had been long acquainted, and were, at the date of the murder, on intimate terms. M'Lachlan was also in the habit of visiting M'Pherson. The old man denied having any acquaintance with M'Lachlan, and, indeed, having only seen her once in the twelve months previous. On the night previous to the murder, it was proved that M'Lachlan had left her own house, in the Broomielaw, between 9 and 10 o'clock at night, accompanied by another woman, and that they walked together to the Gushet-house, and there parted-that previous to her leaving her own house, she stated her intention of visiting M'Pherson; but she was not traced nearer to Sandyford Place that night than the Gushet-house, which is a considerable distance from it. It was proved that she was not in her own house on the night of Friday, and only returned on Saturday morning, between 9 and 10 o'clock. murder? It may with the circumstances, we grant, establish a strong presumption of guilt, but it can go no farther. But what will be said to the mere possession, when it is remembered what we have specially noted before, that there was no evidence to prove that the prisoner was near Sandyford Place on the night of the murder? In the absence of such an important piece of evidence, scope was left for the supposition that the prisoner might have got these articles from some person or other privy to the murder, and who wished, it may be, to screen himself or herself from detection, and to make the prisoner the scape-goat. At all events there were sufficient causes for doubt and hesitation, in coming to the unanimous conclusion the jury did; and the unseemly haste with which it was arrived at, in a case where the life of a human being was involved, cannot fail to lead to one of two inferences: either their minds were previously made up as to the guilt of the prisoner, or that they acted under some exciting cause, by which their memories were confused and their judgments overborne It appears to us, strong as may be the presumption against the prisoner, that the correct verdict should have been one of "Not proven." Such are the main facts of this atrocious murder, which were proved to the jury, and on which, after twenty minutes' consultation, they found her unanimously guilty. The panel gave in a special written defence, in which, in addition to the plea of not guilty, she "pleaded that the murder was committed by James Fleming, residing with John Fleming, accountant, in or near Sandyford Place, Glasgow." It will be seen that the evidence against the accused was wholly circumstantial-she was not seen In the preceding remarks we have endeavoured t near Sandyford Place on Friday night, nor on Saturday view the evidence in the case from the jury-box, and t morning-there was nothing to connect her with the look at it also from the point of view which the Advocate murder but the possession of the silver plate, and certain Depute put it to the jury, and that was not whethe articles of wearing apparel said to have been the pro- any other person was guilty, either alone, or with th perty of the murdered woman; and the question which prisoner, but whether or not she was guilty. Ou the jury had to solve was, were these circumstances so readers are now aware that the public excitement on th pregnant and conclusive, that it excluded every other verdict and conviction becoming known, aided by th theory than the one that the prisoner alone could have prisoner's statement, was strong and wide spread; an committed the murder? For unless the circumstances yielding to public opinion, the Home Secretary issued proved against the prisoner came up to that, the verdict special commission to Mr George Young, advocate, of guilty was unwarranted, however strong the suspicious make farther inquiries to test the truth of that stat and presumptions against her may have been. The ment. This commission has since been executed, a motive attributed to the prisoner was, the poverty of her the farther proof reported to the Home Secretary, w circumstances. But opposed to that, was the long and has seen it right to advice the Crown to grant a respi intimate relation which existed between the women. Is in favour of the prisoner. Whether she is to it conceivable that any woman in her sound senses could, pardoned, or her sentence commuted, has not yet be with deliberation, and "malice aforethought," fero- made public. Besides the unexplained mystery of ma ciously murder her intimate friend, for the purpose of circumstances of this case, the extraordinary stateme obtaining possession of a few pounds, and some articles read for the prisoner after the verdict, and before p of dress? However clumsily gone about, the distribu-nouncing sentence, is, we believe, unprecedented in crin tion of the clothing, and the pawning of the plate, were done coolly and deliberately, and the person who could do this, so soon after the perpetration of such an atrocious crime, it is not likely to have escaped her that detection must inevitably have followed. If she committed the murder, was she also guilty of the theft, or was she only guilty of the lesser crime? But is the mere possession of the plate and clothing, and even the pawning and distributing, of themselves, assuming their identity to have been proved, sufficient to bring home to the possessor the crime of murder? The recent possession of stolen property, without any plausible account of how it came into the holder's possession, is admitted to be, nine cases out of ten, strong evidence against the oner. But are we to carry that presumption so far o make the unexplained possession of property, said ave been in the house when the crime was committed, trongly presumptive as to infer the capital crime of nal trials in Scotland. That extraordinary stateme purports to give a minute and detailed narrative of whole transactions which took place in the house Sandyford during the night of Friday and morning Saturday. The prisoner therein admitted that she v in the house that night, and she repeats with gr elaboration, and what has the appearance of great sk but which may only be the simplicity of truth, what pleaded in defence, that not she, but James Flemi was guilty of the crime charged. The course which this case has taken from the ou has been such as to call the special attention of the fession to it. The examinations of the parties accused, number and length of the declarations we noticed condemned in our last, the special commission iss by the Home Secretary, to allow the prisoner an opp tunity of proving her statement, is a novelty in Scotla and can only be justified from the peculiar circumsta and coolness might be expected from the jury. At present the Circuit Court may certify a particular case to the High Court, and the Lord Advocate may bring a case to Edinburgh, but this is in his option. The prisoner has no right to choose that his case should be tried there. We do not give our adherence to this suggestion from the belief that Edinburgh men in general, or Edinburgh of the case. No Judge worthy of the office would accept or occupy a seat on the bench who knew that his judgments were to be reviewed by a commissioner appointed from among the members of the bar, pleading before him. It is degrading to the bench, and by no means complimentary to the jury. But if the Government, through its Home Secretary, are of opinion (as this instance shows they are), that Judges may err in judg-juries in particular, are in any way superior to the same ment, and sometimes be carried by their peculiar tempera- class in Glasgow, or any other of our large towns. If ment to overstep the bounds of that judicial temper we must speak our thought, we think Edinburgh juries, which is always in this country associated with the from whatever cause, are in very many instances concharacter of a Judge, they have the remedy in their own spicuously unqualified for the discharge of their difficult hands; and we feel assured that from this day the public duties. Its sole recommendation to us is, that a plurawill not rest satisfied, and the Judges of the Supreme lity of Judges would then always be secured, where the Criminal Court ought not to rest satisfied, until that mental peculiarities of each would meet a counterpoise, remedy has been found and applied. Several have been and in all likelihood be kept close to the golden mean of gested. Of late years a most frequent remedy pro- mildness, temper, courtesy, and sound law. If the rule posed is, that we should have the office of Coroner adopted in England were applied here, that the prisoner revived in Scotland. The benefits of such an institution on his application may have his case tried in Edinburgh, are patent to us from its working in England, and we that, we think, would satisfy the defect we have pointed are convinced that sooner or later the public will demand out. Another suggestion thrown out is, that there its establishment in Scotland. A few more cases, con- should be a Court of Criminal Appeal; and we concur in ducted as the Sandyford one has been, will bring the the suggestion. We fail to appreciate the reasons on public to know and feel that the safer tribunal for all-which the erection of such a court could be resisted; for Judges, prosecutors, criminals, and the public-is one yet, like many other reforms in the law, it has been to which all have access, and the proceedings of which resisted, much more, we fear, by the system of preare known to all, and infinitely preferable to that rem-serving things as they are, than by sound reason. Bant of the middle ages, the secret, unchecked, and We have appeals from every court in the kingdom, irresponsible mode of investigation in criminal matters at until we reach the court of last resort in the House of present adopted in Scotland. But why should we not Lords; yet, in the most serious of all cases, where the have more than one Judge to try cases where the life of life of a fellow-subject is involved, a single Judge sits, aflow-creature hangs in the balance? We see in Edin- tries, and condemns without an appeal, except to the Argh, during the sitting of the High Court of Justiciary, mercy of the Crown, through the Home Secretary. As sometimes very trifling cases tried where property is con- well becomes Lord Brougham-a veteran law reformerred, and there are always two or three Commissioners of an old and cherished idea of his goes to the root of this Justiciary on the bench. If capital crimes are to be con- whole matter of law reform, especially criminal law reform. fired to be tried on Circuit at all, we think it would, His Lordship has long strenuously endeavoured to have to some extent, satisfy the public mind if not less than a Ministry of Justice as a branch of the Government. Judges should always be on the bench. As to If powers sufficiently extensive were given to a Minister matter Glasgow is peculiarly situated. Two Judges of Justice, law reform would long ere this have made dways appointed to go Circuit, and generally they greater strides than it has done, and much that still and sit together, unless circumstances render cumbers our law and its machinery would have been annecessary or impossible. One Judge may, how- obsolete. From his great age, Lord Brougham cannot , hold the Circuit; and this is convenient, for the expect to see such a Ministry established, but we are at mass of business is not of such a character as to de- sanguine enough to hope, that not many years will have zad nice discrimination and very deep law. Circuit elapsed before its necessity will have been established, Lotoriously is not held in very high esteem, as evinced and that it will have been an accomplished fact. y be usual remark if a case is quoted for an authority, AL! true enough, but that was on Circuit." The cmt of criminal business of late years had so increased by an Act of Adjournal, an additional Circuit art was appointed to be held at Glasgow in winter, dadditional court room was also provided; and now one -the senior one-sits in what is called the Old art House, and the junior Judge in the new one. The ags, no doubt, in some cases consult with each other doubtful points which occur, but practically there are Courts, with a single Judge in each. The better rely, however, is, that all capital cases should be tried >re the High Court at Edinburgh, where the greatest e and deliberation would be attained, where a plurality Jadges would always be secured, and, if the crime had perpetrated beyond Edinburgh, greater impartiality GLASGOW SHERIFF COURT STATISTICS. MR SHERIFF BELL, the senior Sheriff-Substitute for Glasgow, on opening his Court for the winter session, gave the following statement of the amount of the judicial business transacted in the Sheriff Court at Glasgow during the year from 1st October, 1861, to 1st October, 1862. The Sheriff remarked that these statistics show a constantly increasing amount of business; and, we think, fully bear out his statement that there is not a busier or harder-working Court of Law in the kingdom than the Sheriff Court of Glasgow:- The total number of new cases called in the Ordinary Court was 1563. Appearance was entered and litiscontestation ensued in 936 of these, whilst decrees in absence were given in the remaining 627. The gross number of enrolments in the printed rolls of the three Sheriff-Substitutes, who sit in this Court, has been 6145. The number of debates appearing in these rolls, all of which have been heard, was 2530. The number of diets of proof fixed was 1221; but as many of these proofs were continued to subsequent diets, the total number of diets of proof has, in reality, been considerably larger. The gross number of enrolments on the Sheriff-Depute's printed rolls was 1244. The number of small debt cases decided in the Small Debt Court, which sits three times a-week, was 22,806. The number of judicial sequestrations was 215, of which 8 resulted in deeds of arrangement. The number of competitions for the office of trustee was 9; appeals from the deliverances of trustees, and discussions as to liberations, protection, or discharge of bankrupts, 58. In our Criminal Court, the number of criminal cases tried before a Sheriff and a jury was 263; the number tried before the Sheriff summarily without a jury was 79; and the number of judicial declarations taken from accused parties was upwards of 500. There were also 200 investigations conducted by the Fiscal, under the superintendence of the Sheriff, in cases of sudden death. In addition, there was a great amount of work done in matters connected with the Poor Law, with lunacy, with summary ejections, with nuisances, with meditatio fugas, with the recovery of water and other rates, and with numerous statutory jurisdictions of which it is impossible to give the precise details. RETIREMENT OF LORD IVORY. REGRET will be deep and general throughout Scotland on learning that Lord Ivory has come to the decision not to resume his seat as a judge in the Court of Session. The cause, however, we are glad to learn, is not present ill-health, but rather apprehension that his health would fail if he were again to attempt the arduous work of the First Division. If he could have taken his work easily, he might have gone on for a few years as other aged judges, some of them not undistinguished, have done; but such is, or has been, the restlessness of his intellect, his almost morbid conscientiousness, and his impulse to probe everything to the bottom, that, as we suppose, his medical advisers and his friends have decided that it is prudent to avoid the probability of his again, by overexertion in the discharge of his judicial duties, injuring his chances of enjoying a long, serene, and happy old age. Lord Ivory's public life having, in a sad, but not the saddest sense, come to a close, it is open to us to say something about his career, although we can hardly say of him all the good we might have done had he not happily been still amongst us. He is now, we believe, seventy years of age, having been born in 1792. His birth-place was Dundee; his father being a watchmaker in that town, and still remembered in it as a man of great natural talent, both for mechanics and literature. He was educated at the Dundee Academy, and was an excellent scholar in all branches, but especially in arith metic and mathematics. He betook himself to law, and in 1816 he was admitted to the Faculty of Advocates. His literary efforts were henceforward professional, and consisted of elaborate legal essays in the shape of the written pleadings then in use; in a treatise on Forms of Process, published anonymously; and in an edition of Erskine's Institutes of the Law of Scotland, which still holds its place as the best. The "Forms of Process," the first volume of which was published the year before he became an advocate, and the second two years after, is, in spite of the dreary character of the subject, one of the most elegantly-written books on Scotch law, and, as a piece of literature, as much superior to some books that have been intended to supersede it as "Paradise Lost" is to the verses of a Miscellany of boarding school misses. His literary talent was of great service to him in his early advocate days, as those were the days of exact and learned written arguments, before oratorical wind and palaver by the hour-and-half were expected to enlighten or convince the wisest heads in Scotland. Many of his written arguments-which the industrious student of difficult questions of law may still have occasion to read in that vast tomb of acute intellect, the Session Papersare excellent. Lord Ivory was, we believe, not a very fluent speaker, probably because he had too many thoughts crowding ready and impatient for utterance. John Clerk is reputed to have pronounced him "the worst speaker and the best writer he ever knew at the bar." The former part of the criticism must have been given for the sake of antithesis, for it could not be true; and the latter is also rather an extravagant eulogy, for John Clerk had known as a lawyer the writings of Cranstoun, Jeffrey, Moncrieff, Cockburn, Jamieson, and Skene. There is not much in legal literature equal to their writings, and they have some merits that Lord Ivory's do not possess. But, on the other hand, some of his written pleadings and some of his opinions have merits that we do not recognise in the production of some of those great men. In 1840 he was raised to the Bench of the Court of Session, and in 1849 to the Bench of the Court of Justiciary, and he has been for several years senior judge of both-indeed, the senior judge in the three kingdoms, not reckoning, of course, Lord Lyndhurst, Lord Brougham, and one or two others. occasionally resuming their former judicial functions only as members of the House of Lords. He carried with him to the bench those peculiar talents that had raised him to distinction at the bar. The only fault we have ever heard imputed to him was that he was too fastidious too sceptical, too deliberative; that his mind, like a fin balance, vibrated too long before it came to rest, and di not weigh the coarse claims of litigants with sufficien rapidity. But a more excellent judge than he has bee for many years in the First Division, could scarcely be His peculiar talents suited the peculiar composition o that justly admired Court, and gave it a strength and wisdom much of which it loses with him. In politics h was, from his youth upwards, a Liberal-a Liberal i the best sense, as well as in "the worst of times.". From the Scotsman. 16TH JANUARY, 1862. SHERIFF COURT, GLASGOW. (MR SHERIFF BELL.) JOHN LECKIE & Co., Assignees of Archibald Crawford, v. ROBERT M'GAVIN, Jun. or draft was an assignation, and should have been written on a £1 5s stamp. Having heard parties' procurators, the Sheriff-Substitute pronounced the following Interlocutor, which has been acquiesced in: Finds that the pursuers sue, as assignees of Archibald Title to Sue-Draft or Order-Assignation-Oblitera- Crawford, in virtue of the letter addressed by him to the detion of Stamp-16 and 17 Vict., c. 49, sect 4.-An fender at the end of the account annexed to the summons, in open account was assigned by an order or draft, and well, Glasgow, the sum of £18 sterling, being the amount of these terms:-"Sir, please pay John Leckie & Co., 60 Stockan adhesive penny stamp affixed, but on which, though the account written on this and preceding page, due by you partially written over, the assignor had not written his as commanding officer of the corps. for which the goods charged name or his initials. The assignee having raised action in said account were supplied:" Finds that this letter is impressed with a penny stamp, in conformity with the provisious on the account, the defence of no title to sue was repelled, of the Act 16 and 17 Vict, cap. 49, which enacts that a stamp because (1) the 16 and 17 Vict., c. 49, only imposed of that value shall be attached to every "draft or order for the a penalty on failure to comply with its directions as payment of any sum of money to the bearer, or to order on to cancellation of stamps, but did not declare the docu-demand," it being explained in the schedule that all documents or writings usually termed letters of credit, shall be taken to ments null; and (2) the document founded on was not an be drafts or orders within the meaning of the Act, as also all assignation requiring a stamp of a higher denomination. documents or writings "whereby any person to whom any such document or writing is, or is intended to be delivered or THE defender is captain of the 80th Corps of the Lanark-sent, shall be entitled, or he intended to be entitled to have shire Volunteers, and was sued by the pursuers, as assignees of Archibald Crawford, saddler and harness makers, Glasgow, for £18, "for goods furnished and supplied by Crawford to the said crops, on the order of the defender, or those acting under his authority, or by his instructions, per account commencing on the 31st day of January, and ending on 5th day of July, both in the year 1860; and which account and sum thereby due was duly assigned by the said Archibald Crawford to the persuers, conform to draft or order thereon, dated 8th day of September, 1861, and which was duly intimated to the defender." credit with, or in account with, or to draw upon any other person for, or to receive from such other person, any sum of money therein mentioned:" Finds that the defender pleads, as a first preliminary defence, that if the said stamp be the appropriate stamp for the writing, the same is invalid and foresaid Act have not been complied with, it being therein null, in respect that the provisions of the 4th section of the enacted that "in any case where an adhesive stamp shall be used for the purpose aforesaid on any receipt, or upon any draft or order respectively, chargeable with the duty of one penny by this Act, the person by whom such receipt shall be given, or such draft or order signed or made, shall, before the instrument be delivered out of his hands, custody, or power, cancel or obliterate the stamp so used by writing thereon his name, or the initial letters of his name, so and in such a manner as to show clearly and distinctly that such stamp The draft or order attached to the account was in the has been made use of, and so that the same may not be again following terms: To Captain R. M'Gavin, Glasgow, 8th June, 1861. I am, SIR, Your obedient Servant, (Signed) ARCHD. CRAWFORD. The defence, which was stated in a minute, was as follows: Preliminary-The pursuer has no title to sue. On the Merits-A denial of the statements in the libel, ad of any responsibility on the part of the defender for the price of the articles; and a denial of resting owing r the sum sued for, or any portion thereof, and explained aat the articles in question were not ordered by the defender, nor by any one for whom he is responsible. Inder the preliminary defence of want of title to sue, the points of the case, which emerged at the debate, and vas decided at this stage of the case, were (1) that the order or draft, though impressed with a penny stamp in terms of 16 and 17 Vict., c. 49, had not been effectually cancelled or obliterated by the granter writing thereon his name, or the initials of his name; and (2) the order used; and if any person who shall write or give any such re- NOTE. In the case of Lawrie, 6th February, 1810, F.C., two things were decided-1st, That the indorsation, "pay the within account," was an effectual conveyance of it to the party him with an authority to settle the account, but also affording in whose favour the indorsation was granted, not only vesting him a good action in law; and, 2d, That no stamp was neces B* sary. As regards, however, this second point, the authority of the case of Lawrie has been overturned by the later cases of Isles, 23d June, 1836; Taylor, 13th February, 1815; and Sutherland, 13th November, 1847-in all of which it was ruled that an order to pay money for behoof of the payee required a stamp, and was of no effect without it. In two, at least, of these cases, it was held that the indorsation or order was equivalent to a bill of exchange, and therefore that a bill stamp was necessary. In Sutherland, the latest of the three, where the words written on an open account were, "pay the above sum of £ to D. S.," the judges, whilst they were unanimous that a stamp was required, were not at one as to whether it should be an assignation or a bill stamp. But the Stamp Act of 16 and 17 Vict. has put an end to all doubt as to the stamp which must now be used to validate such an indorsation; and the document here in question is stamped in conformity with the provisions of that Act. On the other hand, as regards the first point, which was decided in the case of Lawrie namely, the right of action which the indorsature gives to the indorsee-none of the subsequent cases have interfered with that; and no doubt was ever thrown out in any of them that if the proper stamp had been used, the pursuers' title would have been sufficient. On the contrary, in Sutherland's case, Lord Mackenzie said—“This is not exactly a bill of exchange, for there is no exchange in the matter. It is an assignation. It is said to be a mandate, which requires no stamps. That, however, is contrary to the fact here, for Sutherland sues for his own interest as indorsee of the parties who order their accounts to be paid to him. They have sold their rights to him, and he does not claim payment for them." All the other judges concurred in the view that the indorsation was more than a mandate: and it is plain that they threw out the action on no other ground but the want of the stamp, and that if there had been a stamp they would have sustained the instance. The Sheriff-Substitute finds, it is true, a decision of the Sheriff Court of Renfrewshire, reported under date 25th April. 1861, in the Scottish Law Journal, vol. iii., page 60. in which both Sheriffs held that it was incompetent for the grantee to indorse or assign a receipt for borrowed money in favour of a third party by writing thereon, desiring the debtor to pay the sum in the receipt to said party, to which writing a penny stamp was attached. On the other hand, however, the Sheriff-Substitute also finds, in said Journal, under date 6th June, 1861, vol. iii., page 73, a decision of this Court, that an open account was validly assigned, so as to give a right of action by an order to pay the endorsee on demand, being writ ten on the account, and a penny stamp affixed. That case was not before the present Sheriff-Substitute, but he concurs in the observation made by the Sheriff-l'epute in the Note to his judgment affirming that of the Sheriff-Substitute, that if the in forsation, which is disputed, gave the right to demand payment to the endorsee on his own account, it necessarily also gave him a right of action to enforce payment. The words of the Sheriff of Lanarkshire are:-"There is no such thing recognised in law as a right being conveyed of a sort of neutral character which will validate a payment made in pursuance of the draft, but not vest a right of action. Payment can only be safe if made to a party legally entitled to demand it, and if refused, that party is necessarily clothed with a right of action." notes did not per se prove the debt. The claimant appealed, but the Sheriff affirmed the trustee's deliverance. Evidence of Debt.-Held, that it is competent to produce farther evidence of a claim when a judgment of a trustee rejecting the claim for defective evidence has been taken to appeal. THE appellants claimed to vote and rank on the sequestrated estate of Messrs Gray Brothers, drapers, Perth, for various sums advanced to the bankrupts. The evidence produced with the affidavits consisted of bills accepted by the bankrupts to the appellant and his wife, and bank cheques granted by the appellant, and either indorsed and cashed by the bankrupts, or the contents of which they otherwise received. The appellants are the brother and the sister-in-law of the bankrupts. The trustee rejected the claim, and his judgment was appealed, and minutes were ordered by the Sheriff. The grounds on which the claims were rejected, as set forth in the minute for the trustee, were (1) that the appellants were conjunct and confident with the bankrupts at and prior to the date of the sequestration; (2) the only vouchers of debt produced by the appellant in support of their claims were two promissory notes, which had never been discounted, which might have been granted on the eve of, or after, sequestration, and of the true date of which no evidence was produced with the affidavit; and (3) no evidence of any actual advance of money was produced. In law it was pleaded, that the promissory notes were not per se sufficient evidence of debt in a question betwixt the brother and sister-in-law of the bankrupt on the one hand, and the trustee on the other, as repre senting the general creditors; and as the appellants though called on to do so, produced no other or additiona evidence in support of their claims, the trustee was entitled and bound to reject both claims. The appellants in their minute at great length detailed the circumstances under which the advances had beer made and the securities taken, and pleaded (I.) that the claims made by the appellants were legally establishe by the promissory notes produced; (II.) the grounds o which the deliverances of the trustee were founded wer untenable (1) because promissory notes, though grante to relatives of the bankrupt, are still valid vouchers o a debt, though in cases where these appear to have bee granted in suspicious circumstances, the claimant may b obliged to give prima facie evidence of onerosity; (2 because even where such evidence is required, th claimant is not obliged to produce evidence to the effec that every farthing of the money contained in the note was paid to the bankrupt, it being sufficient to giv evidence that there were onerous transactions betwee the parties; (3) because on such prima facie case bein established, the onus of proof is shifted, and the truste is bound to set aside the votes by reduction; (4 because in this case there were no grounds for refusin to give effect to the promissory notes as vouchers of a onerous transaction, or for treating them in any wa differently from votes in the hands of strangers; (5 because it is proved by the letters, cheques, acknowledg ments, receipts, memoranda, and entries in the book above referred to, that these notes were granted fo money lent by the appellant to the bankrupts, or firms of which they were partners; (III.) the trust |