept. 28. Reg. Acworth. Sur. Oct. 25 LAWSON, JOHN, jun, builder, Seasalter. Pet. Oct. 1. Reg. Callaway. Sur. Oct. 31 LORD, WILLIAM, cotton waste dealer, Oldham. Pet. Sept. 29. Sur. Oct. 15 Sept. 29. Reg. Hime. Sur. Oct. 18 RUANE, JAMES, coach proprieter, Chester. Pet Sept. 20. Reg. Kay. Sur. Oct. 27 Pet. Mr. William Mackmurdo Hacon, of 18, Fenchurch-street, London, solicitor, has been appointed a Commissioner for taking Affidavits and Examining Witnesses in England for the High Court of Judicature at Bombay. Mr. Hacon has also been appointed a Commissioner for taking the Acknow- SINCLAIR, ROBERT, victualler, West Barnet. Pet. Sept. 29. Reg. ledgments of Married Women in England in respect of Property in India. LEGAL NEWS. RYLANDS, JOSEPH, Cotton_spinner, Kingston-upon-Hull. BANKRUPTCY ANNULLED. A LEGAL RELIC OF ANTIQUITY-PARLIA- Assignment, Composition, Inspectorship, and Trust Deeds. Gazette, Sept. 27. fields. Sep. 13 Trust. H. Croysill, accountant, Old J-wrychmbs. Sols. Lawrance, Plews, Boyer, and Baker, Old Jewrycambs Liquidation by Arrangement. FIRST MEETINGS. Gazette, Sept. 30. MENTARY RELIEF. Recently a County Court, as established by an Act of Edward III., was held before Mr. Under-sheriff Burchell, at the FAWCETT, THOMAS COOPER, attorney-at-law, late Lincoln's-innSheriff's Court, Red Lion-square, and must be held every four weeks until the same is abolished by another Act of Parliament. At these courts proclamations of outlawry were monthly made, when debtors were reminded of judgments against them, but since the new Act to abolish imprisonment for debt was passed not a single case has occurred, and yet the ancient ceremony must be pone through. The officer of the court (Mr. Mountain) in the name of the Sheriff. called upon all persons having anything to do at the County, Court to "draw nigh and give their attendance." No appearance was made, and at the end of the other proceedings all persons were ordered to de- BASKERVILLE, CHARLES, victualler, Exeter; Ort. 15, at eleven, part and give their attendance on that day four weeks. The court was opened and closed by the officer saying "God save the Queen." This ceremony must be repeated every month until relief is BOND, THOMAS, builder, Foxberry-d, Deptford: Oct. 13, at three, given by Parliament. METROPOLITAN MUTUAL MEDICAL AID SOCIETY. This society, under the patronage of the Right Hon. the Lord Mayor, the Right Hon. James Stansfeld, M.P., the Vice-Chancellor James Bacon, the Hon. Sir James Hennen, Court of Queen's Bench, Sir William Henry Bodkin, Assis tant Judge, Middlesex, is formed to enable persons of limited income, by payment of a small annual sum, to secure themselves efficient medical aid in equal to the ordinary requirements of life, but are case of illness. To those whose means are only unprepared to meet the expenses connected with sickness, the above arrangement will sufficiently commend itself; whilst the fact of the district medical officers being selected from among fully qualified practitioners, and the strict limitation of expenses, will, no doubt, be guarantees highly appreciated. Many are now forced into the hands of unqualified men or druggists, whose profits depend upon the sale of medicine, and who have never received a medical education. It is proposed to appoint sub-committees for the several districts, to assist generally in the working of the society. The district medical officers will be ap. pointed by the general committee, under the advice of its medical members. It is not intended that persons who may be possessed of sufficient income to pay ordinary medical charges, or who may be suffering from any chronic or inveterate disorder, shall participate in the advantages of this society. The sub-committees will be instructed to prevent any such abuse. A single subscription is 10s. 6d. The object must commend J. B. D. G. MATTHEWS, ESQ. The late James Bogle Denton Graham Matthews, Esq., of Cross Deep Lodge, Twickenham, and of 29, Essex-street, Strand, solicitor, who died at 94, Wimpole-street, W., on the 21st ult., in the fifty-itself to everyone. ALDRIDGE, JOHN, cabinet maker, Leonard-st, Finsbury; Oct. 17, at two, at office of M. Banes, accountant, Basinghal-st. Sol., Mason, Symonds-inn, Chancery-la ANDERSON, JOHN WILLIAM, tailor, High-st, Kingsland: Oct. 17, BAINBRIDGE, ROBERT, rate collector, Middlesbrough: Oct. 15, at at twelve, at office of Sol., Kimber, Great Winchester-st-bldgs eleven, at the Black Lion Hotel, Stockton. Sol., Bainbridge BARRETT, JOHN, sen., and BARRETT, JOHN, jun., painters, Halifax; Oct. 11, at three, at office of Sol, Cronhelm, Halifax at the Museum Hotel, Queen-st, Exeter, Sol., Rogers BINNING, WILLIAM, draper, Maldon, and Colchester; Oct. 17, at two, ut office of Sol., Bennett, Friday-st BLACKBURN, CYRUS, grocer, Dewsbury; Oct. 12, at three, at the Ryal Hotel, Dewsbury, Sol., Ibberson, Dewsbury at offices of Sol., Harris, Wellington-st, Southwark BOSTWICK, THOMAS, packing-case maker, Barnsley; Oct. 13, at eleven, at the Coach and Horses Hotel, Barnsley BRAY, JAMES, common brewer, Walkern: Oct. 8, at eleven, at the Salisbury Arms, Hertford. sol., Wade, Hitchin CASEY, JOHN WILLIAM, silversmith, Roman-rd. Victoria-pk; Oct, 20, at two, at offices of Sol., Ditton, Ironmonger-la CLAASSEN, RICHARD, merchant, Gracechurch-st; Oct. 13, at one, CROWLEY, RICHARD, builder. Wallington; Oct. 20, at three, at at offices of Sol., Emanuel, Austin-friars offices of C. Warwick, 23, Bucklersbury. Sol., Richards, Croydon DAVENHILL, JOHN SAVADGE, wholesale wine merchant, Swansea; Oct. 13, at eleven, at offices of Sols, Strick and Bellingham, Swansea DUNCONDE, HENRY CHARLES, Heutenant in H. M. 7'st regment of Highlanders, Eaton-sq; Oct. 17, at three, at offices of Sols., Lawrance, Plews, and Co, Old Jewry-chmbs twelve, at offices of G. Y corn merchant, Bristol: Oct. 17. at and Swann, Bristol B. Dyer, Bristol. Sols., Fussell, Prichard, EARLE, HENRY, attorney, Bedford-row: Oct. 27, at one, at the Guildhall Coffee house, Gresham st. Sols., Treherne and Wolferstan, Ironmonger-la, Cheapside EDGAR, THOMAS, general draper, Southampton; Oct. 15, at twelve, at office of Sol., Killby, Southampton FREEMANTLE, JOHN, miller, Kingsomborne: Oct. 13, at one, at the Grosvenor Arms Hotel, Stockbridge. Sol., Killby, Southampton FURNIFUL, JOSEPH, painter, Farmby, near Southport; Oct. 18, at eleven, at the Railway Hotel, Southport. Sol., Walton, Southport HAIGH, EDWARD, felt hat manufacturer, Leeds; Oct. 10, at three, at offices of Sols., Teale and Appleton, Leeds HARRIS, JENKIN, furniture broker, Tredegar; Oct. 12, at twelve, at offices of Sols,, Simons and Plews, Merthyr Tydfi HENDRY, JAMES, former, Shoreham; Oct. 14, at twelve, at offices of Sol., Philp, Pancras-la, Bucklersbury HOLLAND, EDWIN, out of business, Birmingham; Oct. 12, at HORNBLOW, WILLIAM, hosier, Manchester; Oct. 13, at three, at three, at offices of Sol., Rowlands, Birmingham HOWARD, SARAH, general draper, Manchester: Oct. 5, at offices office of Sols., Lawrance, Plews, and Co., Jewry-chmbs of Nicholson and Milne, accountants, Manchester ISHERWOOD, FRANCIS, smallware dealer, Ashton-under-Lyne; Oct. 13, at three, at the Angel Hotel, Market-st, Manchester. Sol, Clayton, Ashton-under-Lyne JOLLY, THOMAS, cotton manufacturer, Oakenshaw, near Accring ton, and Manchester; Oct. 24, at three, at the Royal Hotel, Manchester, Sols., Sale, Shipman, Seddon, and Sale, Manchester ESAN, WILLIAM HENRY, bricklayer, White Lee, par Birsta' uct. 12, at two, at offices of Sols., Messrs. Watts, Dewsbury KNIGHT, WILLIAM, draper, Park-st, Camden-town: Oct. 21, at two, at offices of Sols, Terrell and Chamberlain, Basinghall-st LISTER, ROBERT ASHTON, machinist, Dursley: Oct. 3, at two, at the Spread Eagle Hotel, Gloucester. Sol., Francillon, Dursley LUCAS, GEORGE, confectioner, Newport; Oct. 12, at twelve, at offices of Sol., Adams, Old Jewry-chmbs MCLOUGHLIN, THOMAS, draper, Manchester: Oct. 13, at half-past three, at offices of Sols., Boote and Edgar, Manchester MILFORD, HENRY ASHWIN, late electrician, Guildford - st, Russell-sq; Oct. 19, at eleven, at Mr. Kendrick's offices, 24, St. Swithin's-la MORISON, ROBERT JOSEPH, gentleman, Palace-gardens-ter, Kensington; Oct. 14, at four, at office of Sols., Eyre and Co., Johnst, Bedford-row MURGATROYD, SAMUEL, worsted stuff manufacturer, Tong, par Birstal; Oct. 14, at eleven, at offices of Sol., Peel, Bradford OFIELD, JOHN, victualler, Rotherham; Oct. 14, at ten, at offices of Sol., Sugg. Sheffield PEMBERTON, EDWARD THOMAS, late brewer's manager, Liverpool; Oct. 13, at three, at office of Sol., Etty, Liverpool PERRY, WILLIAM, timber merchant, Acton-st, Gray's-inn-rd, and Wharton-st, King's-cross-ri: Oct. 18, at three, at offices of Sols., Lawrance, Plews, and Co., Old Jewry-chmbrs PUGH, CHARLES, wine merchant. New Park-st, Southwark; Oct. 18, at three, at office of Sols., Nash, Field, and Layton, Suffolkla, Cannon-st PURDON, HENRY, surgeon, Aberdare; Oct. 12, at eleven, at offices of Sol., Hollier. Aberdare RIDINGS, EDMUND, and RIDINGS, THOMAS, merchants, Liverpool, Manchester, and Preston; Oct. 12. at two, at offices of Messrs. Banner, accountants, Liverpool. Sols. Bateson, Robinson, and Morris, Liverpool ROBINSON, CHARLES JAMES; ROBINSON, WILLIAM JOSEPH; and HUSON, ARTHUR, merchants, Liverpool; Oct. 11, at two, at offices of Messrs. Banner, accountants, Liverpool. Sols. Bateson. Robinson, and Morris, Liverpool SABBERTON, WILLIAM JAMES, box manufacturer, Banner-st, and Coleman-st, St. Luke's? Oct. 13, at three, at office of Sol. Bradley, Mark-la SALTER, WILLIAM, victualler, Rvde, Isle of Wight; Oct. 12, at eleven, at the Crown Hotel, Ryde. Sol. Urry, Ventnor, Isle of Wight SEARES, WILLIAM ROWLAND, ten merchant, Great Tower-st: Oct. 13, at two, at offices of Sols., Lewis, Munns, Nunn, and Longden, Old Jewry SPINKS, JAMES SAMUEL, beer retailer, Hart st, Covent-garden, and Cottenham-rd, Upper Holloway; Oct. 8, at one, at 5, Bowst. Covent-garden. Sol. Goatley TAYLOR, JAMES, manufacturer of opaque porcelain, Hanley: Oct. 13, at three, at the Queen's Hotel, Hanley. Sol. Litchfield, Newcastle, Staffordshire TAYLOR, THOMAS, shingler, Derby; Oct. 17, at three, at offices of Sol. Jaques, Birmingham THORNTON, SAMUEL, builder, Sedgley: Oct. 15, at eleven, at offices of Sol., Stokes, Dudley UWINS, JOHN POTTER, farmer, Cuckfield; Oct. 17, at eleven, at office of E. Waugh, High-st, Cuckfield WATKIN, JOHN, late beerhouse keeper, Swinton; Oct. 14, at two, at office of Sol, Walmsley, Manchester WHEELER, GEORGE, builder, West Cowes, Isle of Wight; Oct. 13, at twelve, at office of Sols., Hearn and Fardell, Newport, Isle of Wight WHITTINGHAM, JOSEPH, coach builder, Long-acre; Oct. 14, at three, at 23, Bedford-row. Sol, Wright WOOD, GEORGE, out of business, Leeds; Oct. 22, at eleven, at offices of Sols., Fawcett and Malcolm, Leeds Gazette Oct. 4. BARKER, FRANCIS, merchant, Liverpool; Oct. 18, at two, at the Law Association Rooms, 14, Cook-st, Liverpool. Sol., Elgill, Liverpool BARTLETT, JOSEPH, soap manufacturer, Warrington; Oct. 17, at eleven, at the County Court, Warrington. Sols., Davis and Brook BIRD, GEORGE, bootmaker, Birmingham; Oct. 21, at three, at office of Sol., Walford, Birmingham CAW, JAMES, iron safe manufacturer, Birmingham; Oct. 19, at three, at office of Sol., Jaques, Birmingham CRUICKSHANK, JOHN, dealer in horses, York; Oct. 25, at three, at office of Sol., Bent, Manchester DAVIES, DAVID, nurseryman, Bath; Oct. 13, at twelve, at office of Sols., Simmons and Clark, Bath DAVIES, GEORGE, saddler, Liverpool; Oct. 18, at three, at office of Sol., Harris, Liverpool DAVIES, WILLIAM, licensed victualler, Trealaw, near Dinas; Oct. 17, at one, at the New Inn Hotel, Pontypridd. Sol., Thomas, Pontypridd DEAN, JOHN MARCH, auctioneer, The Grove, Stratford, and Prospect-hill-pk, Walthamstow; Oct. 25, at two, at offices of Sol., Russell, Old Jewry-chmbs EDGINGTON, ELIZABETH SARAH, and EDGINGTON, WILLIAM, jewellers, Baker-st; Oct. 12, at two, at offices of Sol., Girdwood, Verulam bldgs, Gray's-inn EYRE, ABIJAH, tool maker, Euston-rd; Oct. 12, at three, at office of Sol., Marshall, Hatton-garden FOX, JOHN HENRY, cardmaker, Cleckheaton; Oct. 19, at three, at offices of Sols., Carr and Cadman, Cleckheaton GAUNT, ROBERT, and MELLOR, GEORGE, silk manufacturers, Leek; Oct. 15, at ten, at office of Sols., Challinor and Co., Leek GILBERT, GEORGE, and KERR, GEORGE, general merchants, Abchurch-la; Oct. 25, at two, at office of Kemp, Ford, and Co., 8, Walbrook, Cannon-st. Sol., Parker, St. Michael's-alley, - Cornhill HALL, HENRY WILLIAM, pawnbroker, High-st, Wandsworth; Oct. 14, at two, at offices of Honey, Humphrys, and Co., Kingst, Cheapside. Sol., Corsellis, Wandsworth HALL, JOHN, chemist, Gainsborough; Oct. 24, at eleven, at the County Court Office, Gainsborough. Sol., Burton, Gainsborough HARLAND, MATTHEW BRIGHAM, bricklayer, North Newbald; Oct. 18, at eleven, at the George Hotel, Whitefriargate, Kingston-upon-Hull HARRISON, ABRAHAM, innkeeper, Doncaster; Oct. 14, at two, at offices of Sols., Shirley and Atkinson, Doncaster HINDMARSH, WILLIAM JOHN, tailor, West Hartlepool; Oct. 17, at three, at office of Sol., Appleton, Leeds HOLLINGS, BENJAMIN, Woollen cloth manufacturer, Guiseley, and Leeds; Oct. 17, at three, at offices of Sol., Hutchinson, Bradford HOLLINGS, JAMES, woollen cloth manufacturer, Leeds; Oct. 17, at two, at offices of Sol., Hutchinson, Bradford HOWELL, BENJAMIN FRANCIS, grocer, Roath, near Cardiff; Oct. 13, at one, at offices of Wilson and Co., Bristol. Sol., Morgan JACKSON, CHARLES METCALF, and JACKSON, JOHN, linendrapers, Bradford; Oct. 14, at eleven, at offices of Sol., Lancaster, Bradford JEFFERY, JAMES, licensed victualler, Landport; Oct. 17, at eleven, at office of Sol., King, Portsea JOHNSON, JAMES, grocer, Cannock; Oct. 17, at two, at offices of Sol., Glover, Walsall KEEN, EDWARD. plumber, Royston ; Oct. 18, at three, at office of Sol., Marshall, Hatton-garden KITCHEN, WILLIAM, dyer, Leeds; Oct. 15, at twelve, at the Great Northern Railway Hotel, Wellington-st, Leeds. Sol., Spirett LARGE, EDWARD WILLIAM, builder, Cromwell-rd, Upper Hol loway; Oct. 14, at three, at offices of Sol., Ricketts, Frederickst, Gray's-inn-rd LUCAS, CHARLES, cooper, Cardiff; Oct. 14, at eleven, at effices of Sol., Waldron, Cardiff LOMAS, THOMAS PAUL, and LOMAS, HENRY EDWARD, stampers, Southwark-st, Southwark; Oct. 17, at two, at offices of Barnard, Clarke, McLean, and Co., 3, Lothbury. Sols., Linklater, Hackwood, and Addison, Walbrook MALIM, ALFRED, banker's clerk, Durnsford-lodge, Wandsworth; Oct. 26, at two, at offices of Pattison and Cobbold, New Bridgest. Sol., Watson, Basinghall-st MATHESON, THOMAS, hotel keeper, North Shields; Oct. 20, at two, at offices of Sol, Bousfield, Newcastle-upon-Tyne PAYNE, JOHN BELLAMY, machine maker, Chard, and Nottingham; Oct. 12, at one, at the George Hotel, Chard. Sols., Dommett and Canning PEARSON, WILLIAM, hatter, Wigan; Oct. 18, at half-past two, at office of Sol., France, Wigan PHILLIPS, EDMUND, shirt manufacturer, Manchester; Oct. 17, at three, at office of Sol., Heald, Manchester PILLEY, JOHN WESLEY, clerk, Aldermanbury Postern, and Nelson-ter, Stoke Newington; Oct. 20, at three, at office of Sol., Bateson, Guildhall-chmbs, Basinghall-st REEVES, WILLIAM. trainer of race horses, Epsom; Oct. 24, at Telen's SAV eleven, at oices of Sol, Fuilen, Cloisters, Temple; Oct. 22, BOROUGH of DOVOR, in the county of at SHEPHERD, JOSEPH, saddler, Bradford; Oct. 17, at eleven, at offices of Sol., Hill, Bradford STEVENS, JOHN, and STEVENS, WILLIAM TEMPLE, merchants, SYLVESTER, CHARLES WILLIAM, oriental stone cutter, City-rd; WILLIAMS, CHARLES, licensed victualler, Blue Anchor-rd, Ber- WYKES, JOSEPH, broker, Mincing-la, and King Edward's-rd, Hackney; Oct. 13, at three, at offices of Sol., Nairne, Crosby-sq Orders of Discharge. Gazette, Sept. 23. UNDER BANKRUPTCY ACT 1861. BURNESS, SAMUEL, shopman to a leather merchant, Lavender-rd, Battersea KING, ESTHER, washerwoman. Manchester LEIGHTON, CHARLES, formerly coal proprietor, Fenton, Longton, and Audley UNDER BANKRUPTCY ACT 1869. UNDER BANKRUPTCY ACT 1861. Dividends. BANKRUPTS' ESTATES. The Official Assignees and Trustees are given, to whom apply for the Dividends. UNDER BANKRUPTCY ACT 1861. BIRMINGHAM, Mayor.- NOTICE is HEREBY GIVEN, that the COURT of QUARTER SESSION of the Peace of and for the said Borough and the Liberties of the same will be holden before Sir WILLIAM HENRY BODKIN, Knight, Recorder of the said borough, at the SESSIONS HOUSE, of and in the said borough, an Monday, the 17th day of October next, at the hour of Ten o'clock in the forenoon, at which time and place all persons bound by recognizance or that have any other business to do at the said Session are hereby required to attend. Appeals will be first heard, and notice of every Appeal intended to be tried must be given to the Clerk of the Peace two clear days at least before the Session. Dovor, 29th June, 1870. LEDGER, Clerk of the Peace. the Supreme Courts of Canada, INVITES CORRESPON. DENCE with parties having business matters to attend to there. Reference, Messrs. KENNETH DOWIE, and Co., Liverpool. LAW PUPILS. A Barrister, who has, with almost uniform success, prepared upwards of eight hundred students for examination, many of whom obtained a prize, including one of Trinity Term 1869, the Clifford's Inn prizeman of last Hilary Term, and a certificate of merit of the past Term, RECEIVES PUPILS for their Intermediate or Final Examinations, to whom he devotes five hours daily. Fee moderate. - For particulars, or an interview, address "Mr. J.," Messrs. Stevens and Sons, Law Booksellers, 119, Chancery-lane, W.C.-N.B. Classes are forming, limited in number, for the ensuing Michaelmas, Hilary, and Easter Terms. LAW EXAMINATIONS.-Mr. H. WAKEHAM PURKIS'S Classes recommence MONDAY, the 3rd of OCTOBER.-1, Lincoln's-inn-fields, W.C. AW EXAMINATIONS.-A Gentleman at PREPARES, in chambers or through the post, for the INCORPORATED LAW SOCIETY, the BAR, and London LL.B. References to former pupils. Terms are reasonable, and may be dependent upon success.-Address "LL.B.," care of Messrs. Reeves and Turner, Law Booksellers, Chancery-lane, W.C. ATTORNEYS or ACCOUNTANTS requiring copies, extracts, or information from trust ceeds or other bankruptcy proceedings, wills, or any registered doen. ments, may advantageously communicate with "MENTOR,' 22, Gresham-street, London, E. Bennett, W. earthenware manufacturer, first, 14. Kinnear, Birmingham.-Chune, G. timber merchant, third, 4. 7-rths. Kinnear, Birmingham.-Collett, E. tailor, second, d. Kinnear, Birmingham.-Cooke, J. sen. farmer, first, 74d. Kinnear, Birmingham.-Farnsworth, C. farmer, first, 10s. 6. Jardine, Haverhill.Hager, J. saddler, first, 3d. Jardine, Haverhill.-Heuer, G., E., and F. butchers, first, 18. 04. Kinnear, Birmingham.-Hutchison, W. farmer, first, 14d. Kinnear, Birmingham.- Machin, W. merchant, first, 4s. Gl. Kinnear, Birmingham.-Meredith, J. lime first, 18. 6d. Kinnear, Birmingham.-Scott, W. S.. J., and M. corn dealers, first, 21. Kinnear, Birmingham.-Slack, M. and M. C. timber merchants, second, 0d. 43-64ths. wise.) Kinnear, Birmingham.-Slater, Ford, and Simpson, paraffin oil makers, first, 74d. Kinnear, Birmingham.-Talbot, J. baker, first, 103d. Jardine, Haverhill. hurner, first, 18. 334. Kinnear, Birmingham, rice, M. clothier, SOLICITORS BOOK-KEEPING.—An ex UNDER BANKRUPTCY ACT 1869. Ellison, W. W. jeweller, 7d. At office of Trust. J. Clabburn 22, London-st, Norwich.-Hutchings, J. builder, first and final, 28. 10. At office of Edmonds, Davis, and Co., accountants, 46, St. James's-st, Portsea-Langdon, T. A. victualler, 4. At office of Trust. W. R. Millar, 101, High-st, Southwark.-Legal, C. merchant, first, 6s. 8d. At office of Trust. H. Bolland, 10, South John-st, Liverpool.-Richardson, J, of Boston, 2s. At office of Sol. Dver, Boston.-Smith, Rev. P. clerk in holy orders, 48. 9. At offices of Trust. C. Other, jun., Swaledale and Wensleydale Bank, Richmond.-Toy, H. brassfounder, final, 3d. At office of Sol. BAYLEY.-On the 3rd inst at Aldershot, the wife of W. H. Bayley, solicitor, of a son. BROUGH. On the 28th ult., at 8, Park-terrace, Highbury, the wife of Jas. Cornelius Brough, barrister-at-law, of a son. COWELL. On the 7th Aug., at Calcutta, the wife of Herbert Cowell, Esq., barrister-at-law, of a son. COZENS-HARDY.-On the 4th ult., at 48, Clarendon-road, Nottinghill, the wife of Herbert H. Cozens-Hardy, barrister-at-law, of a daughter. MEADOWS.-On the 28th ult., at Allerton house, Green - lanes, Hornsey, the wife of John Osmond Meadows, solicitor, of a daughter. MARRIAGES. GAWTRESS-BROUGHTON.-On the 28th ult., at Askern Church, Henry Gawtress, of the Middle Temple, barrister-at-law, to Mary, youngest daughter of Godfrey Broughton, of Askern, near Doncaster. STEBBING-PIDGEON.-On the 1st inst., at St. Peter's, Kensingtonpark, William Stebbing, Esq., barrister-at-law, Fellow of Worcester College, Oxford, to Anne Pinckard, youngest daughter of J. S. Pidgeon, Esq., of Pembridge-villas, Bayswater. STRICKLAND-SHACKELFORD.-On the 4th inst., at Great Houghton, Northamptonshire, Sefton West Strickland, Esq., of Lincoln's-inn, barrister-at-law, to Maud Gertrude Shuckburgh, youngest daughter of George Shackelford, Esq., of Husband's Bosworth, Leicestershire. DEATHS. FREEMAN.-On the 4th inst., at Gaines, Herefordshire, John Freeman, Esq., Chairman of Quarter Sessions for the county of Hereford. GRIFFITHS.-On the 23rd ult., at Lindfield, aged 40, William Henry Griffiths, Esq., M.A., of Worcester College, Oxford, and Deputy Lieut. for the county of Middlesex. NOLAN.-On the 4th inst., at 34, Brunswick-square, aged 25 Edward Nolan, of St. John's College, Oxford, and student of the Inner Temple. WILTON.-On the 28th ult., at Cotswold Cottage, Wood-green, N., aged 27, David Wilton,, the faithful and attached head clerk of Watkin Williams, Esq., M.P., barrister-at-law. perienced ACCOUNTANT undertakes the charge of Solicitors' Books by double entry (Kain's system or otherTerms very moderate.-Apply to A. B., Messrs. Parsons and Best, 16, Lime-street, E.C. AN ENGLISH SOLICITOR about to visit the Colonies of Australia and New Zealand, is PREPARED to TRANSACT LEGAL BUSINESS there. -Apply to "A. B.," 35, John-street, Bedford-row. A SOLICITOR, who is a Clifford's-inn Prizeman, and who also obtained the First Honours at his Intermediate Examination, PREPARES Gentlemen for the Law Examinations, either through the post or in classes. Terms moderate.-Address "TUTOR" (No. 1436), 10, Welling ton-street, Strand, London, WC. TOPARLIAMENTARY AGENTS and Orders for the ensuing Session, Draft Reference Books and Forms, and every requisite for the use of Agents, &c., promoting private bills. Books of reference copied, litho graphed, or printed with the greatest expedition.-WATER, Low and SONS, 49, Parliament-street, and 66, London-wall London. LONDON GAZETTE (published by authority) and LONDON and COUNTRY ADVERTISEMENT OFFICE No. 117, CHANCERY-LANE, FLEET-STREET. ENRY GREEN (many years with the late the attention of the Legal Profession to the advantages of his long experience of upwards of twenty-five years, in the specia insertion of all pro formá notices, &c., and hereby solicits their continued support.-N.B. One copy of advertisement only required, and the strictest care and promptitude assured. File of London Gazette kept. LA AW FORMS and PRECEDENTS. Carefully prepared and APPROVED FORMS of every description, as used in the Chancery, Common Law, Probate, Bankruptcy, and other Courts and Offices; Genera! Forms, Notices, Letters, &c., &c., in great variety; kept in stock and supplied by EVISON & BRIDGE, (Successors to J. SULLIVAN,) LAW STATIONERS, PRINTERS, &C, 22 & 31, CHANCERY-LANE, W.C. Catalogues forwarded Post Free. TITLE ASSURANCE.-Doubtful and Defective Titles Assured and rendered Marketable and Mortgageable by the LAW PROPERTY and LIFE ASSURANCE SOCIETY, 30, Essex-street, Strand. For information, forms and specimens of the various kind of defective Titles already assured in this office, apply to EDWARD S. BARNES, Secretary. 68, CHANCERY-LANE, LONDON. CHAIRMAN.-Sir W. J. Alexander, Bart., Q.C. DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN.-Alfred H. Shadwell, Esq. Reversions and Life Interests purchased. Immediate and Deferred Annuities granted in exchange for Reversionary and Contingent Interests. Loans may also be obtained on the security of Reversions. Annuities, Immediate, Deferred, and Contingent, and also Endowments, granted on favourable terms. Prospectuses and Forms of Proposal, and all further information, may be had at the office. C. B. CLABON, Sec Divorce-Settlement-Covenant by petitioner's father to pay an income to the respondent SYKES v. SYKES AND SMITH COURT OF PROBATE. In the Goods of J. E. LOUGHLIN- COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH. Contract-Sale of produce to be shipped from abroad- LATTER. WHITE Composition deed-Right to composition of creditor who has brought an action and recovered judgment-Debtor and creditor...... LEADING ARTICLES, SUMMARIES, 239 242 Law and the Lawyers. It is very much to be regretted that by reason 240 of ill-health the services of Mr. MACNAMARA should be lost to the public. He has however, in addition to resigning his appointment as police magistrate, vacated the Recordership of Reading. One of the Recorders on the Home Circuit, Mr. BUSHBY, has been created a Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate for Worshipstreet. Mr. BUSHBY is best known as the author of an unpretending, but very excellent work on the Practice of Elections, which reached a third 415 415 CORRESPONDENCE, &c. TO CORRESPONDENTS 415 416 edition in 1868. THE fact appears to be dawning upon the Profession all the world over, that the days of very 419 big fees for legal work are gone by; and the difficulty now appears to be to persuade those who seek to live by it that they can do so decently. We in England have our experiences and our doubts, but it may delight the heart of the briefless to hear that at the Antipodes all who are disposed to work may do so profitably. After 420 noticing many complaints which it deprecates, the Australian Jurist says, "To those who are willing to work diligently and wait patiently, there need be no care for the present nor fear for the future. There is work enough and to spare now, and in proportion to the growth of the colony grist will come to the mill. The days of rapid and precarious fortunes are gone by, we admit, but the days of settled and secure incomes are arriving, if they be not already come. The workers of the legal hive will, as we firmly believe, ever find here a fitting reward for their toil, whatever may be the 422 case with the drones." 422 SOLICITORS' JOURNAL: Notes of New Decisions Heirs-at-Law and Next of Kin. Appointments under the Joint-Stock Winding-up Acts 421 Creditors under Estates in Chancery Creditors under 22 & 23 Vict. c. 35 421 421 Unclaimed Stock and Dividends in the Bank of England THE BENCH AND THE BAR 421 421 MAGISTRATE AND PARISH LAWYER: Borough Quarter Sessions Judges' Chambers-Bail in criminal cases.. 421 421 Hammersmith Police Court-The ground story defined.. 421 JOINT-STOCK COMPANIES' LAW JOURNAL: Notes of New Decisions Answers to the Final Examination Questions MERCANTILE LAW: Notes of New Decisions MARITIME LAW: Notes of New Decisions 423 423 424 424 424 425 425 425 THE 12th section of the Married Women's Property Act is of so extraordinary a character, that we think it deserves particular attention. It says: "A husband shall not by reason of any marriage, which shall take place after this Act 424 has come into operation be liable for the debts of his wife contracted before marriage, but the wife shall be liable to be sued for, and any property belonging to her for her separate use shall be liable to satisfy such debts as if she had continued unmarried." We commend this section to the careful attention of dishonestly disposed ladies possessed of personal property who are contemplating marriage. A lady so situated 425 has only to obtain credit from any or every one 426 who will trust her, and then marry. The common law still carries the personalty to her husband, and the section in question relieves him from liabliity to her debts. True it is she may be sued, and if she has separate property it is answerable. In the absence of such separate property, the creditors' remedies would be valueless, at all events unless the wife should survive. The origin of the blunder is obvious; the bill as originally drawn placed a married woman in the same position as a feme sole for all the purposes of property, and with such a scheme the 12th section would have been consistent; when, however, the rule of the common law 428 426 TO READERS. In future the LAW TIMES will be transmissible by post, without reference to weight or size, by a halfpenny stamp on a wrapper, which may be procured at all post offices. The LAW TIMES will be sent by post direct from the office, post free, on payment of 27s. for six months IN ADVANCE. As accounts cannot be kept, prepayment is a necessary condition of this arrangement. VOL. XLIX.-No. 1437. was retained, such a provision became not only absurd but iniquitous. The provision really required is, that a husband should be liable for his wife's debts contracted before marriage, to the extent, and only to the extent, of her assets vested in him by the marriage, in the same way as he would be bound to satisfy in administration her debts contracted before marriage, out of any choses in action belonging to her. IF WE had but a single event to speak of in connection with the personnel of the Bar as it was last term, and as it will be next, we should feel justified in making it subject of remark. But, unfortunately, there has been another agent at work besides promotion. Death has removed, with a most impartial hand, young men rather than their elders, no less than four members of the Junior Bar having been cut off in the outset of their career. The one remarkable fact, however, will be the absence of Mr. MELLISH. Few who were not constantly in attendance on the sittings of the courts can understand the magnitude of the vacuum which has been caused in the ranks of the Common Law working Bar by his elevation to the Equity bench. In time to come, the regulation period having elapsed when posterity can decently award distinction, his magnificent ability will probably be recognised in a manner which we can hardly appreciate, and it is, of course, impossible now to conjecture to what extent he will add as a Judge to the remarkable monument to his skill and learning which he raised while at the Bar. He will be missed in all the courts of appeal. Each separate common law court will feel sensibly that its greatest practitioner is gone, whilst the equity courts will see once more on the Bench the legal genius and power of intellect which were by no means strange to their Bars. Of the lesser lights, as we have said, four have been too soon extinguished by death. will name them all-Mr. BACON, a son of the VICE-CHANCHELLOR, Mr. BUCHANAN, Mr. DUCKWORTH, and Mr. BUTLER RIGBY. The latter name was familiar to the public; having few educational advantages, Mr. RIGBY nevertheless, by industry and perseverance, succeeded in obtaining a very fair share of court practice, and his absence will not be unobserved in Westminster-hall. If Mr. MACNAMARA should by ill health be precluded from practising, which in the interest of the Profession we sincerely hope will not be the case, the courts will lose a familiar face, and the assistance of high legal attainments. The police appointments as they now stand, will not affect the condition of the working Bar. MR. BRUCE AND LEGISLATION. We THE newspapers must always have their idols and their scapegoats. On the one they lavish all their epithets of adulation, on the other they bestow their equally copious vocabulary of abuse. Partisans cannot always be praising, for readers would grumble; they must mingle blame with praise to preserve an appearance, at least, of independence and impartiality so the practice is to spot one or two officials upon whom individually to shower the needful quantity of fault-finding. The present scapegoats of the newspapers are two lawyers (Mr. BRUCE and Mr. AYRTON). The former is more leniently treated by journalism than the latter, but he is most unjustly assailed nevertheles. Fault is found with him, not only for what he does, but for what he does not. In the eyes of some journalists he is never right, and the most absurdly contradictory charges are preferred against him day after day in the same columns. Justly provoked by these attacks, Mr. BRUCE has recently stood upon his defence and answered his detractors with much vigour. The principal complaint against him was of failure in the accomplishment of divers promises of legislation made at the beginning of the last session. But his answer is that the fault lay with the_Parliament. The Irish Land Bill and the Education Bill filled all minds and occupied all tongues, and there was no chance of procuring a fair hearing for measures that provoked neither political nor religious differences. The answer is conclusive. Mr. BRUCE erred, perhaps, in promising so much with such a prospect before him, and we think that he errs still, in pledging himself to so much for next session, and we should find no fault with him if one-half of it should fail to become law. He promises measures for regulating trades unions, for reforming the licensing system, for better dealing with habitual criminals, and finally for creating a scheme of municipal government for the metropolis. We cordially accept his statement that was impossible to have dealt with these in the last session; but we cannot share his hope that he will be enabled to dispose of them in the next. None of them are measures that enlist party feeling. They will be supported and opposed from both sides in both Houses. The Ministry can neither command nor even ask their own majority to give a party vote on any division upon them. They vitally affect so many interests that they will assuredly meet with opposition in many forms, open and concealed. Members will be governed not so much by their own opinions as by the pressure put upon them by the rival interests among their costituents, which will certainly not spare threats. Take the Licensing Bill for instance. Let it wear what form it will, what a hornet's nest will it not certainly bring about the ears of the member who propounds it. If it is restrictive, the brewer and the publican will combine to defeat it, and if the publicans pull together no borough member, at least, can refuse his vote to them without the certain loss of his seat at the next election. If it relaxes the existing law, the organisations of the temperance people will be no less loud in their reproaches, and so the unfortunate members, placed between two fires, will be glad of any contrivance to shelve a measure that puts them in such peril. It will be scarcely less so with the Trades' Unions. It may be safely predicted that no measure will satisfy both masters and men. No concession which the latter would value is likely to be otherwise than distasteful to the former; and here again Mr. BRUCE will have to contend with rival forces, and members will be compelled to choose which they will serve. The Metropolis Incorporation Scheme will be opposed by a multitude of parochial interests, petty in themselves, but influential in elections and powerful in combination. With measures such as these, the old game is sure to be played by their opponents. They will profess a desire for reform, perhaps, almost a zeal for it, but they will object to the particular measure of reform. They will not fight the principle, but they will attack every clause, and destroy the Bill in detail. Mr. BRUCE would, we think, consult his own reputation by limiting his efforts to two of the reforms he has promised, and, as being of primary importance, these should be the Licensing System and the Trades Unions. They will be quite as much as he will be enabled to carry, and they will require all his attention, for the battle will be a fierce one upon both. And these will be sufficient for his reputation. If Mr. BRUCE's new laws last session were few, his administation of the Home Office has been successful, the complaints of the newspapers notwithstanding; his industry is unwearied; he is patient to hear and consider all complaints, and he was always ready to answer in Parliament-and his answers were good and sufficient-any of the questions, some sensible, many foolish, put to him by members. Above all, though sorely tried, his temper never failed him. appears to me pretty clear that this proviso applies only to the breach of an affirmative covenant. The covenant in question is a negative covenant, and, therefore, is not brought within the operation of the proviso."... The learned Baron then concurred with the rest of the court in deciding the case in favour of the defendants upon other and independent grounds. With very great respect we differ toto cælo from the opinion thus expressed. It does appear to us that language more apt or more appropriate to meet the case of breach of any of the lessee's covenants, whether of an affirmative or negative character, could not have been used. We apprehend that the word "observance" was intended to apply, and does apply, to the breach of negative covenants, and that it was inserted in order to avoid any objection that the word "performance" would only be applicable to affirmative covenants, an idea which, perhaps, derives some countenance from the case of Doe d. Abdy v. Stevens, 3 B. & Ad. 299, where a proviso for re-entry if the lessee "shall do or cause to be done any act, matter, or thing contrary to and in breach of any of the covenants," was held not to apply to a breach of the covenant to repair, the terms of the proviso applying strictly to misfeasance, not to mere non-feasance. There is, however, a clear distinction between performance of a covenant and performance of an act covenanted for; the antithesis in the former case being between performance and breach (whether by omission or commission) of the covenants. However this may be, and whatever may be the correct view, if the word "observance" had been omitted, the insertion of that word removes, to our minds, all doubt. "Observance and performance" is merely a roundabout Latinism, which has its full equivalent in the Saxon "keeping" of a covenant, and a covenant is either kept or broken. We really think it would be perverting the language of an instrument, in order to defeat its plain intention, if judicial decision should render it necessary to specify in so many words that negative, as well as positive or affirmative, covenants, are to be deemed covenants within the scope of the condition of re-entry, and that it would be going far beyond any fair application of the rule which very properly requires that a plaintiff seeking to take advantage of a condition of re-entry should show clearly that the very event provided for has occurred, or that, as Lord Campbell has expressed it, "the bird has been hit in the eye." THE BABY FARMING CASE. RE-ENTRY ON NON-OBSERVANCE OR alleged against her. But she was actually ar- MARGARET WATERS has been hung. The day before her execution she wrote a minute and most painful narrative of the alleged crime, which corresponded precisely with her elaborate statement to Dr. EDMUNDS, read by him to the Dialectical Society. According to this confession, whose truth nobody questions, though guilty of much that was wicked and detestable, she was not guilty of murder. True that her offence was a grievous one, and many will think that she deserved death for what she undoubtedly did. But, looked at from a lawyer's point of view, and not upon Lynch law principles, her crime was not murder, but manslaughter, and her punishment should have been penal servitude, and not the drop. The public, and probably the jury, tried her with reference to all that was raigned for the murder of one child only. A lawyer learns to limit his judgment to the facts of the one case under investigation, without perA DOUBT which was extrajudicially expressed mitting it to be biassed by other cases of which by Baron Channell, in the recent case of West v. he has heard or read. The untrained mind cannot Dobb, 23 L. T. Rep. N. S. 76, decided in the do this, and criminals are continually convicted Exchequer Chamber, and which was not dis- and punished for something other than that for countenanced by the other members of the which they were indicted. Who can doubt that if court, will, if it be well founded, deprive in- no other child than " Baby CowEN" had been imnumerable landlords of remedies for which we ported into the case; if the jury had never heard do not hesitate to say they intended to stipulate, of other alleged child murders, that upon the and render necessary an alteration of the lan- merits of that case alone, the woman never guage in which conditions of re-entry are gene- would have been convicted of murder, or, if rally framed. In the above-mentioned case, the convicted, permitted by public opinion to be left plaintiff in ejectment had demised premises to for execution? It was, to say the least of it, lessees for fourteen years, and the lease con- extremely questionable whether the child died tained a covenant by the lessees that they by any act of hers; at all events, the connection would not assign or part with the possession between her treatment and the death was so without the written consent of the lessor. problematical, that no jury, judge, nor secretary There was also a clause of re-entry in case the would have sent the prisoner to death on such lessees "should fail in the observance or per- insufficient and shaky evidence of it, but for formance of any or either of the covenants." the prejudice created by her calling. She was Baron Channell, in his judgment, said "it'in very truth convicted, and hung for baby farming generally, and not for killing the particular child; and the public feeling that demanded a victim was stirred, not by the murder of the one child, but by the system of which that child's death was supposed to be an illustration. Perhaps the public feeling was right in this, and that for her whole conduct MARGARET WATERS deserved her fate. But lawyers do not try and hang for general mis. conduct, even though hanging be moraly deserved; they require a conviction to be upon satisfactory evidence, proving a particular charge. Thus viewed, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that the hanging of WATERS for the murder of baby CowEN was legally wrong, though morally right. THE CUSTOMS CONSOLIDATION ACTSUPPLIES TO BELLIGERENTS. COUNT BERNSTORFF, in his elaborate remarks on this subject, addressed to the English Government, has been somewhat dictatorial. It appears that Lord GRANVILLE, in his letter of the 13th Sept. to the Prussian minister, declared that "the traffic which had been carried on was quite legitimate, and that the Custom House authori ties had no power to stop it." To this the Count replied that there is a legal means of putting a stop to the conveyance of arms and ammuni tion, and referred to the 150th section of the Customs' Consolidation Act 1853 (16 & 17 Vict. c. 107), which enacts that "the following may, by proclamation or order in council, be prohibited either to be exported or carried coastwise: Arms, ammunition, and gunpowder, military and naval stores, provisions or any sort of victual which may be used as food by man, and if any goods so prohibited shall be exported from the United Kingdom, or carried coastwise, or be water-borne, to be so exported or carried, they shall be forfeited." He then alludes to the 125th section of the same statute, which empowers the Customs authorities to demand the destination of the vessel, and to the 5th section of 17 & 18 Vict. c. 122, "On the entry of arms and ammunition of war, whether for home use, exportation, or transit, the number of articles of each description as denominated in Table A (ammunition and victuals) shall be stated in the import, export, or transit entry, as the case may be," alleging that we have the power, but not the intention, of prohibiting supplies to belligerents. It is material to decide whether the statutes cited by the Count give such authority as he desires the Executive to exercise. The intention of Parliament in enacting sect. 150, was evidently to guard against the exportation of ammunition and victuals at those times when we ourselves are in special need of them; the statute has no bearing whatever on the law relating to contraband of war, and therefore cannot in any way assist the Government in their deliberations as to the proper course of action in this matter. It is important, in considering this section of the Act of Parliament, to notice the words "Any articles which Her Majesty shall judge of being converted into, or made useful in increasing the quantity of military and naval stores, provisions, &c., which may be used as food for man," which at once show the reason of inserting the section, namely, to protect our own home produce; and, further, the sections immediately preceding it all relate to customs exportation, and no reference whatever is made to belligerent powers. The section should be read ejusdem generis, as providing for the internal arrangement of our excise, and guarding against smuggling, and providing beneficial rules for the coasting trade. We have before stated in our remarks on "Supplies to Belligerents," that the Government had not thought fit to extend their powers of restraint on exportation, and, by thus remaining inactive, they have in a certain degree legalised the sending of supplies to belligerents, and it cannot for one moment be imagined that the ATTORNEY-GENERAL, and other law officers of the Crown, when discussing the Enlistment Bill last session, and the materiality of providing a prohibitory section, would have overlooked sect. 150, had it in any way applied to the subject now under consideration by the Powers. It is certain that even had the Executive the right to advise her Majesty to put stop to supply of contraband of war by order in council, we should at once be violating our policy as neutrals, for, when the Neutrality Act was under debate, an amendment was proposed with the view of prohibiting the export of arms and warlike stores for the use of belligerents, but the amendment was rejected, and thus the Legislature decided that the repression of the traffic should not be undertaken. It was then supposed that Prussia wanted ammunition, and France stood more particularly in need of coal. but France had not at that time proved herself to be so utterly incapable, and no suggestion was made that the rejection of such a clause would operate in favour of France. The powers were then untried. Now the result is known; and the German arms having met with such success, it would be more than violation of neutrality, a violation of all right, to alter our policy by interference in the matter. Count BERNSTORFF alleges in his despatch that we have before interfered, during the "Danish-German complications,' 2nd June 1818, when the commissioners of customs were empowered in a Treasury minute to prevent exportation to the belligerents. We have no recollection of such a precedent, and our opinion is indorsed by the speech of the ATTORNEYGENERAL on the Enlistment Bill. The Government have done all that is in their power, under existing enactments, to do; they have advised HER MAJESTY to issue a proclamation, warning her subjects to desist from exportation of contraband of war, and the consequence of disobedience to these injunctions of the QUEEN is pointed out to be a liability to hostile capture, and further that those who so supply contraband do so at their own risk. THE OPERATION OF USAGE UPON IN the judgment delivered in the case of Mollett and others v. Robinson, 23 L. T. Rep. N. S. 185, C. P., the relation between principals and their brokers was thus laid down by Chief Justice Bovill. "The general rule of law is, that persons who engage a broker to transact business for them in a general market, authorise him to do so according to the general and known usages and customs of that market, although they themselves may not be aware of them; and if the business is transacted in the ordinary and usual course, the principals are bound by such usages and customs whether they had actual knowledge of them or not." This is an important principle, and if it were universally assented to would not require comment. But in that very case of Mollett v. Robinson, the court was divided in opinion, and it will be advisable therefore to see the exact position of the question as regards reason and authority. Mr. Justice Willes delivered, as is his wont, a lucid judgment in opposition to the view taken by the Chief Justice. Before referring to the particular facts of the case, we will look at the general principles which the dissenting pusine Judges expressed. They say "It is an elementary proposition that a custom of trade may control the performance of a contract, but cannot change its intrinsic character." And further, in elaboration, "it may regulate, as extrinsic, what is done in the market, where the contract does not provide otherwise. It cannot overrule what is agreed upon between the parties, whether intrinsic or extrinsic." Now before going further it will be seen that there is a vast difference between saying that whatever a particular contract may be between a broker and his principal, yet, if the former transact his business according to "known usages," which, however, may be unknown to the principal, the latter is bound, and saying, on the other hand, that customs and usages may govern and regulate a contract. How far they are to prevail is stated by Mr. Justice Willes, namely, in matters of detail. "The agent," he says, "may perform the business he is engaged for according to the usages of the market in matters of detail, although the principal be unaware of such usage ;" and his reason is perfectly sound"because every authority to do a thing not specifying the way implies an authority to do it in a reasonable way, which the usual prima facie way is." To continue the reasoning of the learned Judge would necessitate the consideration of the facts of the case, which we wish to postpone whilst we consider the position in which a principal may place himself by giving instructions to a general broker or agent. This was raised in the case of Baines v. Ewing, L. Rep. 1 Ex. 320; 14 L. T. Rep. N. S. 733, where the defendant authorised an insurance broker at Liverpool to underwrite policies of marine insurance in his name and on his behalf, the risk not to exceed 1007. by any one vessel. Disregarding this limit, the broker underwrote a policy for 150%. The plaintiff, for whom the policy was underwritten, had no notice of the limited nature of the broker's authority, but he was aware that contracts of this nature entered into at Liverpool were, as a general rule, controlled within a certain limit known as between broker and principal, but undisclosed to third parties. But it was relied upon by the plaintiff that in the case of a general agent private instructions to the broker could not affect third persons. This view did not prevail. The directions to the broker in that case were precise, being in the following terms:-"I hereby authorise you, in my name and on my behalf, to underwrite policies of insurance against marine risks, not exceeding 100% by any one vessel." Now, in the first place, the absurdity of holding a principal liable to an unlimited extent on an authority to a broker was fully recognised, and the knowledge in the Liverpool market respecting the limit in the generality of cases was only looked upon as further confirming the opinion that contracts must be governed by the private instructions. A passage from Story on Agency was discussed (4th edit. s. 131), where it is said that if factors who possess a general authority to sell violate their private instructions, the principal is none the less bound. Mr. Baron Bramwell took direct exception to that doctrine, remarking that the case which the learned author refers to by no means supports the proposition laid down. He added, "I doubt exceedingly whether the principal of a factor would be liable in a case where the factor sold in spite of a particular authority to sell at a particular price." So far authority is strongly in favour of giving effect to private instructions, but there is an obvious distinction between Baines v. Ewing and Mollett v. Robinson, which we will point out by referring to the facts of the latter. The custom set up had reference to the London tallow market, the plaintiffs being tallow brokers in London, and the defendant a merchant at Liverpool. The plaintiffs had on several occasions been employed by the defendant, and on the 2nd April 1869 the defendant gave the plaintiffs an order to buy 50 tons of tallow for him, and on the 28th of the same month he gave a further order for 200 tons for the next settling day, and desired the plaintiffs to book them to him. The plaintiffs, as brokers, according to custom, bought an aggregate quantity of tallow for their different principals, in each case giving their names as the buyers, and they sent bought notes to the defendant. The person of whom they had purchased a quantity for the defendant failed in consequence of a fall in the market, and no tallow was delivered; but the plaintiffs asked the defendant to pay them the difference in the price of the tallow which he had commissioned them to buy. Learning, then, for the first time what had been done, he declined, and the plaintiffs sold out of the aggregate amount of tallow delivered so much as the defendant had ordered, and brought their action to recover the difference of value. Now clearly, outside the custom, no remedy at all existed, and the real question was, whether the usage of the market could be imported into and made part of the contract between the plaintiffs and the defendant. The Lord Chief Justice and Mr. Justice Montague Smith were of opinion that the custom and usage which had been proved must be imported into and considered part of the transaction. Then, dealing with the want of knowledge on the part of the defendaut, they say, “and although the defendant was not aware of it, yet, having employed the plaintiffs to transact the business for him in the London tallow market, he is equally bound by the usage of such market as if he were acquainted with it." To discover how far we can approve of such a doctrine, we must find out the consequences which must follow its general adoption. One consequence is plainly pointed out by the court which sanctions the principle, namely, that it may be in the power of any broker in the London tallow market to deprive his principal buyer of a seller against whom he might proceed for breach of contract We do not say that this might not be perfectly reasonable if the custom which regulates the transaction is known to all parties, and we can quite agree that, to use the words of the Chief Justice, if the defendant had known the usage, "and with that knowledge had instructed the plaintiff to purchase tallow for him, we cannot doubt that he would have been bound to make good to the plaintiffs the loss arising from his refusal to accept the tallow." The converse of this proposition, however, is not by any means well supported in the judgment referred to, but there is apparent an anxiety to back up the conclusion by reference to letters written by the plaintiffs to the defendant, and the bought note, in which they treat themselves as principals, and reference is made to Humfrey v. Dale, 7 E. & B. 266, in which brokers were held liable as principals. There, however, the usage set up was to the effect that whenever a broker purchased without disclosing the name of his principal, he was liable to be looked to as the purchaser. But it was not sought by evidence of the usage to contradict the written evidence of the contract; the usage and the contract were held quite consistent. But this cannot be said in the case of Mollett v. Robinson. The plaintiffs sought to convert their character from that of brokers into that of principal sellers. Mr. Justice Willes distinctly said, "No usage unknown to the principal can justify a broker in converting himself into a principal seller." Humfrey v. Dale does not in any way conflict with this terse and sensible doctrine, for by the terms of the contract in that case, as we have already said, both parties were aware of the position in which they stood, apart from any usage at all. The foundation of all dealings with brokers is, in our opinion, in accordance with the view confining them to their capacity as such, and the reasoning of Mr. Justice Willes strikes us as conclusive. "A broker," he says, "is entitled to indemnity only for what he does within the limits of his authority. Here his authority was to buy as broker for his principal, not to sell to him. If the sale had been consummated in the course insisted upon by the broker, the principal would have obtained goods and paid for them; that is, would have bought them. Of whom? of his own broker, and no one else. That ought not to be, without the knowledge and consent of the principal." The court being equally divided, the plaintiffs retained the verdict directed in their favour by the Lord Chief Justice. We cannot help regarding the result as a misfortune, looking at it not only as a matter of abstract justice but of legal principle. FORENSIC ORATORY IN ENGLAND. We hear occasionally in these days, compliments bestowed upon counsel by Judges. A very eminent Judge not long ago said of an eminent advocate-eminent, that is, according to the standard of our time—that he had made a speech which had never been excelled in Westminster-hall; and again, on a certain election inquiry, an astute Judge observed of the argumentative advocacy of the leader for the petitioners, that it was worthy of the best days of the Bar. So far so good. But do these compliments signify anything? Do they convey to us the certain impression that there are now amongst us advocates who could rival ERSKINE or SHERIDAN if they had but the opportunity? Do we believe this of any of our counsel? Do we, to come to our own day, honestly think that we have a BERRYER or a FAVRE among us? It is difficult to follow out this subject without making some personal observations. But whatever value our paper may lose by the omission, such observations most certainly must be omitted. We must take the Bar as a class, and judge it by its general operations and their effect. And to begin with, we do not think it will be denied that there is very little genuine eloquence, genuine forensic oratory, to be found in the ranks of our profession. The common explanation of this admitted fact is that the causes in which English barristers are engaged in these times are so thoroughly mercantile, so invariably squabbles between individuals relating to credit or reputation, or mere matters of account, that there is no longer any school for oratory, no longer any occasion for it. Our every-day experience proves this. Our causes célèbres are but very poor substitutes for political trials of the kind in which ERSKINE distinguished himself. We have not had orally great case since EDWIN JAMES TOP which seemed all the hi minence m |