of the Society against any of its members to be recoverable summarily before a magistrate. Claims against the Society to be recoverable in like manner. Any member of a Trade Society doing any act in his capacity as a member contrary to the articles or bye-laws of the Society upon conviction to be expelled from the Society and deprived of all advantage whatever derived or expected from it. The Society to be empowered from time to time to make bye-laws, to be approved by the Registrar of Companies, as being within the proper objects of the Society, and not inconsistent with its articles of association. The incorporated society to be liable in damages in an action in the County Court, or in any Superior Court for any injury done to any person in pursuance or in consequence of the votes or orders of the council or of a general meeting. Penalties to be imposed upon any member of a Trade Society doing any act in contravention or excess of the articles of association or bye laws. The Society to be dissolved when it shall cease for six consecutive months to have less than fifty members, or at any time by vote of threefourths of the members at two successive special meetings. Members to be enabled to withdraw from the society at any time on giving fourteen days' notice to the secretary. Minutes of the proceedings of the council to be kept in a book for that purpose, and no act to be valid, the order for which is not so entered, and any person doing such act to be responsible as if the same had been done without any authority whatsoever. 1. We have it upon authority that the preliminary examination in general knowledge is of very little value as a test. 2. The single examination in law, which is optional, is far too easy. Very rarely is a candidate refused a pass certificate. When will the Bar feel sufficiently humiliated to take the matter into its own hands? At the present moment, what little action is being taken emanates from solicitors, who are in a position which peculiarly fits them to acquire an insight into the poverty of learning prevailing amongst barristers. This fact ought to be sufficient to rouse the members of the Bar to action in selfdefence. But as that fails let them listen to what a highly educated portion of the press says on the subject. We recommend the following extracts from an article appearing in the Pall Mall Gazette of Wednesday to their attentive consideration: and defended by those laws. Will you break up such an institution?" The answer would most assuredly be "No;" and we are inclined to believe that the public ought to return that answer to the question even if things remained in their present position. We do not, however, believe that they will do so at least they will not long continue to do so if things remain as they are. They rather like the Bar than not. They would like to have an excuse for allowing it to retain its present position, but the reforming or destroying hand will descend upon it sooner or later unless that excuse is provided. This is the common sense view of the question. To delay reform from within is to invite destruction from without. It would certainly be better to have no profession at all than one which is based on false pretences. A barrister is not necessarily either a lawyer or an advocate. The public have found it out. We hope, with the Pull-Mall, that Parliament may step in to prevent the ruin which mismanagement is bringing upon the Bar, but it is in the last degeee discreditable to a body of men possessing so large an amount of energy and real learning and ability that they should quietly subside into a snbject for anatomical study by the House of Commons. EVIDENCE. Many English questions are best understood when they are looked at from a little distance, and we should strongly advise any bencher who dislikes the notion of compulsory examinations, and who prefers to see the English Bar stand on what he regards as the solid ground of its real intrinsic merits, to ask some one who has had colonial experience what is thought of British barristers practising out of the four seas. We are very much mistaken if he would not find that almost THE GODRICH CASE-CONTRADICTORY opinion on the subject would tell him that the everyone in a position to form an intelligent absence of any real test among men who are called to the bar in England lowers the character of the English Bar in the colonies beyond all calculation. Here and there, no doubt, the colonial and the Indian Bar are well supplied, but in many instances men come out with certificates of their call who know nothing whatever of their profession, and who certainly do not give a favourform their opinions of it from a small number of specimens. Those who know nothing at all about law, and never had the faintest intention of knowing anything about it, may, and, under the existing system occasionally do, become barristers, and make use of their right to the title in a manner which would certainly not edify those who adorned them with it. The true lesson is to be learnt nearer home. In plenty of English provincial towns barristers are settled who have no more Such are the principal features of a plan able impression of it to those who are obliged to the way of dealing with contradictory testi which will require the elaboration of many details before it can be embodied in a formal law. This mere outline of it will suffice to show my design. It will probably be objected that it contains no provisions for the punishment of offences by the members of Trade Societies. It is so intended. They are, in fact, not required. The existing law is amply sufficient for that purpose. The perpetrators of an outrage are criminally responsible for it; the promoters are equally so. An incorporated society could act only through its council, and this council could act only by a formal resolution, duly entered in the minutes; but if such a resolution prompted to crime or to interference with the liberty of those who are not members, every person voting for it would be undoubtedly liable to indictment. For such wrongs damages could be recoverable against the society, and it would be an important provision in the proposed enactment that the funds of Trade Societies shall be liable in damages for any injury to person or property committed by the society, or by any person with the knowledge or consent of its council. A few words in conclusion. Because unreasonable claims have been made, we should not, therefore, refuse to recognise reasonable demands. Trades Unions are an existing fact, and a very important one. For good or ill they are among us, powerful in numbers and intelligence and growing in power, and having among the objects of their being not a few that are highly creditable, extremely beneficial to themselves, and not injurious to the community. Are they sufficiently important in numbers and influence to be fairly entitled to formal recognition and special legislation? It must be remembered, by those who doubt this, that it is always the prudent course to bring associations within the pale of the law, for thus, when the State gives to them formal recognition, an honourable status, and special facilities for organisation, it has a right to require, in return, compliance with regulations made for the protection and convenience of the community that thus favours them. Benefit brings with it responsibity; "Noblesse oblige" is as applicable to a Trades Union, as to all other persons, associations, or classes to whom a status is given by the law. THE IMPENDING DEGRADATION OF THE BAR. WE heartily wish that we could divine some mode of expression which would penetrate the thick skin of lethargic indifference which seems to have overgrown the governing bodies of the Inns of Court. Unfortunately, we have done ur utmost, and matters are still in their old state. That state is this: than they have to be clergymen. We could Every member of the Bar who frequents the Now let us see what is the writer's views concerning the prospects of the Profession. He says: We have no doubt that by a decided and vigorous policy the Inns of Court might put the Bar in the course of a very few years in a position which they might hold for generations. They might be able then to say to all whom it might concern, "You perceive that in point of fact we are one of the most highly educated bodies of men in the country. We are by training, and also by tradition and esprit de corps, the guardians of the laws of England, and of everything which is sanctioned THIS remarkable case, in which another jury have convicted of perjury another of the witGodrich was condemned in 1868 in the Divorce nesses on whose testimony the unhappy Mrs. Court, elicited from the Lord Chief Justice a most masterly summing up, in which some valuable considerations were suggested as to mony in such cases. In the first place, it suggests a question which has often occurred, perhaps, to others than the writer when they have listened to cases of contradictory testimony or conflicting evidence-are there no rules or principles on which to proceed in arriving at a conclusion in such cases? Can experience or are we to be left in each case to the uncertain or reason suggest no safe and sound guidance or the circuitous process of balancing one set of influences of the mere impressions of the moment, which only leaves the mind, after all, in doubt. witnesses or circumstances against another, It has often occurred to the writer that there are some rules and principles which are almost certain to lead in such cases to a safe and sure conclusion. And above all others is this, to begin with the undoubted facts, and by the light which they afford to try the questions in doubt. To some extent this rule has the support of authority. If we mistake not, the late Mr. Best, in his admirable Treatise on Prescriptive Proof, lays it down as a rule in criminal cases always to begin with what he terms the "real" evidence in the case, that is, the facts and circumstances, which are, for the most part, ascertainable clearly, and without a doubt, as to the crime itself, the corpus delicti, as, for instance, the cause of death, the appearance of the body, and the like, and to work our way on, so to speak, from these primary facts in the case to the solution of those which are in doubt; and one reason, we believe, for this rule, is that there are facts which can be placed beyond a doubt, and are safe as a basis to build upon. So in all cases, civil or criminal, in which problems arise upon evidence, and especially where the evidence is contradictory. There of course the difficulty is greater; and in most criminal cases there is rarely contradictory evidence; and it is a question rather of the sufficiency of the evidence, or its effect. Where there is contradictory evidence, as the difficulty is necessarily greater, there is all the more need of some rule or principle to guide the mind; and In all such cases there are facts which are bethe rule just suggested is all the more valuable. yond a doubt. And the writer has never known a case of the kind in which it was not apparent that the steady observation of these undoubted facts-especially in their proper order-the order of time-has in itself afforded the most certain evidence as to the rest of the case, and the questions of fact involved in it. Nor has he ever known such a case of contradictory testimony in which the difficulty has not arose from mixing up all the facts together in the mind-the facts undoubted along with those in doubt, and looking at them all as of equal, or all of doubtful, force and value, without clearly distinguishing those which are beyond a doubt, and so of certain and solid force and value, and basing and building our views of the case upon them, that is, judging of the questions at issue by the light thus afforded. In almost all cases the light thus afforded will enable us to determine the doubtful questions. The weight of the certain facts will turn the scale upon the questions of doubt. Suppose, for instance, that in a case between husband and wife, the first undoubted fact in the case is a letter from the husband to the wife, confessing some heinous offence, and imploring her mercy and forgiveness-indicating also that it is not for the first time-and suppose the next undoubted fact is, that she seeks relief by separation from him, and that then he brings charges against her of the same nature as those which she has brought against him, charges, supported by the evidence of persons in a low position of life, who have volunteered their evidence, under the influence of resentment, against her; these, the primary and undoubted facts of the case, may help largely to determine questions of fact apparently involved in doubt on contradictory evidence. For such facts throw a strong light on the question of credibility. The late Sir George Lewis laid down some rules of historical credibility, founded on the principles of our law of evidence, and one of these was, that the evidence must be that of indifferent persons, not of enemies or of interested parties. When once a husband is accused by his wife of gross misconduct, he is likely to feel the strongest disposition to bring against her some counter-charge of criminality; it becomes for him, far more than for her, a struggle of life or death, for if she fails in her charge, why she only fails in criminating him, whereas, if he fails, he is ruined. He has, therefore, a tremendous motive, and predisposition to believe anything he is told of her or suspects of her, and is ready to suspect her of anything, and believe and credit any stories of her conduct. Under such circumstances, especially if, as often happens, he has the purse strings, and she is poor, and deprived of resources, pending litigation, there are sure to be persons a in low position eager to feed these suspicions and supply the required proof. And assuming that, while smarting under ill-usage, and craving sympathy and support, there has been some degree of intimacy and unguarded familiarity, there is certain to be something for such creatures to seize upon and work up, to serve their purpose; circumstances to be distorted and exaggerated, or, if need be, invented, in order to support a preconceived to believe. How on earth the jury in the Divorce the witness fixes a time and place when they were together and alone), but it is possible, and in this case it was attempted, to prove an alibi against the witness, and to show that she was not in the house at the time. But this lets in no end of false testimony to disprove the alleged alibi, and only tends to complicate the case. Then as to the conduct of the witness at the time,not mentioning it, &c., and similar circumstances, they may be more or less doubtful, and be a feeble answer to positive testimony. But if the general truthfulness of the witness is destroyed, and above all in the particular case-if, for instance, she swears to the drunkenness of the accused, who is proved by independent evidence to be sober-then the whole worth and force of the positive testimony is destroyed, and at the same time a foundation of probability laid for the other evidence against the story. As regards evidence of contemporaneous circumstances in the conduct of the witness also, if her account of what she said and did at the time with reference to the alleged act is inconsistent with her having known of it, or if her account in the witness box of her conduct at the time is inconsistent with the evidence of independent witnesses, that, again, will be very strong evidence to destroy the testimony of the witness, by destroying all confidence in its truthfulness. All these kinds of evidence were supplied in quittal of the accused in the Divorce Court is the present case. Of course, to obtain an acone thing, to obtain a conviction of the witness In the one case the accused is acquitted because on the ground of perjury quite another thing. the other case the defendant, the witness, is to it does not appear that the evidence is true; in be convicted because it appears that her evidence was false. The burden of proof, of course, is far greater upon the unhappy wife in the latter case than in the other. To sustain it, however, all the modes and kinds of evidence above described intrinsic improbability of the story, positive eviwere resorted to. There was, in addition to the dence that the witness was not in the house at the time, and that accounts she gave at the time were quite different from her present story, and that portions of her story which were capable of contradiction, as the alleged drunkenThese heads of evidence were ness, were false. other. Thus, if the witnesses were mistaken independent, and yet mutually supported each who proved that the woman was not in the evidence of those who swore to the accounts she house at the time, then this did not affect the gave at the time. Nor did either of these heads collateral matter of the alleged intoxication. of evidence affect the contradiction as to the How any twelve men came to believe this we cannot divine, except that the character of the unhappy lady was so blackened by a host of witnesses that the jury might have been ready to believe anything of her. But even then how could they credit testimony so absurdly contradictory? One of the witnesses described the lady as always drinking from morning to night. This woman was convicted of perjury at the Old Bailey. A governess who had lived in the house, and who having left, is, of course, independent of poor Mrs. Godrich, swore that she never saw the least sign of her drinking. The evidence of one credible person is worth that of a dozen, all dependent on, or under the influence of, one of the parties to the suit. Not (as the Lord Chief Justice observed) because it is to be supposed that they were actually suborned to commit perjury, but because they would be eager to serve the purpose of their patrons, and from the coarse and vulgar suspicions inherent in their own nature, would conceive a suspicion of guilt from mere familiarity, and then bring themselves, especially under the impulse of a little resentment, to swear to facts tending to support their own preconceived belief. We believe it is thus that very often, out of an unfortunate estrangement, servants and persons in a similar position make up cases for the Divorce Court. And it is all the easier to do so, and they are all the more disposed to do so, when a lady separated from her husband, naturally on the one hand seeks sympathy and support from some male friend; and, on the other hand, irritated and annoyed by her position, falls perhaps into faults of temper, and makes enemies of the servants or those about her. It is in such cases specially that these rules and principles of probability and proof are necessary to be kept in mind in order to guide the Nor is the difficulty lessened, it is rather mind through a maze of contradictory evidence. enhanced, by the new Act allowing the parties Justice observed that he was in doubt as to its to be examined; as to which the Lord Chief wisdom, for, as he pointed out, on the one hand be enormous, while, on the other hand, in case the temptation to perjury in case of guilt would of innocence, no one will attach much import- And these two latter heads of evidence were And here comes in a deep secret of human ance to the denials of the accused parties. The matters as to which there could be no mistake. nature, which was disclosed by the Lord only evidence of the parties really worth any- As to dates, we all know that mistakes will Chief Justice in the course of his masterly thing is that which they afford against them- occur; but not as to whether a person did or did summing up in the Godrich case, viz., that selves, which may safely be relied upon, and not ascribe her leaving at once to revolting immopersons who have already a preconceived belief which often furnishes valuable guidance as to rality, or as to whether or not a lady was in will far more easlly bring themselves to swear the question in dispute, because throwing a the habit of getting drunk. These were matters falsely to facts which tend to support it than great light on the relative credibility of the par- as to which there could be no mistake, and here those who have no such belief. The Lord Chief ties. If one of them is convicted on his own the independent testimony was in favour of the Justice illustrated this by a remarkable and showing of the guilt he imputes to the other, or, accused lady. Our object, however, is not so impressive anecdote, drawn from the recollecon the one hand, denies, or does not admit, much to discuss the merits of the particular tions of the early part of his career at the Bar. what undoubted witnesses or his own hand-case, as to draw attention to some important Two men had been convicted of murder upon writing may prove, then there is a sure and safe rules and principles as to contradictory evidence the testimony of an alleged eye-witness; one of test as to the credibility of his evidence in oppo- and they resolve themselves into this-to look them admitted his guilt, but protested the inno-sition to that of the other. first to the undoubted facts, to distrust evidence cence of the other, who, upon inquiry, was found to have been 200 miles away from the scene of kind matter nothing at all; if witnesses on one Mere numbers of witnesses in cases of this tainted by interest or enmity, and to attach more importance to independence than mere the murder. It turned out the alleged eye-side are of the same class and in a position of number of witnesses, and to test their credibility witness was one of a gang to which the confessed murderer belonged, and knew the murder on the main story by the independent evidence was to be committed, and believed it was to as to collateral matters. be by both the two against whom she swore. One of them, however, was of the same name as a friend of her own, and in order to screen him, lest he should be suspected, she swore falsely that she witnessed the murder in order to secure the conviction of the men she believed to have been the murderers. Now, as the Lord Chief Justice remarked, it is probable that the witness would never have sworn to that false story unless she had supposed it to be true. And he applied it thus to the fcase of Mrs. Godrich, that if her demeanour had created in the minds of those about her an impression of her guilt, they would far more readily swear falsely to facts which would convict her. This was a most profound observation, which is worth preservation and reflection. In the present case the witness had sworn to something far more incredible than that which the witness swore in the case of Lord Melbourne, thirty years ago, and which a jury, with universal approval, refused belief. dependence on, or under the influence of, that In cases of alleged adultery, it is to be borne STAMPS ON LEASES-BOULTON'S CASE. THE construction which has been put on the 16th section of the 17 & 18 Vict. c. 83, by the Court of Exchequer in Boulton v. The Commissioners of Inland Revenue, reported 21 L. T. Rep. N. S. 721, and which appears to us unimpeachable has the effect of rendering almost every lease which has been granted since the passing of the Act on the 9th Aug. 1854, inadmissible in evidence without payment of the additional duty and the penalty. It was urged by Mr. Manisty in arguing the case for the plaintiff, that if a building lease such as that under the consideration of the court was within the 16th section above alluded to, every lease which contains a covenant to repair is likewise within it. We go further and say that every covenant on the part of the lessee, as it must be taken to be of some value, and to be part of the consideration for which the lease was granted, brings the lease within the 16th section. Usually the demise is expressed to be in consideration of the rent and covenants, and whether so expressed or not, the lessee's covenants are evidently part of the consideration. It seems illogical and impossible to distinguish, and say that a covenant to complete buildings is a valuable consideration, but that a covenant to repair or to pay tithe rentcharge, sewers'-rate, or other burdens properly incident upon the landlord, or to insure against fire, is not a valuable consideration. Covenants, whether they are or are not of such a nature as to be usually inserted in leases, are not essential to a lease-they are not (as covenants in mortgages and settlements are) expressly exempted under the head of covenant in the schedules of the 13 & 14 Vict. c. 97, and they certainly constitute over and beyond the rent or other pecuniary consideration a "further or other valuable consideration." A correspondent in our last week's impression says that the commissioners have issued a circular stating that they will not require a further stamp merely for the covenant to repair. We presume, therefore, that they do not consider that the covenants commonly inserted in leases bring them within the 16th section. For the reasons we have mentioned we do not agree in this view. The commissioners, as our correspondent remarks, are not infallible, and we think with him that Parliamentary interference, asked for by Mr. Bourke on Tuesday, is imperatively called for in order to exempt existing leases from the additional duty and penalty, and to define clearly and distinctly what covenants may for the future be inserted in leases without subjecting them to any other than the ad valorem stamp duty. That your memorialists submit with confidence that whatever is incident to, and a usual and substantial part of a transaction, and so generally received, should be considered as covered by the ad valorem stamp. That your memorialists therefore hope that Her Majesty's Government will feel it their duty not only to introduce a measure for granting the relief above suggested, but also to recommend Parliament to annul the effect of the decision in the oase above adverted to. That your memorialists further venture to submit that the present state of the stamp laws generally, is a discredit to legislation. Nine Acts, having stamps for their principal subject (besides others in which provisions relating to stamps have have been passed during the last twenty years. been thrust in amongst incongruous subjects), Yet these are but a fraction of the enactments on the subjects now in force. In the Appendix to the Treatise on Stamps by the late Mr. Tilsley, the solicitor to the Commissioners of the Inland Revenue (itself more than 1000 pages in length), no less than 252 statutes bearing on the subject are enumerated. That your memorialists therefore submit that a Bill to revise and consolidate the stamp laws, with a general repeal of all previous enactments on the subject is imperatively called for. such a measure will be incomplete unless it conThat your memorialists further submit that tain a provision declaring all instruments stamped previously to its becoming law, to be sufficiently stamped, so as to prevent the necessity of any future reference to the chaotic accumulation of enactments now in force. That as the subject is eminently a practical one, your memorialists also respectfully suggest that if, as they trust, Her Majesty's Government should be disposed to listen favourably to their proposhould be submitted to the consideration of the sitions, a copy of the measure, when prepared, various law societies, with a view to diminish the chances of any necessity arising for subsequent explaining and amending Acts. Your memorialists therefore pray that Her Majesty' Government will be pleased to introduce into Parliament, without loss of time, a measure for confirming the stamps on existing leases, and enacting that future leases shall not be subject to the additional duty above mentioned. In the mean time it will probably be advisable for lessees and parties interested rather to await some measure of relief, than to carry in leases for the purpose of having them stamped in accordance with the law in Boulton's case. The following memorial has been addressed to the Chancellor of the Exchequer: The Memorial of the Manchester Law Association. Sheweth, That it has recently been decided by the Court of Exchequer in the case of Boulton (app.) v. The Commissioners of Inland Revenue (resps.), that whenever leases contain a covenant by the lessee to build on the land demised (although such covenant may be merely for the purpose of securing the rent, and not for the purpose of enhancing the value of the reversion), they THE LATE CHAIRMAN OF THE SURREY are liable, in addition to the ad valorem duty on the rent, to a further duty of 11. 15s. That many hundred building leases must have been invalidated, for purposes of evidence, by this decision. That moreover the ground of the decision extends to many other classes of covenant which are commonly inserted in leases, as for instance covenants to repair and to insure, which if less in degree, are in principle as much a valuable consideration, as a covenant to build. That it follows that besides the great number of building leases which have been affected by the decision referred to, a far larger number of ordinary leases must be defective as to stamp. That it has been hitherto universally considered in the legal profession that leases were not liable to any extra duty in consequence of their containing convenants to build, to repair, to insure, or the like; and until very recently the Commissioners of Inland Revenue did not claim any such extra duty. That your memorialists therefore hope that, following the plan which has been before adopted when a course universally prevalent, and especially where sanctioned by the practice of the Inland Revenue authorities has been proved to be erroneous, Her Majesty's Government will be pleased to recommend Parliament to pass a Bill for the purpose of declaring all leases hitherto made to be sufficiently stamped, although they may not be stamped with the extra duty to which they are now held liable. That your memorialists, however, conceive that it was by no means the intention of the Legislature to enact what is now held to have been enacted; for they cannot suppose that it was intended that whilst a conveyance in fee in consideration of a yearly rent should be chargeable with ad valorem duty on the rent only, although it may contain a covenant to build, a lease for 999 years of the same land, on the very same terms, should (notwithstanding that the reversion on such a lease is practically valueless) be liable, in addition, to a duty of 11. 15s.; nor that a lease of a house for fourteen years at a rent of 501., liable as such to a stamp of 5s., should, because it contains a covenant to repair, be liable to an additional duty of seven times that amount. And afterwards, at as early a period as is consistent with its due preparation, a Bill for the general Consolidation of the Stamp Laws. M. BATESON WOOD, President. SESSIONS. ON Monday last, the 7th inst., there was a full attendance of the Surrey sessions Bar at the Sessions-house, Newington, for the purpose of presenting an address to the late chairman, Sir Thomas Tilson, on his retirement from that office. Mr. Lilley, the leader of the Bar, addressing Sir Thomas said, that it had been his lot to take part in the retirement of two preceding chairmen, both able and honourable men, but he could say most unfeignedly that the feeling of regret entertained by the Bar was deeper and more sincere on the present than on any previous occasion. He (Sir T. Tilson) had brought to the discharge of his important duties a legal education and experience, a cultivated mind, and unquestionable ability, and during the many years that he had discharged the duties of the office from which he had now retired, he had increased that experience and enlarged his knowledge, and had rendered important services to the public and the Bar. The Bar desired to express their sense of his unvarying courtesy, forbearance, and kindness. It was a consolation to them to know that he retired with mental energies unabated, with physical powers undiminished, and with honour and distinction truly deserved. The Bar also consoled themselves with the hope that though he had retired from the more arduous duties of chairman, he would continue to discharge occasionally the less prominent magisterial duties, and that he would, at their gatherings here and elsewhere, be found occasionally present. The Bar also trusted that, though lost to them as chairman, there might long be preserved to them one whom they valued as a true friend. He might be assured that he carried with him the respect and sincere regard of every member of the Bar. And they earnestly hoped that he would continue long in the enjoyment of his well-earned retirement. Mr. Lilley then read the resolution which had been passed by the Bar, which was as follows: -"That the members of the Surrey Sessions' Bar desire to express their deep regret at the retirement of Sir Thomas Tilson from the chairmanship of the sessions, and at the same time to record their high estimation of his public character and private worth, and to assure him that he carries into his honourable retirement the hearty good wishes of all their number." Sir Thomas Tilson, in reply, stated that this resolution of the Bar was only a continuance of the kindness which, since his first connection with the sessions, he had always received from the Bar. It was true that he had had a professional experience of thirty-five years before he came there; but that experience having been exclusively confined to civil matters, he had felt a difficulty in accepting the offer of the chairmanship when made to him, but he was assured by his brother magistrates that the Bar of the sessions was so kind and considerate that in all matters he might rely on their assistance. He had found that to be true to the very letter in the case of every member sitting in that place to receive greater kindness of it. It was impossible for any magistrate than he had experienced from the Bar. They had always acted towards him with the greatest consideration and courtesy; they had always respected the office, if not the man, though they had been good enough to say that the man, too, had earned their respect. Their expression of respect he greatly esteemed, for he believed there was nothing in this country superior to an enlightened and intelligent Bar; he therefore felt this compliment very much indeed. He feared that he had been eulogised far more than he deserved. In addition another source of consolation in his retirement, to the expression of their good opinion he had and that was that he left behind him as chairman one whose ability and courtesy so well fitted him to fill that position. LEGAL ITEMS. THE sittings after Hilary Term commenced on Tuesday, with 17 appeals, before the Lord Chancellor and Lord Justice Giffard; 107 original Rolls; 42 before Vice-Chancellor Stuart; 107 and transferred causes before the Master of the before Vice-Chancellor Malins; and 64 before Vice-Chancellor James. On Tuesday, Lord Romilly (referring to recent transfers of causes to his Lordship's court), said that as the list was now printed, solicitors could not possibly tell when their causes were coming on. He wanted a list printed just as if all the causes transferred to him had been originally set down before him, and then they would be taken in their proper order, so that parties could know when they might be expected to come on. It might still be stated, if thought desirable, that such and such cases had been transferred. Sir Richard Baggallay, on behalf of the Bar, expressed himself much obliged to his Lordship for the suggestion, which would prevent much inconvenience and uncertainty. It having been suggested that it would be a convenience to have a list printed in Bankruptcy, analogous to that of the Chancery Courts, Mr. Bacon has promised to take the subject into his consideration. The Lord Chancellor will not sit in the Court of Chancery until Wednesday, and on Monday his Lordship will be engaged at the House of Lords. ELECTION LAW. NOTES OF NEW DECISIONS. ELECTION PETITION BRIBERY PAYING MONEY TO GET A VOTER OUT OF PRISONAGENCY-AUTHORITY TO CANVASS-PAYMENT OF MONEY AT REVISION COURT-COSTS.-On the trial of an election petition the question of agency as regards the responsibility of a candi17 & 18 Vict. c. 102, is not to be considered as it date for the acts of his agent, under sect. 36 of would be in an action for penalties brought against the candidate for the corrupt practices of his agent. P. was appointed by the Liberal Registration Society to conduct the business of the revision, which shortly preceded the election. D., the candidate, subscribed liberally to the funds of the society, and approved of P.'s appointment. The staff of the society, with P. at its head, was afterwards used in promoting directed in a great degree the meetings of the the election. The committee of this society electors, and D. on one occasion communicated directly with P. by letter with reference to the election: Held, that P. was the agent of D., so as to render him responsible for bribery by P. A charge of bribery cannot be sustained on mere suspicion, but must be supported by thoroughly the Warrington Petition, 19 L. T. Rep. N. S. 812, satisfactory evidence. Dicta of Martin, B. in and of Willes, J. in the Lichfield Petition, 20 L. T. Rep. N. S. 11, approved. McC. was arrested for debt and lodged in gaol the day before the polling day by a political opponent. On the polling day, when the election was virtually decided, two supporters of the respondent, McI. and H. went to the gaol, paid the amount of the decree, and openly conducted McC. to the booth, where he voted for the respondent: Held, that this payment unexplained would have been an act of bribery differing from the Ashburton case, 2 W. & B. 1: Held, further, that the Ashburton case cannot be regarded as establishing the rule that money paid to get a voter out of prison in order to "enable" him to vote should not, under the above circumstances, be considered as money paid to induce him to vote, and therefore an act of bribery. McI. canvassed with the respondent uninvited, and the respondent made several attempts to get rid of him. He also, at the invitation of the audience, seconded a resolution at a meeting of electors at which the respondent was present. On one occasion also, the respondent requested Mel. to leave a document for him at a certain place: Held, that Mel. was not an agent of the respondent, so as to affect him by acts of bribery either expressly or by implication. The definition of agency in the Norwich case, 19 L. T. Rep. N. S. 618, and the Windsor case (sup.) approved, but held not to apply. Sect. 12 of the Irish Representation of the People Act 1868 (31 & 32 Vict. c. 49), declares the payment of money for the conveyance of voters to the poll to be illegal: Held, that such payment did not vitiate the election; but, semble, that excessive payment for cars to induce the owners to vote would be bribery which would affect the election. By sect. 8 of 31 & 32 Vict c. 49, the paid employment of voters is made illegal, and their votes may be struck off on a scrutiny. It was alleged that voters employed at the preceding revision received more than a fair remuneration for their services, and that the excessive payments were made corruptly: Held, on the evidence, that the payments were not excessive; but, semble, that even had they been, it would not have been bribery, the voters so paid having long previously promised their votes to the respondent: (Bradford Petition, No. 2, 19 L. T. Rep. N. S. 723, per Martin, B.) The voting by several of those who voted for the respondent having been illegal, and time having been expended and costs incurred with reference to such votes, the time consumed being not less than two days: Held, that the respondent was not entitled to receive his costs attending the inquiry on those two days: (City of Londonderry, 21 L. T. Rep. N. S. 709. O'Brien, J.) Bilston District.-Dividend at the rate of 10 per dends at the rate of 20 per cent. per annum. English, Scottish, and Australian Chartered.— London and South-Western.-Dividend of 5s. per share. Manchester and Liverpool District.-A dividend North Wilts.-Half-year's dividend at the rate ASSURANCE COMPANIES. Law Life Assurance.-Year's new policies, 238; assuring, 313,168.; new annual premiums, 11,9977. London and Provincial Marine Insurance. declared. Dividend at the rate of 10 per cent. per annum Universal Marine Insurance.-10 per cent. per MISCELLANEOUS COMPANIES. China Steam and Labuan Coal.-A further that the company had not yet let the premises lately occupied by the Council of India. LEGISLATION AND JURIS- HOUSE OF COMMONS. PAYMENT OF MEMBERS. Mr. P. TAYLOR gave notice that on the 8th March, with a view to facilitate the admission of all classes to that House, he would move for leave to bring in a Bill to restore the ancient constitutional practice of the payment of members. He would also, on an early day, ask leave to introduce a Bill to abolish the Game Laws. DEEDS OF MARRIED WOMEN. 22nd inst., he would move for leave to introduce Mr. DODDS gave notice that on Tuesday, the a Bill to facilitate the execution and acknowledgment of deeds by married women. THE BRIDGEWATER ELECTION COMMISSION. Mr. HEADLAM gave notice that on an early day he would present a petition from Bridgewater, complaining of the conduct of the Election Inquiry Commissioners, and would move for a copy of the recent judgment in the Queen's Bench in connection with the subject. STAMPS ON LEASES. Mr. BOURKE gave notice that on Thursday he would ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether it is the intention of Her Majesty's Government to propose any alteration in the law with regard to stamps upon leases, consequent upon a late decision of the Court of Exchequer. COMMONS AND WASTE LANDS. Mr. CowPER gave notice of his intention to move for leave to bring in a Bill to improve the protection and management of commons and waste lands near cities and towns in England. THE NEW LAW COURTS. Mr. HEADLAM gave notice of his intention to ask the First Commissioner of Works to state the intentions of Her Majesty's Government as to the site of the new courts of justice. LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANIES. Mr. CAVE moved for leave to bring in a bill to panies. He said the Bill was the same in prinamend the law relating to Life Assurance Comciple as the one which he was allowed last year to carry as far as committee, but which, owing to the pressure of pressure of business, he was not able to carry further.Leave was given. CATTLE STEALING. Sir G. JENKINSON obtained leave to bring in a Bill to extend the provisions of the law as to stolen horses to all other kinds of stolen cattle. GAME LAWS AMENDMENT. Mr. P. WYKEHAM MARTIN obtained leave to dividend of 2s. 6d. in the pound, making 19s. paid, bring in a Bill to amend the laws relating to game. is now payable to the creditors. City of London Brewery.-A dividend of 6 per cent. declared, making a total distribution of 10 per cent. for the year. Cornwall Hematite.-A dividend at the rate of Dagenham (Thames) Docks (Limited).—Mr. C. F. Bank of England Stock 239 240 3 Cent. Cons. Ann... 92 New 2 Cent. Ann.... Do. 34 do. Jan. 1894.. Do. exp. Jan. 5, 1880 74 92 924 92 92 92 92 11 India 5 Cent. for Acc. India 4 Cent.1888 India Stock,5 Cent. Jan. 7, 1872. India Bonds (1000l.) Do. (under 10001.) 4 per Ex. Bills, 1000%. Do. 5001. Do. 1001. and 2001. a March 24 per cent. par. bPremium. 100 ... a i European Gas.-An interim dividend of 5 per Gwendraeith Valley Lime, Coal, and Railway (Limited).-Mr. Samuel Lovelock is official liqui dator. Improved Industrial Dwellings.-A dividend at Indiarubber, Gutta Percha, and Telegraph Works. annum. Linoleum Manufacturing.-A dividend, being, with an amount distributed in July last, equal to 12 per cent. per annum. Lion Brewery.-The results for 1869 are reported satisfactory. After writing off 50071. from leases and plant, and 70591., the balance of expenses at the formation of the company, together with the interim dividend paid in July, 18,0716. remains. 208.b Of this a half-year's distribution on the ordinary shares at the rate of 14 per cent. (which, with the interim dividend, makes 10 per cent. in 1869). PUBLIC COMPANIES. RAILWAY COMPANIES. Bristol and Exeter.-Dividend at the rate of 5 per cent. per annum. CHURCH-RATES (SCOTLAND). SOLICITORS' AND ATTORNEYS' REMUNERATION. Mr. RATHBONE obtained leave to bring in a Bill to amend the laws relating to the remuneration of solicitors and attorneys. The several Bills for which leave was given were brought in and read a first time. PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS. NOTICES OF MOTIONS ON THE PAPERS ON THURSDAY. Mr. Glyn-Leave of absence at half-past four o'clock.-To Mr. Charles Wykeham Martin, one month, ill health. Mr. Bruce-Bill to consolidate and amend the Acts relating to the Regulation and Inspection of Mines. The Chancellor of the Exchequer-Bill to consolidate and amend the Law relating to the Coinage and Her Majesty's Mint. the Law relating to Friendly Societies. Mr. Shaw Lefevre-In committee of the whole House, to meve that the Chairman be directed to move the House that leave be given to bring in a Bill to consolidate and amend the Laws relating to Merchant Shipping, Mr. Shaw Lefevre Bill to abolish Compulsory Pilotage. Mr. Loch-Bill to amend the Game Laws in Scotland. whole House, to move that the Chairman be Mr. Osborne Morgan-In committee of the directed to move the House that leave be given to bring in a Bill to amend the Burial Laws. Mr. Headlam-Address for copy of the judg ment of the Court of Queen's Bench in the case of Lovibond v. Price. Mr. Charles Forster-Bill to abolish the Forfeiture of Lands and Goods on Convictions of Felony. Mr. Osborne Morgan-Bill to facilitate the Purchase and taking of Sites for Places of Worship and Schools. Mr. T. Chambers-Bill to legalise Marriage with a Deceased Wife's Sister. Mr. Henley-Copy of the evidence taken before the courts appointed to inquire into the loss of the ships Carnatic and Spindrift, and the reports made to the Board of Trade thereon. SOLICITORS' JOURNAL. NOTES OF NEW DECISIONS. DOMICIL.-C., born in France, succeeded his uncle in business at Manchester, and purchased land and built a handsome house there, and also a vault in which he buried his uncle, wife and child, and, going to Vichy for his health, died at the place of his birth. The evidence of intention was conflicting, and went chiefly to the impression of the witness, but it appeared that he preferred the French climate, and talked of taking his wife's body to France: Held, that the domicil of origin never was lost, and that C. died a domiciled Frenchman: (Capderielle v. Capdevielle, 21 L. T. Rep. N. S. 660. V.C. M.) NEGLIGENCE-SPARKS FROM RAILWAY ENGINE. The defendants, in the course of a very dry summer, allowed hedge trimmings and cut grass to accumulate in heaps on the embankment along which their railway runs; when the heaps had been there for a fortnight, and were in a very combustible state, they caught fire, and the wind being high, and the country in a very parched state, the fire spread through a hedge, over a stubble-field, and across a lane to the plaintiff's house, which it destroyed. It was proved that just before the fire broke out, two locomotives of the defendants had passed along the defendants' line close to the spot where the fire broke out; but no evidence was given to show that the defendants had not taken all possible precautions to prevent the emission of sparks from their engines: Held, by Bovill, C. J., and Keating, J. (dissentiente Brett, J.), in an action against the defendants for negligence, that there was evidence from which the jury might infer that the heaps in question were set on fire by a spark from one of the defendants' engines, and that there was evidence of negligence in having left those heaps so long on the embankment during so dry a season: (Smith v. London and South-Western Railway Company, 21 L. T. Rep. N. S. 668. C. P.) PRACTICE AT NISI PRIRS-CROSS-EXAMINATION-RECEPTION OF EVIDENCE.-If a document be given to a witness during cross-examination for the purpose of identifying the handwriting, the counsel for the party whose witness is in the box has a right to inspect the document sufficiently to enable him to re-examine about the writing, and also to identify the document in case it should afterwards be put in evidence. He has, however, no right to read the document through, nor to comment upon its contents, until it be put in by the other side, although he may remark upon its absence if it be not put in. In an action by executors against a son of their testator to recover money received by him from his father, the Dr. side of the testator's account book, containing entries of the receipt of interest from the son, was held to be admissible in support of the plaintiff's contention that the money had been lent and not given, although the right of the plaintiffs without consent to put in the other side, which contained no entries opposed to the advantage of the writer, was doubtful: (Peck v. Peck, 21 L. T. Rep. N. S. 670. C. P.) INTERROGATORIES - TROVER PLAINTIFF'S TITLE.--In trover for barley, the defendants, admitting the prima facie title of the plaintiffs, as holders of the bill of lading, indorsed by the shipper to D. and G., and by D. and G. to the plaintiffs, showed that they (the defendants) had delivered the barley to D. and G. immediately on its arrival in this country, and without production of the bill of lading; that three months afterwards, on D. and G. becoming bankrupt, the plaintiffs, for the first time, claimed the barley as holders of the bill of lading indorsed to them by D. and G.; that the plaintiffs were bankers to D. and G. Under these circumstances the defendants sought to interrogate the plaintiffs as to the time at which, and the circumstances under which, the bill of lading was indorsed to them by D. and G., and also as to their relations and dealings with D. and G. Held, WILL- MEMORANDUM OF REVOCATION.-A testator shortly before his death executed on his will a memorandum of revocation in these words, "This will was cancelled this day," &c. The court refused to include it in the grant of administration: (In the Goods of Fraser, 21 L. T. Rep. N. S. 680. Prob.) CONTINGENT WILL.-A contingent will is where a testator refers to a period of time or some possible calamity which may happen within that time, not as a reason for making his will, but in language which makes the disposition of property depend upon that event. A testator, being obliged to leave England suddenly, executed a testamentary paper, in which he said, "should anything unfortunately happen to me while abroad, I wish everything I may be in possession of at that time, or anything I may be possessed of hereafter, to be equally divided," &c. The court held that the words "at that time" limited the disposing powers of the will to the contingency of his dying abroad, and refused probate: (In the Goods of Porter, 21 L. T. Rep N. S. 680. Prob.) SOLICITOR AND CLIENT-ATTACHMENT.-The Act for the Abolition of Imprisonment for Debt (32 ff 33 Vict. c. 62) does not prevent a writ of attachment from issuing against a solicitor who has made default in payment of a sum which he has been ordered by the court to pay: (Re Bush, 21 L. T. Rep. N. S, 692. Rolls.) SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE-AGREEMENT.-An agreement in writing cannot be qualified or altered by subsequent conversations or a presumed intended departure from the terms of the original agreement. A receipt for the deposit, duly stamped as an agreement, is sufficient to support a bill for specific performance of the contract: (Boun v. Stroud, 21 L. T. Rep. N. S. 695. V. C.`J.) WRIT OF SEQUESTRATION-32 & 33 VICT. C. 62, ss. 4 & 8.-The proper mode of enforcing obedience to an order for payment of money into court is, having regard to the 32 & 33 Vict. c. 62, ss. 4 and 9, by writ of sequestration only, and not of attachment: (Sykes ▾ Dyson, 21 L. T. Rep. N. S. 696. V. C. S.) EQUITY PRACTICE-PARTITION.-W. alleged a joint ownership of copyholds by two persons for twenty years and present possession by one of them (who survived the other) and by herself as joint-owners, and, claiming particular shares on special allegations, prayed for declaration of rights and a partition in the usual way. On general demurrer to this bill, held, that the allegation of present possession as joint-owners must be taken to mean in fee, and as on a petition the court might direct an inquiry as to the rights, and the plaintiff might be declared entitled, the demurrer must be overruled. Also, that even if the court considered W. ought first to prove her title at law, the bill would be retained for a year to give her that opportunity: (Ward v. Ward, 21 L. T. Rep. N. S. 699. V.C. M.) ANNUITY TO SECURE LOAN-REPURCHASES.Where the grantor of an annuity upon repurchase of the annuity, and the extinction of all his obligations to the grantee, filed a bill to have delivered up to him a policy of assurance effected on his life, by and in the name of the grantee, but with the money of the grantor, the court, following the decision in Gottlieb v. Cranch, 4 De G. M. & G. 440, dismissed the bill, but without costs: (Knox v. Turner, 21 L. T. Rep N. S. 701. V.C. S.) ings and affidavits" refers only to the affidavits as to discovery of documents, not to the general pleadings and affidavits in the cause. When a summons is dismissed with costs, the costs will, as a general rule, include all the costs, both of adjournment and in chambers: (Alcock v. Gill, 21 L. T. Rep. N. S. 704. V.C. J.) CHANGE OF VENUE-PREPONDERANCE OF CONVENIENCE-FORUM REI OF DEFENDANT.-In the exercise of a judge's discretion upon an application to change the venue in an action of contract, the advantage of holding the trial at the forum rei of the defendant, as well as the preponderance of convenience, should be considered: (Levy v. Rice, 21 L. T. Rep. N.S. 717. C. P.) ADMINISTRATION BY WIFE.-A wife took out administration to her husband's estate, and became insane before completely administering it. The court in granting administration to the son instead of the original value of the estate: (In allowed the sureties to justify for the present the Goods of J. James, 21 L. T. Rep. N.S. 730. Prob.) COURT OF EXCHEQUER-NISI PRIUS. (Before BRAMWELL, B. and a Special Jury.) MATTHEWS v. COLLIS AND ANOTHER. Liability of attorneys for not arresting a debtor. This was an action brought against a firm of attorneys for negligence. H. T. Cole and Patchitt appeared for the plaintiff; J. Karslake, H. James, and Inderwick, for the defendants. It appeared that the plaintiff was a manufacturer of hair cloth at Crewkerne, in Somersetshire, and the defendants were attorneys at Birmingham. It appeared that the plaintiff had had transactions with a person named Lawson, who carried on business in America, which resulted, as the plaintiff alleged, in a debt due to him of 70001. In Angust, who was anxious to bring matters to a settlement, 1867, Lawson came to England, and the plaintiff, instructed the defendants to arrest Lawson, on the ground that he was about to leave the country. Instead of at once proceeding to extremities and arresting Lawson without notice, one of the defendants called upon him and urged him to settle the plaintiff's claim, at the same time informing him that proceedings had been taken for the purpose of arresting him. Mr. Lawson becoming alarmed, at once left the country, and it was only after long and expensive proceedings in America that the plaintiff was induced to accept the sum of 30001. as a compromise of his claims against Lawson. He balance of his claim against Lawson, and the exnow brought the present action to recover the penses he had incurred in attempting to enforce payment of the whole debt. The defence was that the plaintiff had unnecessarily incurred expenses in taking legal proceedings in America when he might have recovered a judgment against Lawson in this country, which would have been recognised by the American courts. It was further contended that he had exaggerated his claim against Lawson, and that in reality he had recovered all that was due to him, from that person. Evidence having been called on both sides, and the learned counsel having addressed the jury on behalf of their respective clients. BRAMWELL, B. in summing up, told the jury that by endeavouring to act with kindness towards Lawson the defendants had clearly made themselves liable to the present action. The only question for the jury would be the amount of damages. The jury retired, and on returning in about half an hour, found a verdict for the plaintiff for 18007. BAIL COURT. Re EDWARD CRAIG (an Attorney, &c.) In this case a rule nisi had been obtained calling upon Mr. Edward Craig, an attorney who had practised in the county of Essex for many years, to show cause why he should not be struck off the rolls, he having been convicted at the Chelmsford October sessions of appropriating to his own use a sum of 1200l., the money of a client, and sentenced to twelve months' imprisonment. DOCUMENTS COSTS. A railway company having been made defendants to a suit, an affidavit as to documents was made by their secretary, who was not a defendant. The company answered, and the bill was re-amended, Lord now applied, on behalf of Mr. Craig, that whereupon the secretary made a second and a the rule might be enlarged until next term in order third affidavit as to documents. He was then to allow of time for the consideration by the authoexamined by the plaintiffs, ex parte, on their rities at the Home Office of memorials which had behalf, before the examiner; and in the course been presented praying for a review of the convicof such examination deposed to the possession of tion and that Mr. Craig might be pardoned. The certain documents not mentioned in his affidavit. money alleged to have been appropriated was the Upon summons by the plaintiffs, that the com- proceeds of the sale of some land belonging to the pany might be ordered to make a further affidavit client in question, and it seemed that instead of accounting for the documents referred to by the handing it over to the prosecutor he paid it into secretary in his examination: Held, that the wards he became bankrupt, and the client lost his his private account at the bank. Not long afterapplication was irregular, and summons dis- money. The prosecution and conviction was under missed with costs. The expression of Selwyn, the Fraudulent Bailee Act, and counsel contended L. J., in Wright v. Pitt, L. Rep. 3 Ch. 811, that at the trial that the Act had no application in the "such suspicion must be founded on the plead-case, inasmuch as it only referred to transactions |