The Lord Chancellor has appointed Frederick ames Munby, of Manchester, Gentleman, to be a Commissioner to administer Oaths in Chancery in England. The Right Hon. the Lord High Chancellor has ppointed Mr. George Curry, of Cleckheaton, in he county of York, Solicitor, a Commissioner to administer Oaths in Chancery, in England. THE GAZETTES. Professional Partnership Dissolbed. Gazette, Nov. 24. DUBOIS and GRIFFITHS, attorneys and solicitors, Church-passage, Guildhall-yd. Nov. 18. (Frederick Thomas Dubois and George A. Griffiths.) Bankrupts. Gazette, Dec. 1. To surrender at the Bankrupts Court, Basinghall-st. UNT, HENRY, oil manufacturer, Marsh-gate-la, Stratford, Pet. Nov. 29. Reg. Hazlitt. Sol., Reed, Bloomfield-st, Londonwall. Sur. Dec. 15 To surrender in the Country ARRISON, JOSEPH, secretary to a gas light and coke company, RICE, GEORGE, brickmaker, Alfred-ter, Hanwell. Pet. Nov. 25. HOMAS, EDWARD, attorney, Bristol. Pet. Nov. 25. Reg. Harley. Sur. Dec. 11 Gazette, Dec. 5. To surrender in the Bankrupts' Court, Basinghall-street. ARNHAM, H. B., gentleman, Gloucester-pl, Hyde-pk. Pet. Nov. 30. Reg. Roche. Sur. Jan. 18 AYDON, GEORGE, shoemaker, Kingsland-rd. Pet. Dec. 2. Reg. Roche. Sur. Dec. 21 OWNES, CAMPBELL, civil engineer, Ordnance-rd, St. John'swood, and Gresham-bldgs, Basinghall-st. Pet. Nov. 30. Reg. Pepys. Sur. Dec. 19 TTA, CHARLES, upholsterer, Stafford. Pet. Nov. 30. Reg. Pepys. Sur. Dec. 15 DAMS, FREDERICK, butcher, Longsight, near Manchester; Dec. 13, at eleven, at the Clarence hotel, Hyde-rd, Manchester. Sol., Davies, Manchester DDISCOTT, HENRY, nurseryman, St. Thomas-the-Apostle; Dec. 15, at eleven, at the Queen's hotel, Queen-st, Exeter. Sol., Searle AKER, JOHN, grocer, Hatton; Dec. 15, at eleven, at the Dog and Partridge inn, Tutbury. Sol. Chawner, Uttoxeter ECK, JOHN, cattle dealer, Skyethorns, near Skipton; Dec. 16, at two, at office of Sols., Robinson and Robinson, Skipton ELFITT, WILLIAM, butcher, Whittington; Dec. 12, at three, at office of Sol., Gee. Sheffield" RAHMA, LEWIS, and BRAHMA, OCTAVIUS, opticians, Southampton-row, Holborn, and Bristol; Dec. 14, at one, at office of Sol., Lewis, Cheapside BRETTELL, HENRY, auctioneer, Leominster; Dec. 14, at two, at the Great Western Railway hotel, Birmingham. Sol., Andrews, Leominster BROWN, JOHN READ, major-general in the Indian army, Abbey. gardens, Abbey-rd, St. John's-wood; Dec. 18, at two, at office of J. Comfort, accountant, Grecian-chmbs, Devereux-ct, Temple Sel., Chatterton, Southampton-st, Bloomsbury-sq BUCK, PHILIP, machinist, Framingham Farl; Dec. 13, at twelve, CRAVEN, ADELAIDE, boarding-house keeper, Rode; Dec. 11, at office of Hooper, Ryde CURTIS, JAMES, and WISEMAN, SAMUEL, cowkeepers, Great Yar mouth; Dec. 14, at eleven, at 8, Regent-st, Great Yarmouth. Sol., Clarke, Great Yarmouth DANN, WILLIAM JOHN, hosier, Nottingham; Dec. 15, at twelve, at office of Sol., Belk, Nottingham DEARLING, WILLIAM, miller, Carshalton; Dec. 15, at half-past three, at the Chamber of Commerce, Cheapside. Sol., Armstrong, Old Jewry DEELEY, JOSEPH, boot maker, Birkenhead; Dec. 14, at two, at office of Sol., Downham, Birkenhead EARLE, HENRY, attorney, Bedford-row; Dec. 15, at twelve, at the Guildhall Coffee-house, Gresham-st. Sols., Treherne and Wolferstan, Ironmonger-la, Cheapside FARLIE, JOHN GEORGE JOSHUA, teacher of music, Woolwich; Dec. 9. at twelve, at 38, Green's-end, Woolwich. Bol., Hughes, Upper Thames-st, and Woolwich FRAMPTON, THOMAS, publican, Bath; Dec. 8, at eleven, at Marchant's hotel, Bath. Sol., Crutwell, Bath FULLER, JAMES, painter, Wolverhampton; Dec. 16, at twelve, at office of Sol., Barrow, Wolverhampton GIBSON, CHARLES, coal merchant, Kendall; Dec. 12, at twelve, at the Bull and Royal hotel, Church st, Preston. Sols., Thompson and Graham GOODWIN. CHARLES, fancy dealer, Lowther-arcade, Strand; Dec 14, at two, at the Guildhall Coffee-house, Gresham-st Sols., Treherne and Wolferstan, Ironmonger-la, Cheapside GRIFFITHS, THOMAS, chemist, Bideford; Dec. 18, at three, at office of Sols., Woollacott and Leonard, Gracechurch-st HARDY, JEFFERY, wine merchant, Plymouth; Dec. 15, at twelve, at office of Sols., Boyes, Fowler, and Co., Plymouth HARPER, WILLIAM CESAR, basket maker, Kamsgate; Dec. 14, at three, at office of Sol., Edwards, Ramsgate HAYWARD, JOHN ROBERT SAMUEL, surgeon, Shirehampton; Dec. 13, at two, at office of Sol., Beckingham, Bristol HOLMES, CHARLES, grocer, Stogursey; Dec. 15, at twelve, at office of Sols., Reed and Cook, Bridgwater HOLMES, THOMAS MARSHALL FAULKNER, timber merchant, Aston-juxta- Birmingham; Dec. 15, at eleven, at office of Sols., Jelf and Goule, Birmingham KEYWORTH, HENRY, tinman, Lincoln; Dec. 14, at eleven, at office of Sol., Hebb, Lincoln LAMBERT, WILLIAM, ironmonger, Southborough, in Tonbridge; Dec. 13, at three, at the Guildhall Coffee House, London. Sols., Stone, Wall, and Simpson, Tunbridge-wells LEE, WILLIAM, coach builder, Dedham: Dec. 15, at four, at the Marlborough Head Inn, Dedham. Sols., Messrs. Philbrick, Colchester LEVY, MICHAEL, out of business, Addison-rd, Notting-hill; Dec. 12, at three, at the Bull's Head Inn, Bread-st, Cheapside. Sol., Maniere, Great James-st, Bedford row MARSH, JOSEPH, watchmaker, Wolverhampton and Bilston; Dec. 12, at eleven, at office of Sol., Langman, Wolverhampton MEREDITH, JOHN, innkeeper, Yockleton; Dec. 6, at eleven, at office of Sol., Morris, Shrewsbury MOGG, THOMAS, cabinet maker, Old Kent-rd; Dec. 11, at two, at 145, Cheapside NASH. GEORGE, ship chandler, Bristol; Dec. 11, at two, at office of Sol., Beckingham, Bristol NATION, JOHN, plumber, Wrington; Dec. 14, at twelve, at office of Sol., Perham, Bristol PHILLIPS, JAMES, farmer, Glandwr, par Llanfyrnach; Dec. 12, at twelve, at the Rutzen Arms, Narberth. Sol., Howell, Llanelly PICKARD, HENRY, architect, Llandudno; Dec. 14, at twelve, at office of Sol., Chamberlain, Llandudno PIERSON, THOMAS, attorney, Sheffield; Dec. 13, at twelve, at the Cutlers'-hall, Church-st, Sheffield. Sol., Fernell, Sheffield ROBERTSHAW, HIRAM, tea dealer, Thornton, par Bradford; Dec. 14, at three, at office of Sol., Moore, Bradford ROBINSON, HENRY, carpenter, Swansea; Dec. 11, at three, at office of Sols., Clifton and Woodward, Swansea RUSE, CHARLES, pewterer, Hereford-pl, Commercial-rd; Dec. 14, at three, at office of Sol., Holmes, Eastcheap SHARP, ADOLPHUS, leather seller, Tabernacle-walk, Finsbury; Dec. 19, at two, at offices of Sols., Norton, Son, and Elam, Walbrook SHEPHERD, JOHN, out of business, Bradford; Dec. 14, at half-past two, at office of Sol., Pullen, Leeds SMITH, WILLIAM HENRY, rope maker, Fountain-stairs, Cherry. gdns-st, Bermondsey; Dec. 14, at twelve, at office of Sol., Mote, Walbrook STEPHENSON, JABEZ, grocer, Hull; Dec. 14, at three, at the Kingston hotel, Scale-la, Hull. Sol., Spurr SUMMERS, JAMES, baker, Mile End, Bow; Dec. 12, at three, at the Claremont Arms, Upper Grange-rd, Bermondsey. Sol., Bilton, New Bridge-st, Blackfriars SUMNER, WILLIAM, spindle maker, Preston; Dec. 15, at half-past two, at office of Sols., Cunliffe and Watson, Preston TILL, CHARLES, baker, Southsea; Dec. 15, at three, at office of Sol., Blake, Portsea URRY, JAMES, hair dresser, Newport, Isle of Wight; Dec. 11, at three, at 58, Lugley-st, Newport. Sol., Joyce VICKERY, JAMES, blacksmith, Blagdon, par. Pitminster; Dec. 13, at eleven, at office of Sol., Trenchard. Taunton WALKER, JOHN HARNETT, cabinet maker, Whitstable; Dec. 14, at three, at the City Terminus hotel, Cannon-st. Sols., Sankey, Son, and Flint, Canterbury WARREN, GEORGE, general in Indian army, Bognor; Dec. 18, at twelve, at office of Sol., Holt, John-st, Bedford-row WELLER, EDWIN, farmer, Bevendean; Dec. 14, at twelve, at office of Sols., Black, Freeman, and Gell, Brighton WHITE, JAMES, gentleman. Slough; Dec. 14, at twelve, at Kings. ford and Dorman, solicitors, Essex-st, Strand. Sols., Sankey, Son, and Fiint, Canterbury WHITE, MATTHIAS GEORGE, gasfitter, Landport; Dec. 14, at eleven, at office of Sol., Walker, Portsea WILKINSON, RICHARD, saddler, Broseley: Dec. 20, at two, at office of Sols., Messrs. Broughall, Shrewsbury Gazette, Dec. 5. BAGSHAW, THOMAS, joiner, Matlock; Dec. 29, at ten, at the Gate Inn, Matlock Bath. Sol., Neale BRABIN, WILLIAM, butcher, Chester; Dec. 16, at half-past two, at office of Sol., Churton, Chester CASH, JOHN, farmer, Bilsby; Dec. 18, at three, at office of Sol., Mason, Alford CHARMBURY, WILLIAM, miller, Bathampton; Dec. 18, at eleven, at office of Sols., Little and Little, Bath COZENS, GEORGE EDWARD, grocer's assistant, Bloomsbury st Dec. 21, at three, at 68, Guildford-st, Russell-sq. Sol., Craven DAVIDSON, GOLDIE THOMAS, stationer, Sheffield; Dec. 18, at three, at office of Sols., Clegg, Sheffield DBVEREUX, WILLIAM, painter, Earlestown; Dec. 18, at eleven, at offices of Messrs. Davies and Co., Warrington. Sols., Davies and Brook, Warrington DIXON, GEORGE, and SMITH, HENRY, grocers, Cockspur-st, GUEST, GEORGE, licensed victualler, Gornal Wood, par. Sedgley; HARBRIDGE, JAMES, farmer, Cannock; Dec. 15, at eleven, at offices of Sol., Glover, Walsall HARRIS, WILLIAM, cabinet maker, Birkbeck-rd, and Schofield-rd, Upper Holloway; Dec. 14, at two, at offices of Sol., Shapland, Staple-inn, Holborn HAYWARD, HENRY, currier, Yeovil; Dec. 18, at one, at the Mermaid hotel, Yeovil. Sol., Beckingham, Bristol HENKEL, ADAM, boot maker, Talbot-rd, Paddington; Dec. 22, at three, at office of Rule and Head, Westbourne-grove, Bayswater. Sol., Welman, Great George-st, Westminster HOPKINS, JOHN, soda water manufacturer, Southampton; Dec. 15, at two, at office of Sol., Kilby, Southampton HOPKINS, WILLIAM, painter, Bath; Dec. 13, at half past eleven, at office of Sol., Wilton, Bath HOUGHTON, JAMES JOSEPH, refreshment-room keeper, Basingstoke and Netley; Dec. 21, at one, at the Red Lion hotel, Basingstoke. Sol., Chandier, Basingstoke HOYES, EDWARD, and HOYES, GEORGE, builders, Nottingham; Dec. 18, at twelve, at office of Sol., Belk, Nottingham JONES, WILLIAM SAVILLE, glass merchant, Leeds; Dec. 19, at two, at offices of Sols., G. A. and W. Emsley, Leeds KAYE, JAMES, builder, Barnsley; Dec. 28, at half-past two, at offices of Sol, Dibb, Barnsley KINGSLAND, RICHARD, ironfounder, Brighton; Dec. 19, at eleven at office of Sol., Foster, Birmingham LAYCOCK, RICHARD, saddler, Bradford; Dec. 18, at three, at office of Sols., Lees, Senior, and Wilson, Bradford LEWIS, THOMA3, beerhouse keeper, Wolverhampton; Dec. 18, at three, at offices of Sol., Stratton, Wolverhampton LINDO, ALEXANDRE, shipping agent, Colebrooke-row, Islington; Dec. 15, at two, at office of Sols., Sampson, Samuel, and Emanuel, Finsbury-circus LOWE, CHARLES, coal dealer, Heaton Norris; Dec. 18, at three, at office of Sol., Brown, Stockport MARCHANT, RICHARD, miller, Withyham; Dec. 18, at three, at the Sussex Hotel, Tunbridge Wells. Sol., Head, jun., Cannon-st MATHER, CHARLES JAMES, working jeweller, Bath; Dec. 18, at eleven, at office of Sol., Bartrum, Bath MATTHEWMAN, HENRY, and MATTHEWMAN, JOHN, ale merchants Knaresborough; Dec. 21, at one, at the Crown hotel, Knaresborough. Sols., Hirst and Capes, Knaresborough MEDDINGS, JAMES, cabinet maker, Evesham; Dec. 15, at twelve, at office of Sols., New, Prance, and Garrard, Evesham MERRICK, MARTHA, crape trimming manufacturer, Adelphi-ter, Victoria-pk; Dec. 18, at eleven, at 55, Basinghail-st. Sol., New MILLINGTON, THOMAS HENRY, no occupation, Tipton; Dec. 21, at eleven, at office of Sol., Greenway, Wolverhampton MOSLEY, JOHN MARLOW, bookseller, Leeds, Dec 18, at two, at offices of Simpson and Beevers, accounants, Leeds. Sol., Whiteley, Leeds MUDD, RICHARD, woollen draper. West Hartlepool; Dec. 20, at eleven, at office of Sol., Pullan, Leeds MULLER, AUGUSTUS WILLIAM, manager to a soap manufacturer, PASHLEY, WILLIAM, chandler's shop keeper, Sutterton-st, Caledonian-rd, Islington; Dec. 14, at three, at office of Sol, Marshall, Lincoln's-inn-fields PECK, THOMAS, painter, Barnsley; Dec. 21, at eleven, at office of Sol., Rogers, Barnsley PLUMTREE, GEORGE, butcher, Epworth; Dec. 15, at two, at office of Messrs. Collinson, Parkin, and Littlewood, Epworth. Sols., Burdekin, Smith, and Pye-Smith POLKINGHORNE, EDWIN SHERMAN, brewer, Penzance; Dec. 14, PRICE, JOHN, baker, Ruthin; Dec. 16, at twelve, at the Wynnstay RENDER, GEORGE, tailor, Northallerton; Dec. 19, at two, at the ROBINSON, JAMES, innkeeper, Whitby; Dec. 20, at two, at 38, ROBINSON, THOMAS, farmer, Bniton Agnes; Dec. 20, at three, at the Black Lion hotel, Bridlington. Sol., Summers RUDRUM, FREE IC, out of business, Norwich; Dec. 18, at one, at office of Messrs. Gamble and Harvey, accountants, Colemanst. Sol., Stanley, Norwich SEARLE, WILLIAM, ship broker, Liverpool; Dec. 22, at three, at office of Sols., Etty, Liverpool SHACKLETON, ABSALOM SAMUEL, and CHAPMAN, JOHN, wholesale and retail confectioners, Newcastle-upon-Tyne; Dec. 18, at two, at offices of Mr. T. Bowden, accountant, Newcastle-uponTyne. Sols., Joel, and Ingledew and Daggett, Newcastle uponTyne SHENTON, THOMAS, licensed victualler, Rowley Regis; Dec. 14, at eleven, at office of Sol., Stokes, Dudley SLACK, WILLIAM, milliner, Sheffield; Dec. 15, at eleven, at office of Sol., Fairburn, Sheffield SNELLING, ALFRED, boot maker, Sittingbourae; Dec. 15, at eleven, at offices of Sol., Gibson, Sittingbourne SPICER, CHARLES, stationer, Johnson's-pl, Harrow-rd; Dec. 21, at twelve, at office of Harris, Wreford, and Co., accountants, Exeter. Sol., Trehane, jun., Exeter STILES, DANIEL BOOTH, and STILES, WILLIAM BALL, builders Northampton; Dec. 15, at twelve, at the Wentworth hotel, Peterborough. Sols., Deacon and Wilkins, Peterborough TILEY, WILLIAM, butcher, Woodchester; Dec 26, at half-past twelve, at office of Sol., Winterbotham, stroud TURNER, JAMES, and LOWE, JOHN, bootmanufacturers, Leicester; Dec. 7, at one, at office of Sol., Ouston, Leicester URRY, DANIEL BARTON, brickmaker, Shanklin; Dec. 15, as three, at office of Messrs. Fardell a d Woodridge, Sandown WALKER, WILLIAM, and WALKER, JAMES, drapers, Maidstone; Dec. 15, at twelve, at offices of Sols., Reed and Lovell, Guild. hall-chmbs, Basinghall-st WALLING, SAMPSON, grocer, Littlehampton; Dec. 20, at twelve, at the Chamber of Commerce, Cheapside, Sol., Brandreth, Brighton WATLING, CHARLES, coach builder, Pentonville-road; Dec. 14, at two, at office of Mr. T. Ager, Barnard's-inn. Sol., Roberts WHYTE, MARY JANE, milliner, Bedford; Dec. 11, at three, at office of Sol., Stimson, Bedford WILSON, JOHN, jeweller, Gainsborough; Dec. 23, at eleven, at office of Sol., Rex, Lincoln WOODROFFE, CHARLES, tailor, Masborough; Deo. 22, at twelve, at office of Sol.. Smith, Sheffield WOODRUFF, JOHN, out of business, Marple, near Stockport; Dec. 18, at three, at office of Sol., Sampson, Manchester WRIGHT, JOHN FLETCHER, victualler, Bicester; Dec. 18, at twelve, at offices of Sol., Berridge, High-st, Marylebone, and Bicester, Oxon ZOLLER, GEORGE, restaurant keeper, Cullum st; Dec. 7, at three, at 1, Cullum-st. Sols., Barton and Drew, Fore-st HEMMING.-On the 4th inst., at 3, Fairfax-road, the wife of G. W MARRIAGES. KIPLING. On the 29th ult., John Philip Kipling, solicitor, age 63,. PAYNE. On the 30th ult., at Fairford, Gloucestershire, aged 6 PARTRIDGE AND COOPER AND COOPER SCIENTIFIC PRESENTS Collections to THE NEW SYSTEM OF BUYING A WHOLESALE & RETAIL STATIONERS, 192, FLEET-STREET, AND 1 & 2, CHANCERY-LANE, LONDON, E. Carriage paid to the Country on Orders exceeding 208. DRAFT PAPER, 48. 6d., 6s., 78.,78. 9d., and 98. per ream. ream. NOTE, 98. 6d. per A JUSTICES CLERKS ACCOUNTORGE C OKE, of the Mansion House, London, for Justices' Clerks' Account of Fees received by them. The headings are-date; subject of entry; fees earned; fees debited in ledger; ledger folio; current fees received; tines, fees, &c., credited; ledger folio; fines, fees, &c., repaid; office expenses. A specimen sheet sent to any applicant. PRICES.-One quire, 58.; two quires, S.; three quires, 118.; four quires, 148.; five quires, 178.; six quires, 208.; half-bound; or in sheets unbound, 3s. per quire. May be obtained direct, or through, by order, any bookseller. HORACE COX, 10, Wellington-street, Strand, London. "Lyell's Elements of Geology," and facilitate the important Study of Mineralogy and Geology, can be had at 2, 5, 10, 20, 50, to 500 guineas; also single specimens of Minerals, Rocks, Fossils, and Recent Shells, Geological Maps, Hammers, all the recent publications, &c., of J. TENNANT, Mineralogist to Her Majesty, 149, Strand.Private Instruction is given in Geology and Mineralogy by Mr. Tennant, F.G.S., at his residence, 149, Strand, W.C. THE portable FOOT WARMER.-Sufferers from coldness of the extremities or languid circulation should test this neat and improved article for imparting heat, surpassing the antique water bottle, inasmuch as a uniform heat for an indefinite period can be retained at an infinitesimal cost. Especially valuable for railway travelling, the carriage, or study. Light, portable, and ornamental.-To be obtained of all leading Furnishing Warehouses, Drapers, Chemists, in imitation sealskin, Price 218. Sole Manufacturers, SPENCE and CO., 6, Leather-lane, E.C. EWLAY'S TRAFALGAR CIGARS. BEWLA 198. per 100, and superior to many sold at S0s.. and acknowledged by gentlemen to be as good many cigars for which they pay 6d. each. In consequence of Messrs. Bewlay and Co.'s enormous stock of Foreign Cigars, gentlemen can always depend upon getting them thoroughly well seasoned, and at a moderate price. Messrs. Bewlay and Co. are practically acquainted with their trade, and can therefore recommend their goods with the greatest confidence, as they only make purchases when the crops are really good. They particularly call attention to the Muria brand, which is undoubtedly the finest that can now be had. EWLAY and CO., Importers to the Royal at 49, Strand, 100 years. Wholesale and Retail. MANILLA CIGARS.-Messrs. VENNING and Co., of 14, St. Mary Axe, London, E. C., ha79 just received a consignment of No. 3 MANILLA CIGARS, in excellent condition, in boxes of 500 each. Price 50s. per box. Orders to be accompanied by a remittance. N.B.-Sample boxes of 100, 108. 6d. THE PRACTICAL STATUTES OF THE SESSION 1871 (34 & 35 VICTORIA); WITH NTRODUCTIONS, NOTES, TABLES OF STATUTES REPEALED AND SUBJECTS ALTERED LISTS OF LOCAL AND PERSONAL AND PRIVATE ACTS, AND A COPIOUS INDEX. Edited by W. PATERSON, Esq., Incumbents Resignation Act. Life Assurance Companies Act (1870) Public Schools Act (1860) Amend- Charters (Colleges) Act. Local Government Board Act Bills of Exchange and Promissory Railway Regulation Amendment Fast India Stocks (Dividends) Act. Lodgers' Goods Protection Act. The Trade Union Act. Criminal Law Amendment (Violence, Burial Law Amendment Act. LONDON: HORACE Industrial and Provident Societies Amendment Act. Church Building Acts Amendment Act. Parliamentary Witnesses Oaths Act. Limited Owners Residence Act (1870) Amendment Act. COX, 10, WELLINGTON-STREET, STRAND, W.C. OST PERSONS ARE FAMILIAR with of the Pianoforte Makers, by which anyone who Hires an Instrument and pays the Hire for that period become the ABSOLUTE OWNER OF THE PIANOFORTE. Previously to the introduction of this plan it was almost as difficult for those of limited income to buy a good Pianoforte as to BUY A HOUSE; and persons went on year ofer year, paying for the Hire of an Instrument, and expete ed as much money as would have bought the Pianoforte several times over. What will hold good for Pianofortes will hold good for HOUSES; and there are many who would no doubt AVAIL THEMSELVES OF THE OPPORTUNITY, if it was afforded them, of becoming THE OWNER OF A HOUSE in the same way as they have already become the owner of their pianoforte. THE DIRECTORS OF THE BIRKBECK BUILDING SOCIETY THE HAVE DETERMINED TO AFFORD SAME FACILITIES FOR PURCHASING HOUSES As now exist for Buying Pianofortes. A HOUSE being, however, a more expensive article to Purchase than a Pianoforte, the "Three Years' Sistem wil not apply, excepting in a very few cases: so that a MORE LENGTHENED PERIOD IS NECESSARY over which the time of Hiring must extend. In pursuance of this resolution THE DIRECTORS HAVE MADE ARRANGEMENTS WITH THE OWNERS OF HOUSES In various parts of London, and its Suburbs, by which they are enabled to afford to the Members of the Birkbeck Building Society AND OTHERS A very wide CHOICE in the SELECTION both of HOUSES and the locality in which they are situated. The Plan ugon which the Directors propose to proceed is TO LET THESE HOUSES FOR A PERIOD OF TWELVE-AND-A-HALF YEARS, At the end of which Time, if the Rent be Regularly Pal, THE HOUSE Will become the absolute Property of the Tenant WITHOUT FURTHER PAYMENT OF ANY KIND. IN ALL CASES POSSESSION OF THE HOUSE WILL BE GIVEN WITHOUT ANY IMMEDIATE OUTLAY IN MONEY, BEYOND THIS SMALL SUM NO PAYMENT OF ANY KIND 18 REQUIRED BY THE SOCIETY BEYOND THE STIPULATED RENT, WHICH MAY Although the Number of years for payment of Rent is fixed New System of Purchasing a House, MAY BE SUMMED UP AS FOLLOWS: 1. Persons of Limited Income, Clerks, Shopmen, and others, may, by becoming Tenants of the BIRKBECK BUILDING SOCIETY, be placed at once in a position of independence as regards their Landlord, 2. Their RENT CANNOT BE RAISED. 3. They CANNOT BE TURNED OUT OF POSSES. SION so long as they pay their Rent. 4. NO FEES or FINES of any kind are chargeable. 5. They can leave the House at any time without notice, rent being payable only to the time of giving up possession. 6. If circumstances compel them to leave the House before the completion of their Twelve and a half Years' Tenancy, they can Sub-let the House for the remainder of the Term, or they can Transfer their right to another Tenant. 7. Finally, NO LIABILITY or RESPONSIBILITY of iny kind is incurred, beyond the Payment of Rent by those who acquire Houses by this New System. The BIRKBECK BUILDING SOCIETY have on their List several HOUSES, which they are prepared to LET on the TWELVE AND A HALF YEARS' SYSTEM, and in many cases Immediate Possession may be obtained. The Terms on which Houses can be placed on this Register may be obtained on application to FRANCIS RAVENSCROFT, Manager. To Readers and Correspondents. All anonymous communications are invariably rejected. LORD JUSTICE JAMES has thrown out a hint which may be usefully taken by County Court Judges. It seems to be the practice in bankruptcy for witnesses to be examined before a Registrar, who, All communications must be authenticated by the name and address of the writer, in case of difficulty, reports to the Court; or the case is taken to not necessarily for publication, but as a guarantee of good faith. The volumes of the LAW TIMES and of the LAW TIMES REPORTS, are strongly and uniformly bound at the office, as completed, for 5s. 6d. for the Journal, and 4s. 6d. for the Reports. the Judge on appeal. Thus it happens that questions of fact are not tried before the Judge at all. In a case of alleged fraudulent preference, before the LORDS JUSTICES during last Term, LORD JUSTICE JAMES said that if a Judge of a County Court heard witnesses himself or had questions of fact tried by a jury "the decision of the County Court on a question of fact would never be reversed on appeal unless it were plainly contrary to the evidence." The tribunal of the Registrar is very useful in its way, but if its functions are to be enlarged so as to diminish the effectiveness of the decisions of the Judge it will be a very great evil. Portfolios for preserving the current numbers of the LAW TIMES, price 5s. 6d., by THE Pall Mall Gazette has made a somewhat serious charge against post, 54. extra. LAW TIMES REPORTS, price 3s. 6d., by post, 3d. extra. 109 109 110 solicitors, which is, in effect, that they are in the habit of keeping purchasers out of their title deeds when money is cheap, in order to obtain the 5 per cent. on the amount of the purchase money, which, it is said, they are entitled to charge "by Act of Parliament. The further allegation is made that the profits so derived are put in the pockets of the solicitors. The reign, the year, and the chapter of the Act of Parliament are not given-no such Act is in existence. And if there are a few dishonest practitioners who, to favour their clients-for to suggest that the solicitors can put the money in their own pockets is absurd-drive a purchaser to the door of a court of equity before they hand over the title deeds, the 113 number must be very limited, and without stronger evidence than the ipse dixit of our contemporary we altogether discredit the 115 statement. 110 111 111 112 112 114 115 115 LEGISLATION AND JURISPRUDENCE:- When Life Insurance Policy Effective REAL PROPERTY AND CONVEYANCING:- 116 117 117 118 119 119 119 119 120 120 MR. VERNON HARCOURT'S complaints of the law's delays in the courts of appeal are perfectly just. But was the evidence which he adduces in the least degree necessary to convince anybody of the accuracy of his conclusions? All persons in authority are familiar with the utter uselessness of the Court of Exchequer Chamber. It is a tribunal which has stood condemned in the estimation of the Profession for years past. Every objection which can be urged against the continued existence of a court applies to the Court of Exchequer Chamber. Too frequently it is divided and overrules by a bare majority the decisions of a unanimous court. The number of Judges which it requires causes great 119 inconvenience to the courts from which the appeals do not come, leaving them in so unsatisfactory a condition as to diminish the weight of their decisions, and therefore the probability of these decisions being accepted as final. And moreover a beaten suitor rarely stops at the Exchequer Chamber, but goes on to the House of Lords, to which he ought to be able to go direct with the reasonable certainty of obtaining an immediate hearing. No single voice, we are quite certain, would be raised in support of 12 the Exchequer Chamber. The Judges would gladly see it abolished, 123 and the Profession would welcome anything which removes from them the scandal of procrastination and delay. All the world being 124 agreed as to the existence of grievances connected with the administration of the law, Mr. HARCOURT'S earnest representations were hardly necessary, and if he would take as vigorous measures in Parliament as he does in the Press and on the platform, we might soon arrive at some practical result. (HAKIN'S CASE of the Companies Act 1862 BRUTTON. THE PARISH OF ST. GEORGE, HANOVER-SQUARE Metropolis Local Management Act256 Vict. c. 102, ss. 75, 107.. 552 CARTER r. SMITH Stock and Share Markets... Locke King's Act (17 & 18 Vict. c. 113), V. C. BACON'S COURT. Court of Queen's Bench (Ireland)........... 117 HETMAN r. DUBOIS MAGISTRATES' LAW: Principal and surety-Consolidation of Marylebone Police Court.. Borough Quarter Sessions Irish Criminal and Judicial Statistics..... 126 THE Lodgers' Goods Protection Act has already proved that it is BIRTHS, MARRIAGES, AND DEATHS NOTICE. NOW PUBLISHING. 127 127 A GENERAL INDEX to vols. 11 to 20 of the LAW TIMES REPORTS, New The Law and the Lawyers. Ox Monday evening next, the 18th inst., Mr. JACOB WALEY will read a paper at a meeting of the Social Science Association "On the Devolution, Transfer, and Disposition of Land." no exception to the great bulk of the law as made by Parliament. A case came before Mr. MANSFIELD, the Police Magistrate, last week, in which the question was raised whether, where a lodger bought the goods of a tenant upon which the landlord had distrained and allowed them to remain in the tenant's possession, to be bought back when convenient to the tenant, such goods could be a second time distrained upon by the landlord, For the landlord who distrained it was contended that the tenant had a beneficial interest in the property, and that the Act was intended only to apply to goods in the possession of the lodger. Clearly if it could be shown that a tenant had any property in the goods of the lodger they would be liable to distress. The Act says, that the lodger must make a declaration that the tenant has no property or beneficial interest in the goods threatened or distrained upon. If, notwithstanding this declaration, the landlord distrains and fails to prove that his immediate tenant had some interest in the goods, he will be liable to a penalty. On the evidence in the case before Mr. MANSFIELD he dismissed the summons and expressed a doubt whether any point of law was raised on to us that where the goods of a tenant are purchased by a lodger, which the opinion of a Superior Court could be taken. It appears and an arrangement made by which the purchase becomes in redeem, when he is able, if the case is not outside the Act it is only reality only an hypothecation, the tenant having the right to just within it. Such transactions may have all the effects of a bill his furniture to different lodgers unknown to his landlord, whose of sale, and registration be avoided. A tenant might transfer all right to distrain would be utterly defeated. Parliament cannot have contemplated such a state of things. THE scheme of education and examination set on foot by the Inns of Court leaves attorneys and solicitors to the Incorporated Law Society. A correspondent draws attention to the fact that formerly attorneys and solicitors were members of Gray's-inn, and from this we may deduce that they have a claim on the Inns of Court which ought to be recognised. He writes:-"It is but little known that the Inns of Court and Chancery were originally established for the education and instruction as well of attorneys as of students for the Bar. Your legal readers will knd this in the case of Rex. v. The Principal and Antients of Barnard's Inn (5 Ad. & Ell.). The present inquiry as to the efficiency of the regulations of the Inns of Court, and the appropriation of their funds is of paramount importance, and is in the able hands of Sir ROUNDELL PALMER and other eminent jurists. The Honourable Society of Gray's-inn, of which (though an attorney) I have been thirty years a member, is reputed to have an income of 7000l. a year-I believe more. During the last three years, consisting of twelve terms, only fourteen students have been called to the Bar. Several of these barristers so called, have not, nor ever had, any intention of studying or practising law. At the same time, students admitted members of the inn, and afterwards becoming attorneys, have been expelled the society solely on the ground of their becoming such. It is remarkable that several of the present benchers of Gray's-inn have risen from the rank of attorneys, though they now exclude their quondam brethren from the society. If, as I believe, 21,000l. has been spent in three years in the call of fourteen gentlemen to the Bar, the moderate sum of 15007, has been expended on each of them." PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATIONS. IF credit is to be given to newspaper reports of the Tichborne trial, the points of law which occasionally rise during its slow progress are dealt with in a somewhat peculiar manner. A few days ago, counsel for the plaintiff objected to the production, for admission in evidence, of a certain document, on the ground that it was in the nature of a confidential document between client and attorney. This objection is an intelligible one, and is daily allowed in our courts of justice. But it was not so in the instance to which we would refer, and the remarks of the Judge on the objection seem to us, with all due deference, to be rather of a novel if not of a startling character: "The Court has power," said Lord Chief Justice Bovill, "To make an order for the discovery of documents, and if there is any particular document as to which I have no power, the Court of Chancery has power, and if the documents were in your (the plaintiff's) possession you would be bound to lodge them in the Court of Chancery. If there is any difficulty raised about the production of documents an application could be made to me or to the Court of Chancery, and I should exercise the fullest jurisdiction I possessed in compelling the production of documents in the possession of either parties.' Counsel still objected, contending that the jurisdiction did not apply, and that his objection, if worth anything, went to all the jurisdictions; but the Judge, remarking that it was a waste of time-a remark, perhaps, pardonable, because of the severe trial on his Lordship's patience, which the slow progress of the trial involves--declined to entertain it. The subject of privileged communications is of so much importance, and has been so thoroughly well considered, that it might be imagined that there could be no difference of opinion on it. The position of attorney and client is considered to be so sacred that the former is not to give in evidence anything whatever said to him by his client in that capacity. It would be absurd for us here to enumerate the cases in which this has been held, for it is one of the clearest points in our law of evidence. The privilege extends not only to information conveyed directly by the client to his legal adviser-such as statements by word of mouth, or communications by letter, but to all deeds, papers, and documents entrusted by the client to his care-these the legal adviser is entitled to refuse to produce or to give any information respecting them: (Robson v. Kemp, 5 Esp. 54.) In another case an attorney was asked to produce a document, but refused to do so on the ground of privilege, inasmuch as it was his client's deed, and given to his care in his capacity of legal adviser. Being asked by the counsel on the opposite side what it was, the Judge ruled he was not obliged to answer: (Volant v. Sawyer, 13 C. B. 231.) There is a stronger case still to show how sacredly the law looks upon the position of client and attorney. We refer to the case of Newton v. Chaplin (10 C. B. 356), in which it was held an attorney who held a document for a client could not be compelled to produce it though required to do so by a person who had an equal interest in it with his client. It is true in the Tichborne case a gentleman who for a time conducted the plaintiff's case has ceased to do so; but that does not in the slightest degree interfere with the application of the above rule. It is quite clear that whatever documents were entrusted to him as attorney for the claimant cannot be produced in evidence without the consent of the claimant himself, or through his counsel. And with regard to the power invested recently in the Courts of Common Law of ordering the discovery of documents it can only be exercised in a similar way to which it had of all times been exercised by the Court of Chancery. And so far as we have been able to see in no instance has the latter Court ordered the produc tion of documents which were objected to on the ground of privilege. And if the Court had power to do what the Lord Chief Justice intimated it had what is the use of a rule which can be so evaded? REMEDIES FOR SANITARY NEGLIGENCE. THE amount of personal injury and human misery caused by a want of due attention to the dictates of science respecting noxious vapours and accumulations has suggested, even to the non-legal mind of the Times, that wrong-doers should be made responsible in damages to those whom their neglect may injure. "If," says our contemporary, "we regard the subject from a practical point of view, it must be confessed that any legal supervision of the construction and maintenance of dwelling-houses would be, if not impossible, at least very difficult, and thoroughly alien from the spirit of English institutions. But an effectual remedy for the evils complained of might probably be found by the application of the familiar principle that wrong-doers, or persons responsible for the wrong-doing of others, are liable to pay pecuniary damages to those whom their acts or defaults have injured. We know that nearly all, if not all, cases of typhoid arise from the contamination of drinking water by sewage, or from the permeation of dwellings by sewer gas. In order that such contamination or permeation may occur, somebody must be in fault-either the local authority, responsible for the public works; the owner of the premises, responsible for the original construction of the private works; or the occupier, responsible for their maintenance in a state of efficiency." Upon this it is proposed that a short Act of Parliament should be passed. "providing that after the lapse of one year from its enactment, any corporation or person who was found by a jury to be responsible for having caused typhoid fever should be liable to pay pecuniary damages to any who suffered from the disease, or to the representatives of any who fell victims to it." Now unfortunately there is a principle of our law which discourages the multiplicity of suits, and upon which has been founded the distinction between the remedies for private and public nuisances. For a private nuisance an action will now liefor a public nuisance an indictment only will lie, unless the plaintiff has suffered some particular damage. The scope of this doctrine has been very attentively considered in recent cases. In Winterbothamv. Lord Derby (L. Rep. 2 Ex. 321), the LORD CHIEF BARON said that it was impossible to look at the judgments of the Law Lords in the case of Ricket v. The Metropolitan Bailway Company without seeing that they thought the law had been too far extended in the direction of allowing this description of action to be brought, and it is very doubtful, therefore, whether Parliament would voluntarily breed multiplicity of suits to compel the observance of sanitary precautions. The reason of the distinction in point of principle between the remedies for public and private nuisances is perfectly plain. Imagine an epidemic of typhoid fever arising from the carelessness and negligence of contractors. An entire community of injured persons bring actions against the contractors, and one verdict being given against the contractors they would be absolutely ruined in a very short space of time. In such cases of public nuisance the law now says that unless an individual plaintiff is damnified to a greater extent than his neighbours he shall not maintain an action, but the offender may be indicted. A private nuisance, on the other hand, is limited in its effects. Your neighbour builds a pigstye close to your drawing-room window so as to render the enjoyment of your residence impossible, or even uncomfortable. He is liable to an action at your suit, and there the matter ends. We have dealt with the subject on elementary principles without reference to the difficulty of fixing with certainty any particular disease upon any particular nuisance. Our contemporary says that in the generality of cases no such difficulty would occur, whereby he means that there might be a reasonable moral certainty. That, however, is someway removed from a legal certainty which a court of law would regard as justifying the finding of a jury. Such a proposition, however, as that to which we have referred cannot be seriously discussed in view of the settled principles of our law-principles which we must think that Parliament could hardly venture to disturb even whilst affected by the excitement caused by the imminent danger of the Heir to the Throne. Our sanitary laws appear to us to be sufficient. This is shown by a glance at the powers conferred upon local authorities by the several Acts relating to nuisances, which are summarised in Mr. OKE's Synopsis (p. 1189), where it will be seen that the local authority has power to appoint a committee to receive notices and take proceedings, to appoint inspectors of nuisances at a salary, to procure sanitary reports and pay for the samea power which might be exercised more frequently with great public advantage and to abate a nuisance, and charge the cost of abating same to the person on whom the justice's order is made. By 29 & 30 Vict. c. 90, s. 20, it is the duty of the nuisance authority to make from time to time, either by itself or its officers, inspection of the district, with a view to ascertain what nuisances exist, calling for abatement under the powers of the Nuisance Removal Acts, and to enforce the provisions of the said Acts. Nuisances, as defined by the Act of 1855, include “any premises in such a state as to be 66 was that it lay on the defendant to prove that he had been injured by the want of notice, but it is now settled that the want of notice is a complete defence, and that evidence tending to show that the defendant was not prejudiced by the neglect is inadmissible, except in an action against the drawer, who had no effects in the hands of the drawee: (Byles on Bills, 8th edit. 273.) We have nothing to say against the decision in Petty v. Cooke, which was shortly put upon its proper footing by Mr. Justice Hannen, in accordance with the rule established by Lord Eldon, thus: "Lord Eldon puts it that the surety is discharged when the creditor has done anything which is against the faith of his contract.' How can it be against the faith of his contract to do that which it was his duty to do, namely, to receive payment? It turned out afterwards that the payment was not a good payment, and therefore the surety is discharged." But we do protest against an extension of the doctrine so as to hold a surety to a bargain when, although not prejudiced, he might reasonably conclude that he was discharged. AN INDIAN JUDGE ON THE SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF THE LAW. MR. JUSTICE MARKBY, a Judge of the High Court of Judicature at Calcutta, has published some lectures which he delivered at Calcutta, and which in their collected form he describes as "Elements of Law considered with reference to Principles of General Jurisprudence" (Oxford: printed at the Clarendon Press.) He seems to have been induced to bring out his work by the new direction which education in law has recently taken, and, more sanguine than most people, he thinks that we have already begun the scientific study of the law. At any rate he notices as now existing a revival of the demand for a systematic education in law, apart from professional training," and finds that the Universities of Oxford, Cambridge, and London are "taking active steps to reconstitute the study of the law as part of their course." Apparently these steps amount at the present time only to "resolutions," for our author says, "it is not sufficient simply to take a resolution to teach law in this way," i.e., scientifically. "Experience shows," he adds, "that to establish a study on this footing we must have books and teachers specially suited for the purpose. At present of the first we have scarcely any." We are disposed to regret that, appreciating as Mr. Justice MARKBY does the dearth of books adapted to the scientific teaching of the law, he was not more ambitious. Had he given us a complete manual on some branch of law, instead of a collection of essays, the arrangement of which is "obviously defective" (Preface page 1), dealing with law generally, he would have served some useful purpose, more especially as his opinion is that "when a work is written on English law which is complete in point of arrangement, the long series of labours which are now just commencing, will have been brought very nearly to a conclusion." To have forged the first link of the chain would have been something, but Mr. Justice MARKBY can hardly claim to have done thus much. His little work is a collection of criticisms and suggestions, useful and indeed valuable in their way, but of no worth as a classbook. THE ELEMENT OF TIME IN SURETYSHIP. In the recent case of Petty v. Cooke (L. Rep. 6 Q. B. 790), two old decisions respecting the discharge of a surety by the act of the creditor in giving time to the principal debtor were somewhat reflected upon by Mr. Justice Blackburn. At the close of the last century it was laid down by Lord Loughborough, in the case of Rees v. Berrington (2 Ves. 540), that where time is given by a creditor to a principal debtor without the consent of the surety, the surety is in equity discharged, however short the time may be, on the ground that he is thereby deprived of his right on paying off the creditor to sue the principal debtor. This reasoning Mr. Justice Blackburn condemns as artificial. The next case of Samuel v. Hawarth (3 Mer. 272), was decided by Lord Eldon," and that eminent judge laid down the rule thus: "The rule is that if a creditor without the consent of the surety gives time to the principal debtor, by so doing he discharges the surety, that is, if time is given by virtue of a positive contract between the creditor and the principal-not where the creditor is merely inactive." The ground of his decision is stated to be, "that the creditor by so giving time to the principal has put it out of the power of the surety to consider whether he will have recourse to his remedy against the principal or not, and because he, in fact, cannot have the same remedy against the principal as he would have had under the original contract." And further on he said, "The creditor has no right, it is against the faith of his contract, to give time to the principal, even though manifestly for the benefit of the surety, without the consent of the surety.' In the opinion of Mr. Justice Blackburn, this definition, however accurate, is" based upon highly technical reasoning." If a principle is accurate in itself, it matters little whether the reasoning upon which it is based be technical or artificial, unless it be sought to introduce some exception to it. This was the business of Mr. Justice Blackburn in the case of Petty v. Cooke, and he has introduced an exception of some importance, although what he says does not amount to a judicial decision. "It is clear," said his Lordship, that a creditor who gives time to the principal debtor, without reserving his right against the surety, discharges him; but that time given by a creditor, which in numberless cases does not injure the surety, should discharge him, is, to my mind, not justice, although established by Courts of Equity," This view was taken by a ViceChancellor in Hulme v. Coles (2 Sim. 12), who considers the doctrine a refinement of a Court of Equity. But surely if it is right that if in some cases injury may result to a surety from maintaining an opposite rule, and he be deprived of his subrogated remedy, the old principle should be sustained. The contract of a surety is, in such cases as those under consideration, for a specified time. The time elapsing he may enter into new engagements, and, if subsequently called upon to pay, it is difficult to calculate possible consequences. It was contended in Petty v. Cooke that the surety at the time of taking upon himself his bability contracts that the creditor shall receive valid payment of his claim against the principal debtor. This is hardly so. The contract is that if the principal debtor does not pay by a given day the surety will, but after the expiration of the specified time the contract is gone. And the facts of Petty v. Cooke go to support the view that if by a mistake, if by something inequitable as between the debtor and his creditor, the time goes by, the Surety is not discharged. There the debtor did pay, but the payment was held to be a fraudulent preference, and thus there was no payment at all. We do not see that it can be logically deduced from a decision in favour of the creditor as against a surety under such circumstances, that under all circumstances where the surety is not damnified, for it must go as far as that, the surety is not dis-points of their decisions. "The law," says our author, "being charged by time being given. The surety is discharged by reason of the laches of the creditor, as the parties to a bill of exchange are discharged by a failure to present or to give notice of dishonour. We are aware that a mere guarantor of the payment of a bill of exchange is not discharged by failure to give him due notice of dishonour, but that is because he has no remedy against the parties to the bill. An indorser is entitled to notice because if he have it not, his remedy against the parties liable to him is rendered more precarious. The old doctrine on this subject The first chapter deals with the general conception of law, the bulk of which is based on recognised authority, but which in its scope seems a little wide of the mark. We do not see the utility of labouring the questions whence particular tribunals derive their authority, and what was the nature of their original foundation, whether the judges have power to make law, and if they have not are their decisions law at all? In treating of law as a science we have to recognise its established sources. Mr. Justice MARKBY speaks of judicial decisions as being a source of law, and it is a very common practice to speak of judge-made law. But judges do not evolve law out of their own consciousness. They interpret the Common Law of England, and upon certain principles decide upon facts which come before them. This cannot be called making law-it is rather the fixing of floating principles, uncertain perhaps, but still existing and being in themselves law. The further question whether this law, now embedded in a mass of decisions encumbered with facts, is such a law as we can successfully use for practical purposes, is the really important one, and must be answered in the negative. The work of the lawyer in raking together dicta from numerous cases to make one principle is painful and unsatisfactory. This would be in a measure unnecessary if, as Mr. Justice MARKBY suggests, English Judges were compelled, as in Italy, France, and Spain, " and as has been attempted in India "-why attempted only ?-to state separately and fully what French lawyers call the motives, and Spanish lawyers the stated in distinct propositions, altogether separate from the facts, would be easily ascertained." An admirable custom prevails in the High Court at Calcutta of requiring its own members, when they differ in opinion on a matter of law, to refer the difference to the arbitration of a majority of the whole Court. That is to say, the majority rules without any division of opinion being known to the world." This," we are told, "sometimes leads to the enunciation of propositions of law in an abstract form, which it is made imperative on all the members of the Court, and, of course, on all |