In old times it used to be said by the lawyers that the Chancellor of the Exchequer was not to be trusted; that he would speculate with the suitors' money; that he would play "ducks and drakes with it, but no one now supposes that. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, in respect of the savings bank, is already the greatest banker in the country, and, if he is not to be trusted, who is? No one, indeed, will now venture to contend that the English Government is not to be trusted; and if he did, the House of Commons would not hear him. This is the explanation of the first half of the Bill-how better to administer the Chancery funds? But how does Mr. Lowe work round from this to the diminution of the National Debt? He does so in two ways. First, he invests the £60,000,000, on which he pays 2 per cent., in the funds at 31, and thns gains an annuity of £725,000 annually, which he reinvests at compound interest, and which, in twenty years, will come to about £20,000,000, and will reduce our debt by that sum. It may be said that we should reckon on the other side the loss by the fall in the funds; that as certain suitors lost by that fall, so the State, which is substituted for those suitors, will lose also. But this is a mistake. The State will never have to sell out of the funds, and, therefore, will not lose. Though certain individuals among the suitors in court have to sell at the decision of the cause, new suitors, on the other hand, come in to replace them. The aggregate fund, so far from diminishing, is augmenting as the business of the Court of Chancery augments. The State, therefore, will lose nothing on the principal of its investments, and will get clear, and without deduction, the difference between the interest which it gives and the interest which it makes. Secondly, as the Chancellor of the Exchequer is himself the holder of this large sum in Consols, he can turn it, or any part he likes of it, into terminable annuities. This is an invention, we believe, of Mr. Gladstone, in the case of the savings banks. Generally it is impossible to borrow on terminable annuity, because, except to a limited extent, terminable annuities are not saleable in the market; they are for a common person both a disagreeable and a troublesome investment. They are disagreeable, because the market price is daily diminishing, which the mass of mankind do not like, and it requires the investment of a part of the annual income to replace the principal, which requires the holder first to find how much has to be invested, and then to invest it, which to most people would be very irksome. But when the State is the holder of its own funds, this difficulty is at an end. The State is no longer subject to the caprice of the market; it can invest, therefore, in the sort of security which suits it best, because it is casiest to pay off; and this security is the terminable annuity. In this manner, if Mr. Lowe is successful this year in carrying his Bill, he will have conferred on the country the two curiously connected benefits of helping its suitors at law and of reducing its National Debt. -Economist.

APOLOGY TO THE LORD CHIEF JUSTICE.The Duke of Argyll made on Monday what we may call the minimum of apology for the very savage character of his attack in the debate of Thursday week on what he then termed the railing and almost ribald" accusation brought against the Government by the Lord Chief Justice of England. The Duke only said that some of his expressions had been felt by the Lord Chief Justice" as personally offensive to himself" (which is hardly surprising), and that while he (the Duke) maintained for any member of the Government the fullest right to discuss with freedom both the writing and the publication of the Lord Chief Justice's letter to the Prime Minister," and while he was disposed to think that there were expressions in the Lord Chief Justice's letter which were perhaps open to the same objection that they were personally offensive to members of the Government,

mitted, and proof of guilt appears to attach to certain parties, the local attorneys in the various districts receive their instructions, sometimes from the persons injured, more generally from the police called in to take cognisance of the offence, and in some rare instances from the clerks to the magistrates before whom the charge is made. The evidence is then collected, the brief prepared and handed to counsel, either at the quarter sessions or assizes. In these cases no fault whatever can be found with the way in which the prosecutions are dealt with in court. It is in the earlier stages of the proceeding that the law is defective. The police are sometimes too zealous; sometimes they are not sufficiently intelligent; they make the facts fit the criminal, instead of adjusting the criminal to the facts; their interest in endeavouring to procure a conviction often blinds their sagacity and warps their judgment, and the prosecuting attorney has not always the full legal knowledge to discern and remedy the deficiencies. What is wanted is not an attorney, as proposed by Mr. R. Gurney's Bill, but a barrister of high standing and experience, in each county or district, thoroughly versed in criminal law and its evidences, who should superintend and direct the attorneys charged with the prosecutions. Had there been such an officer to superintend the prosecution in the Road murder we should not have had that most cruel and unjust charge made against the father of the murdered child, subjected to it through the perverse infatuation of the superintendents of police, who were determined that poor Mr. Kent should be the murderer and no one else. With a prosecuting counsel in each county, subordinate to a head of the department in London, under the Attorney-General, there would be no ground whatever for appointing three prosecuting counsel, as proposed by the present Bill. Criminal prosecutions are properly intrusted to the junior members of the Bar. It is their school of practice, and no one who has attended quarter sessions will deny that the duties devolving upon them are ably and most carefully performed. Nor is it desirable to transfer the management of prosecutions from the various attorneys now employed in them to a single attorney, to be appointed by the Government, as proposed. Apart from the objection which such an amount of patronage would give rise to, it is impossible to expect that an attorney however eminent in his own department, could be equal in his professional knowledge to a barrister of long standing and of eminent practice. The appointment of an attorney, again, might be dictated by party influences, but public and professional opinion would effectually prevent that in the case of counsel. During the lifetime of the late Lord Brougham I have frequently discussed this question of a public prosecutor with him, and on one occasion I prepared a Bill in concert with him and with his full sanction. The principle of that Bill was identical with the proposal made in this letter-viz., that a prosecuting counsel should be appointed by the Crown in every county, whose office should be either for life or for a certain period, and that it should be his duty to receive the prosecutions in the earliest stage from the local attorneys employed to conduct them, that he should prepare and direct the evidence, see that the necessary proofs were not wanting, and reject such charges as could by no possibility lead to a conviction. The appointment of such an officer would entail little expense, compared with the value of an increased efficiency of criminal justice, and the more certain protection of lives and property; law practice, as proposed by the Bill of the Recorder of London."

nor would it entail the entire revolution of criminal

CORRESPONDENCE OF THE

PROFESSION.

It has long been expected that the certificate would be repealed, and I submit that the above consistency ought to hasten it. D. Z.

-

The letter of Mr.

PUBLIC PROSECUTORS. William Reade in the last week's LAW TIMES, calls for some reply on the part of the justices' clerks, who, it is there implied, on account of the "miserable pay allowed, do not pay sufficient attention to the prosecutions entrusted to them, in the absence of a public prosecutor. Having had some little experience in the conduct of cases at quarter sessions and assizes, I may perhaps be allowed to say a few words on this subject. Miserably inadequate the remuneration certainly is, particularly in some counties, where one guinea only is allowed in ordinary cases, for the preparation of brief, attendance at court, and drawing in. structions for indictment. Yet, even under these circumstances, I know from experience, that no effort is lacking on the part of the justices' clerk to ensure that justice is done; subpoenas for witnesses are obtained when necessary and journeys are often taken to take down their statements, and instructions for indictment (in many cases requiring much consideration), and the brief, are drawn in as full and ample a manner as if it were ordinary professional business, and a full bill of costs could be charged. That the justices' clerks themselves do not desire a change is well known, because having, as they usually have, a clerk "well up " in criminal matters, and several cases to conduct at one court (apart from the feeling of knowing that a case on which they have exercised their judgment at the preliminary examination has been properly managed, and every thing proper to be done to ensure a conviction has been done), notwithstanding the low scale of fees allowed, there is some small profit attached to it; they have the credit in case of a conviction being obtained of rightly advising the magistrates to commit, have become accustomed to it as part of the business of the office, and it would be casting a stigma on them to deprive them of these prosecutions. On the other hand I know of cases in which the proscutor having exercised his right of employing his own solicitor, the prosecutions have entirely failed; and where solicitors, not accustomed to criminal business, have been actually obliged to apply to the magistrates' clerk for information as to how the prisoner should be indicted and the case managed! The appointment of public prosecutors will entail a large tax on a country already overburdened with taxation, even if it be feasible in country districts, where practitioners of standing, having a good private practice, would not accept the appointments unless the remuneration be many times greater than it is at present, and even then I think that prosecutions would not be better managed than they are at present. I admit that there have been lately several so-called "failures of justice," but these are isolated cases, and in most of them, if not all, the prosecutions have been conducted by firms of solicitors, not clerks to magistrates. The only thing wanting to ensure a proper prosecution of public offenders, is an increased scale of allowance to prosecutors and witnesses for expenses, who, at present, are allowed the munificent sum of 3s. 6d. a day for performing a public duty, and for the trouble and annoyance occasioned by two or three days' com pulsory attendance at a court. J. W. M.

spondent Mr. Keade, but this subject is not I agree in the main with your corre the only one for reform in police courts. Justices' clerks must be paid by salary not by fees. They would then have no pecuniary interest in any case. The magistrates will be spared the dis grace of fining and punishing in certain cases that their clerk should not lose his fees. We should have no clerks depending on police inspectors, and superintendents bringing work into their courts in a variety of ways well known to those expe rienced in police courts' practice. We should not their profession by dining and hob-nobbing with police superintendents. Though I believe the latter practice is not commonly done, it is done. But the prosecutor proposed to Parliament will not do. He should be a solicitor and have charge or command and control of every case from initia tion to conviction or acquittal. I do not see why the coroner could not be made more useful than A. K. Z.

in expressing his regret for his use of any words which may have seemed personally offensive to the Lord Chief Justice." The Morning Post asserts that if this rather economical apology had not been made, the Lord Chief Justice would have been compelled to decline representing any longer the English Government before the Geneva Arbitrators, and we hold that he would have been right.-Spectator.

A PUBLIC PROSECUTOR. Sir E. Wilmot writes to the Times: "Having for many years, among other law reforms, earnestly advocated the appointment of public prosecutors, on account of the numerous abuses and miscarriages of justice which attend the present inadequate and faulty system of prosecution of criminals, I cannot help addressing a few lines to you on the subject of the Bill re-introduced by Mr. Walpole, and read a second time in the House of Commons on the 15th Feb. That Bill proposes radical alterations in a quarter where, at present, no complaint exists, and where the plan now adopted works well. At the present time, when offences have been com

he is by a combination of duties.

LAW CLERKS.-It is gratifying to me to know that I do not stand alone in the views expressed in my letter to your journal of the 21st Oct. last. The letters of Fidelis" and "Lex," which appeared in your respective issues of the 10th Feb. and 24th Feb., are able elucidations of our griev ances, and the writers deserve our best thanks. Following in the same channel, I must say that it is equally surprising to me that matters so vital to our existence as respectable members of society have for so long a time been allowed to remain

HIBBINS, WILLIAM WILMOT, general merch int, Liverpool, March 5, at three, at office of Sols., Whitley and Maddock, Liverpool

HODGINS, JOHN, boot manufacturer, Deansgate, in Manchester; March 11, at three, at the Star inn, Deansgate, Manchester. Sol., Woodall

HODGINS, WILLIAM, draper, Deansgate, in Manchester; March 11, at three, at the Star inn, Deansgate, Manchester. Sol., Woodall HOPE, JOHN HENRY, solicitor, Newcastle; March 4, at eleven, at office of Sol., Story, Newcastle

HOROBIN, WILLIAM, grocer, Middlesborough; March 8, at eleven, at office of J. Braithwaite and Co., accountants, Albertrd, Middlesborough

HUDSON, JAMES, hat manufacturer, Manchester; March 7, at three, at offices of Sol, Warburton, Manchester IZARD, WILLIAM, builder, Penelope-house, Hamilton-rd, Bethnalgreen; March 2, at three, at the Victoria tavern, Victoria-pk Bethnal-green. Sol., Hicks, Lansdown-ter, Victoria-pk JACKSON, JOHN, builder, Wallsend; March 7, at one, at office of Sol., Elsdon. Newcastle

KERRY, JOHN COPEMAN, miller, Roydon; March 14, at eleven, at office of Sols., Messrs. Gudgeon, Stowmarket

KNIBB, HENRY, manufacturing jeweller, Birmingham; March 5, at three, at the Great Western hotel, Birmingham LAWSON, JANE, grocer, West Auckland, March 8, at one, at office of Sol. Thornton, Bishop Auckland

LONGFIELD, CHARLES, builder, Birmingham; March 6, at three, at office of Sol., Jaques, Birmingham

LUPTON, THOMAS, tapster, Bradford; March 1, at three, at office of Sol., Browning, Bradford

MALCOLM, JOHN, beerseller, Hanley; March 4, at two, at offices of C. Saxton, , New-st, Hanley. Sol., Welch, Longton MCDONALD, JOHN, oilman, Crown-st, Holborn; March 12, at four, at offices of Sol., Wetherfield, Gresham-bldgs, Basinghall-st MEGGITT, JOHN, plumber, Church-ct. Richmond; March 14, at three, at the Rose Cottage hotel, Richmond-hill. Sol., Marshall, Lincoln's-inn-fields

MILLICHAMP. EDWARD WHEELER, grocer, Gorleston: March 6, at twelve, office of Sols., Cufaude and Palmer, Great Yarmouth, MITCHELL, HENRY, innkeeper, West Hartlepool; March 14, at chree, at office of Sol., Bell. West Hartlepool

MOOR, LOT, Woollen draper, Stockton; March 6, at three, at office of Sol.. Dobson, Middlesborough

MOSS, EMANUEL, cabinet manufacturer, St. Mary-axe; March 7, at eleven, at the Guildhall tavern, Guildhall-yd. Sols., Rocks, Kenrick, and Harston, King-st, Cheapside

MULLER, FREDERICK GUSTAVE, Cominission agent, Willow-walk,
Bermondsey; March 11, at three, at office of Sol., Montagu,
Bucklersbury
ORR. DAVID TODD, master mariner, Canton-st, East India-rd, and
Irvine, Scotland; March 7, at twelve, at office of Sols., Westall
and Roberts, Leadenhall-st

OWEN, EDWIN, cabinet maker, Wrexham; March 8, at two, at
Anderton's hotel, Fleet-st, London. Sol., Sherratt, Wrexham
PACKMAN, JAMES WOOD, fish salesman, Nicholas-st, Mile-end;
March 9, at three, at the Victoria tavern, Victoria-pk.
Hicks, Lansdowne-ter, Victoria-pk

Sol.,

PALMER, HERBERT, late draper, Glen-honse, Manor view, Brixton; March 11, at one, at 4, Brunswick-sq, Sol.. Yarde PARK, WILLIAM. jun., commission agent, Barnsley; March 5, at two, at office of Sol., Frudd, Barnsley

PRESTON, JOHN, plumber, Manchester; March 2, at twelve, at office of Sol., Addle shaw, Manchester

PRESTON, WILLIAM, plumber, Minchester; March 2, at half-past cleven, at office of Sol., Addleshaw, Manchester

RANDELL, EDWIN EBENEZER, carver, Brighton; March 12, at three, at office of Sol., Lamb, Brighton

RUSSELL, SARAH JANE, grocer, Gloucester; March 4, at eleven, at offices of Sol.. Essery, Bristol

SERRANO, AUGUSTIN, merchant, Great Saint Helen's; March 8, at two, at the Guild all tavern, Gresham-st. Sol., Michael, Gresham bldgs, Basinghall-st

SHEPHERD, WILLIAM, common carrier, Willenhall; March 8, at eleven, at office of Sol., Glover, Walsall

SNELLING, WILLIAM BLOMFIELD, late upholsterer's assistant, Brighton; March 6, at three, at offices of Sol., Brandreth, Brighton

STRINGER, FREDERICK, boot dealer, Salford; March 8, at three, at office of Sol, Dewhurst, Manche ter

STURGEON, CHARLES WENTWORTH DILLON, barrister-at-law, King's Bench-walk, Temple; March 19, at two, at office of Croysdill, Saffery, and Co., Old Jewry-chambers. Sols., Lumley and Lumley, Conduit-st, Bond-st

SWEATMAY, WILLIAM, blacksmith, Middlewich; March 7, at eleven, at office of Sol, Fletcher, Northwich

TARNS, JOSEPH, Cooper, Burslem; March 4, at ten, at office of Sol., Hollinshead, Tunstall

TEBBY, ALFRED, provision dealer, Liverpool; March 7, at three, at office of Sol., Wilson, Liverpool

THOMPSON, JAMES, draper, Liverpool; March 7, at two, at office of Sol.. Etty, Liverpool

THORPE, WILLIAM, merchant's clerk, Sneinton; March 15, at twelve, at office of Sol., Elliott, Nottingham

TOYE, REUBEN JEREMIAH, leather seller, Green-st, Bethnalgreen-rd; March 2, at eleven, at office of Sol., Parsons, Railwayapproach, London-bridge

TYNDALE, CHARLES, TYNDALE, JOSEPH, and LEA, RICHARD, dravers, King's-rd, Chelsea; March 12, at two, at two, at office of Ladbury, Collison, and Viney, accountants, Cheapside. Sol., Sturt, Ironmonger-la

UNWIN, JOHN, heald manufacturer, Stockport; March 14, at halfpast two, at office of Sol., Marsh, Stockport

UREN, JOHN, market gardener, Penryn; Feb. 29, at two, at office of Sol., Jenkins, Falmouth

WARD, ALFRED, builder, Hanley: March 5, at eleven, at the
Saracen's Head hotel, Hanley. Sol.. Sherratt, Hanley
WARD, THOMAS DANIEL, painter, Taunton; March 9, at eleven,
at office of Sols., Reed and Cook, Taunton
WILLIAMS, HENRY, tailor, Crewe-town, in Monks Coppenhall;
March 8, at eleven, at Temple-chmbs, Oak-st, Crowe-town. Sol.,
Cooke, Crewe

WILLIAMS, OBADIAH, tobacco manufacturer, Burslem; March 5,
at three, at office of Sol., Sherratt, Kidsgrove
WILLIAMSON, WILLIAM HENRY, POLLENTINE, RICHARD JOHN
and POLLENTINE, SIDNRY, artists, Ade'aide-pl, city London;
March 4, at eleven, at 5, New-inn, Strand. Sol., Lind
Gazette, Feb. 27.

ABRAHAMS, SOLOMON LYON, general dealer, Ashford; March 11, at half-past twelve, at the Bridge House hotel, London-bridge, Southwark. Sol., Goodwin, Maidstone

ALP, GEORGE, blacksmith, Great Wakering; March 11, at twelve, at office of Sol., Preston, Mark-la

ATKINSON, SAMUEL, Joiner, Sunderland; March 8, at eleven, at office of Sol., Bentham, Sunderland

BEACH. WILLIAM, and PARISH, JAMES HORATIO, builders, New Shoreham; March 16, at one, at office of Sol. Mills, Brighton BESSELL, HENRY, bedding manufacturer, Bristol: March 9, at eleven, at office of Sol., Plummer, Bristol BISHOP, JAMES WILLIAM, cheesemonger, Jamacia-rd, Bermondsey: March 11, at three, at office of Mr. Alfred Nickerson. King William-st. Sol., Simpson, Borough High-st, London-bridge BLACKSTON, HERMAN, hat manufacturer, Leeds, March 11, at three, at office of Sol., Ferns, Leeds BLOOMER, CALEB, iron merchant, Leadenhall-st, London, West Bromwich, and Liverpool, March 14, at eleven, at 21, Darlington st, Wolverhampton. Sol., Green, Wolverhampton BROUGHTON, SAMUEL, farmer, Alton, near Bewdley; March 8, at one, at the George hotel, Bewdley CRESWELL, FREDERICK, hosier, Reading; March 12, at twelve, at office of Sols., Reed and Lovell, Guildhall-chimbe, Basinghall-st DAVID, THOMAS, grocer, Carmarthen; March 8, at five minutes past ten, at office of Sol., Lloyd, Haverfordwest

DEANE, ROBERT, out of business, Waltham Lawrence; March 11, at two, at office of Sol., Tatham, Great Knight Rider-st, Doctors

commons

EATON, WILLIAM, general dealer, Rochester-row, Westminster; March 18, at twelve, at office of Sol., Poncione, jun., Raymondbldgs, Gray's-inn

ELLIOTT, ANDREW, boot maker, Lincoln; March 9, at eleven, at office of Mr. Jay, accountant, Lincoln. Sols., J. and R. Swan and Bourne, Lincoln

ELSAM, WILLIAM, paper agent, Upper Thames-st; March 19, at three, at offices of Sols., Lumley and Lumley, Old Jewry.chmbs FITTON, FREDERICK ALEXANDER, machinist, Manchester; March 8, at three, at the Clarence hotel, Manchester. Sol, Jones, Manchester

FRAMPTON, HENRY, tailor, Worcester; March 9, at eleven,' at office of Sol., Rea, Worcester

FRENCH, ANN, innkeeper, Birdbrook; March 12, at eleven, at office of Sol., Cardinall, Halstead

FRENCH, WALTER, wheelwright, Birdbrook; March 12, at eleven, at office of Sol, Cardinall, Halstead

GILL, ROBERT, carpet warehouseman, Manchester; March 11, at three, at office of Sols., Gardner and Horner, Manchester

GLASSCOCK, JAMES HICKMAN, brewer's agent. Rainham; March PARTRIDGE AND COOPER

14, at three, at office of Sol., Stephenson, Chatham
GREEN, ROBERT, "sailmaker, Newhaven; March: 9, at twelve, at
the Guildhall Coffe -house. Sol., Hillman
HARTLEY, ALFRED, fulling miller, Whitworth, par. Rochdale;
March 13, at eleven, at office of Sols., Messrs. Roberts, Roch-
dale
HINCHLIFFE, WILLIAM, butcher, Hurlstone, par. Penistone;
March 14, at three, nt office of Sols., Messrs. Dransfield, Peni
stone, near Sheffield

HUCKSTEPP, JOHN, coal merchant, Faversham; March 9, at one,
at the Ship hotel, Faversham Sol, Kipping
JONES, EVAN, innkeeper, Merthyr Tydfil; March 8 at eleven, at
the County Court office, Merthyr Tydfill. Sol, B ddoe, Merthyr
Tydal
JONES, HANNAH, farmer, Mouldsworth; March 12, at twelve, at
the Hop Pole hotel, Chester. Sol., Linaker, Frodsham
JONES, MARY, and JONES, JOHN, farmers, both of Rhuddlan;
March 8, at three at the Marsh inn, Rhuddlan. Sol., Roberts,
St. Asaph

KENT, WILLIAM, grocer, Nottingham: March 15, at two, at office
of Sols, Cranch and Rowe, Nottingham
KINGHAM. WILLIAM HENRY, builder, Lorne-gardens, Notting.
hill, and Wellington ter, Hammersmith; March 13, at two, at
Willie's Roomis. King-st, St. James's. Sols., Messrs. Mead,
Jermya-st, St. James's

LATHAM, ALFRED WILLIAM, surgeon, Darlaston; March 12, at
three, at office of Sol., Rowlands, Birmingham
LEECH, EDWARD, linen craper, Colchester; March 14, at three,
at the Fleece inn, Colchester. Sol.. Church
LONGMORE, RICHARD, galvanizer, Wednesbury; March 15, at
elever, at office of Sols., Duignan, Lewis, and Lewis, Walsall
MCCARTHY, JAMES, sawyer in Her Majesty's dockyard at Chatham
Manor-t, Brompton; March 8, at three, at office of Sol., Stephen-
son, Chatham
MITCHELL, JOHN, corn factor. St. Ives, and Somersham: March
12, at one, at the Wentworth hotel, Peterborough. Sols., Deacon
and Wilkins
MORGAN, WILLIAM, grocer, Swansea: March 8, at eleven, at office
of Sols., Davies and Hartland, Swansei
NATHAN, HARRIS, furniture dealer, Wolverhampton; March 11,
at three, at office of Sol., Stratton, Wolverhampton
PARKER, THEOPHILUS, doctor of medicine, Abbotsbury; March
16, at eleven, at the Antelope hotel, Dorchester. Sols., Andrews
and Pope, Dorchester

PLAISTED, REBECCA, grocer, Abersychan; March 11, at eleven,
at ofice of Sol., Dixon, Newport

PLAYFORD. JOHN, baker, King's Lynn: March 12, at twelve, at office of Sols.. Mesars. Nurse, King's Lynn

WHOLESALE & RETAIL STATIONERS,

192, FLEET-STREET, AND 1 & 2, CHANCERY-LANE, LONDON, E.
Carriage paid to the Country on Orders exceeding 20s.
DRAFT PAPER, 48. 6d., 6s., 78., 78. 9d., and 98. per ream.
BRIEF PAPER, 158. Gd., 178. 6d., and 2s. 6d. per ream.
FOOLSCAP PAPER, 10s. 6d., 13s. 6d., and 18s. 6d. per ream.
CREAM LAID NOTE, 38., 4s., and 58. per rcam.
LARGE CREAM LAID NOTE, 4s., 68., and 78. per ream.
LARGE BLUE NOTE, 38., 48., and 6s. per ream.
ENVELOPES, CREAM OR BLUE, 4s. 6d., and ds. 6d., per 1000.
THE TEMPLE" ENVELOPE, extra secure, 93. 64. per 1000.
FOOLSCAP OFFICIAL ENVELOPES, 18. 6d. per 100,
THE NEW "VELLUM WOVE CLUB-HOUSE" NOTE, 98. 6d. per

ream.

"We should direct particular attention to their New Club. honse Paper: in our opinion it is the very best paper we ever wrote upon."-London Mirror.

INDENTURE SKINS, Printed and Machine-ruled, to hold twenty or thirty folios, Is. 8d. and 18. 9. per skin, 208. per dozen. SECONDS OF FOLLOWERS, Ruled Is. G. each, 178. per dozen. RECORDS OF MEMORIALS, 6d. each, 5s. per dozen.

LEDGERS, DAY-BOOKS, CASH-BOOKS, LETTER OF MINUTE-BOOKS An immense stock in various bindings. ILLUSTRATED PRICE-LIST of Inkstands, Postage Scales, Copying Presses, Writing Cases, Despatch Boxes, Oak and Walnut Stationery Cabinets, and other useful articles adapted to Library or Office, post free.

TO EXECUTORS, TRUSTEES, AND SOLICITORS

SILVER PLATE, DIAMONDS,

RAMWELL, ROBERT, brewer, Manchester; March 13, at three, at JEWELRY, ARTICLES OF VERTU,

office of Sol., Sampson, Manchester

RAWKINS, EDWIN, hosier, Harrow-rd; March 12, a three, at office of Sol., Rice, Lincoln's-inn-fields

RICE, GEORGE WILLIAM, painter, Ilfracombe; March 13, at one, at office of Sol., Thorne, Barnstaple

ROWE HENRY, 1 ce sed victualler, Bristol; March 11, at twelve, at office of Sol., Ward, Bristol

ROWLANDS, LEWIS, blacksmith, Caerwent: March 12, at twelve, at the George hotel, Chepstow. Sol., Morgan, Newport SAUL, ALFRED, builder. Christopher-st, Hatton-wall: March 9, at half past eleven, at office of Sol, Walker, Abchurch-la SCOTT, WILLIAM HUNT, out of business, Belsize-rd, Hampstead; March 13, at one, at office of Sol., Moss, Gracechurch-st SHUTER, SAMUEL, hat manufacturer, Brushfield.st, Bishopsgate. March 11, at two, at office of Sol., Solomon, Finsbury-pl STEEDEN, SAMUEL, cattle dealer, Charlton-by-Newbottle; March 7, at twelve, at office of Sol, Berridge, Bicester STOREY, CHARLES, Hetton-le-Hole, March 13, at eleven, at office of Sol., Proctor, jun., Durban

SUTTON, JOHN, auctioneer, Salisbury; March 6, at three, at office of Sol.. Hodding, Salisbury

SWIDENBANK, THOMAS, draper, Tredegar; March 12, at one, at office of Sol, Morgan, Cardiff

TAIT, WALTER, boot dealer, Sunderland; March 13, at three, at Barrow's Commercial hotel, John-st, Sunderland

TATE, GEORGE WILSON, plumber, Alnwick; March 11, at two, at office of Sol.. Bush, Newcastle-upon-Tyne TAYLOR, CHRISTOPHER, tailor, Liverpool; March 14, at three, at office of Sol., Hindle, Liverpool

THOMAS, ALEXANDER FLEMING, general draper. Eccles: March 11, at three, at office of Sol.. Messrs. Whitworth, Manchester THOMPSON, JOHN, merchant, Kingston-upon-Hull; March 14, at half-past twelve, at the George hotel, Kingston-upon-Hull. Sol., Shackles, Hull

THORNHILL. EDWARD, machine fitter, Bradford, near Manches ter; March 11, at three, at office of Sol., Orton, Manchester WARREN, SA UEL, tailor, Tichborne-st, Regent's quadrant: March 11, at two, at office of Sols., Blanchford and Riches, Great Swan-alley, Moorgate-st

WATKINS, JOHN, commission merchant, Threadneedle-st. City; March 7, at twelve, at 12, Hatton garden. Sol., Marshall, Lincoln's-inn-fi 11s

WHEELDON; JAMES, shopkeeper, Claydon; [March 11, at eleven, at office of Sol.. Stockton, Banbury

WIGHT, THOMAS, iron merchant, Middlesborough; March 14, at eleven, at office of Sol., Watson, Middlesborough WOOLRYCH, ARTHUR, EDWARD, surgeon, Wellingborough: March 12, at eleven, at the Chamber of Commerce, Corn Exchange, Northampton. Sol., Jeffery, Northampton

Bibidends.

BANKRUPTS' ESTATES.

The Official Assignees, &c., are given, to whom apply for the Dividends.

Gatable, E. draper, first and final, 10s. 1d. At offices of Trust. S. Hunt, jun.., 54, Portland-st, Manchester.-Gildes, W. B. miller, first, 8. At office of J. Davies and Co., accountants, Commercial. chmbs Warr ngton.-Haden, W. H. ironmaster, first, 2s. 6d. At office of Trust. W. E. Davies, 107, Newhall-st, Birmingham.-Hay, C. S. boot dealer, first and final, 2s. 3d. At office of Trust. A. B. Boal, 30, Malt Shovel-yd, Halifax.-Jennings, T. G. and J. plumbers, first, 28 6d. At office of Trust. A. Nickerson, 51, King William-st.Jones, R. grocer, second, 23. At office of Roose and Price, accountants, 26, North John-st, Liverpo 1.-Peters, R. builder, first and final, 1s. 6d. At office of Trust. T. L. Elliott, Brewer-st, Ashford.Piggins, W. butcher, first and final, 68. 6d. At office of Trust. J. Bacon, Attleborough.-Reynolds, A. auctioneer, 10s. At Gee and Co.'s Bank, Boston.-- Williams, W. draper, first and final, 5s. 3d. At office of Trust. E. H. Owen, 23, Bridge-st, Carnarvon.

BIRTHS, MARRIAGES AND DEATHS.

MARRIAGES. CORY-HERVEY.-On the 19th ult., at All Saints, Kensington, by the Rev. J. Light, M.A., vicar, Henry Cory, only son of the late H. G. Cory, Esq., of Holsworthy, Devon, solicitor, to Flora Leighton, youngest daughter of the late G. Hervey, Esq., of Westbourne-park, London.

WITT-COOPER.--On the 21st ult., at St. Mark's Church, Hamiltonterrace, Gerard Ranelagh, youngest son of Dr. Witt, M.R.C.P., of Spring-gardens, St. James's-park, to Cecilia Jane Seymour, youngest daughter of William Bush Cooper, Esq., of the Temple, and Llwyndwfr, Carmarthenshire.

DEATHS. BUCKLE.-On the 22nd ult., at Lincoln-road, Peterborough, aged 52, Samuel Charles Watson Buckle, solicitor. GIBSON.-On the 20th ult., at 22, Merrion-square North, Dublin, aged 64, William Gibson, Esq., Taxing Master of the Court of Chancery in Ireland.

HANBURY.-On the 21st ult., at Kensington, Lionel Henry Han-
bury, Esq., barrister-at-law.
LAWSON.-On the 25th ult., at Suez, aged 50, George Lawson, Esq.,
District Judge of Ceylon.

&c.,

CORRECTLY VALUED FOR PROBATE,

OR

PURCHASED IN ANY AMOUNT AT THEIR FULL VALUE FOR CASH.

D. & J. WELLBY,

WHOLESALE DEALERS IN PLATE, JEWELRY, AND PRECIOUS STONES,

20, GAREICK-STREET, COVENT-GARDEN,

LONDON.

Secondhand Plate, Jewelry, &c., for Sale, at Trade Prices.

ESTABLISHED FIFTY YEARS.

PRESENTS.-Collections to

SCIENTIFIC RESIN of Solomo 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, W.C.
Private instruction is given in Geology and Mineralogy by
Mr. Tennant, F.G.S., at his residence, 119, Strand.
DOR COUGHS, COLDS, ASTHMA,

FOR

RONCHITIS and NEURALGIA,

BE

HE GREAT REMEDY of the day is

THE

A few doses will cure all incipient cases. Caution.-The ex. traordinary medical reports on the efficacy of Chlorodyne renders it of vital importance that the public should obtain the genuine, which is now sold under the protection of Government, authorising a stamp bearing the words "Dr. J. Collis Browne's Chlorodyne," without which none is genuine. See decision of Vice-Chancellor Sir W. Page Wood, the Times, July 16, 1864. From Lord Francis Conyngnam, Mount Charles, Donegal, 11th December 1863-Lord Francis Conyngham, who this time last year bought some of Dr. J. Collis Browne's Chlorodyne from Mr. Davenport, and has found it a most wonderful medicine, will be glad to have half a dozen bottles sent at once to the above address." Sold in bottles, 1s. 1id.. 2s. 9d.. and 4s. 6d., by all chemists Sole manufacturer, J. T. DAVENPORT, 33, Great Russellstreet, London, W.C.

H. LAMPLOUGH, 113, Holborn-hill, London. OLLOWAY'S PILLS. NERVOUS DEBILITY.-No part of the human machine requires more watching than the nervous system, upon it hangs health and life itself. These Pills are the best regu lators and strengtheners of the nerves, and the safest general purifiers. Nausea, headache, giddiness, numbness and mental apathy yield to them. They despatch, in a summary manner, those distressing dyspeptic symptoms, stomachie pains, fullness at the pit of the stomach, abdominal dis tension, and overcome loathings, capricious appetite, and confined bowels, the commonly accompanying signs of defec tive or deranged nervous power. Holloway's Pills are particularly recommended to persons of studious and sedentary habits, who gradually sink into a nervous and debilitated state unless some restorative, such as his Pills be occa sionally taken.

Cox's

London: HORACE Cox, 10, Wellington-street, Strand, W.C.

Now ready,

NOX'S CRIMINAL LAW CASES. Edited by EDWARD W. COX, Serjeant-at-Law, Recorder of Portsmouth. Vol. XII., Part III., price 58. 6d. The Parts and Volumes may still be had to complete sets. It is the only complete series of Criminal cases published in England. An Appendix contains a valuable collection of Precedents of Indictments.

London: HORACE Cox, 10, Wellington-street, Strand.

The Law and the Lawyers.

A SOLICITOR has become a candidate for the coronership of the City-Mr. TURNER, of the firm of Messrs. SOLE, TURNER and TURNER, of Aldermanbury. Mr. BESLEY, we understand, has retired.

THE saying that law is the perfection of reason has become a proverb. It should be known that even if this be an axiom, it is not applicable to every branch of our law and the practice under it. In VOL. LII.-No. 1510.

THE Mayor's Court would appear to have disposed of its average amount of business during 1871. There were 15,483 actions brought, 833 attachments, and seven equity suits, the aggregate amount in litigation being £971, 225, of these 1088 causes were entered for trial, and 408 actually tried at 85 sittings of the court. Of judgment summonses, 3977 were issued and 2705 heard. Of the actions, 4425 were for amounts under £10, 7915 for amounts over £10 and under £20, 2444 for amounts over £20 and under £50, and 680 for amounts above £50. The foreign attachments involved an aggregate sum of £659,876.

THE Albany Law Journal comments somewhat unfavourably upon the American "case" in the Alabama dispute. It remarks:"The beauties of pleading under the old system are finely illustrated in the proceedings thus far under the so-called Alabama treaty. The United States have prepared, for use before the joint high commission, what is analogous to a declaration in commonlaw practice. For fear that they will be thrown out of court, or something else, they complain of every imaginable matter, whether they hope anything from it or not. In a multitude of counts there is safety, seems to be the motto of the American pleaders. Of course the defence pleads the general issue, and this is as far as the parties can get before the trial comes on. All persons familiar with the ways of the common-law lawyers measure the cases published at their true value. The great misfortune is that the public on both sides of the water, not being familiar with legal fictions outside of the courts, are misled, and this misfortune is aggravated by partisans who are anxious to embarass government action, both in the United States and England."

A POINT taken in the course of the debate on Sir ROUNDELL PALMER'S resolutions deserves more consideration than it received. Admission into the Professions, and particularly to the Bar, taxes the pecuniary resources of candidates too much, and their mental resources too little. Up to the end of last year the question of going to the Bar was simply one of money. It is now equally a question of money, but also a question of brains. The tax imposed by the revenue upon candidates for admission to practise the law is very heavy-much heavier in the case of an attorney than in the case of a barrister. The majority of youths from college will find it difficult to pass the examinations without preparation with private tutors, and this is expensive. The same observation has long been applicable to attorneys. These duties which the revenue demands ought to be considerably reduced or altogether removed, the attorneys' certificate duty going with them. We do not attach much weight to the argument that if the stamp duties were abolished many of the public would become members of the Inns of Court, and thus learn some law; but it is much to the interest of the Profession that the Revenue should have as little as possible to do with it.

THE Legal Profession generally finds a means of giving expressions to its opinions, and the efficacy with which this is sometimes done has been illustrated at Huddersfield. Municipal authorities are sliding into very loose habits, and Huddersfield and Bridgwater seem to be governed by much the same class of person. Bridgwater made a violent effort to induce the Government to accept their nominee for the recordership; Huddersfield has appointed a clerk to the borough magistrates mainly on the ground of his political colour. Bridgwater was saved by the HOME SECRETARY, but the election of magistrates' clerks is no affair of state, and consequently Huddersfield goes unrebuked. As a fact, Mr. MILLS, the new borough magistrates' clerk, is an estimable gentleman, and a good lawyer, but because he was the nominee of a political clique, his election was made a matter of course, although there were many candidates. No single attorney of the town attended when he took his seat. On the other hand Mr. SYKES, who took his seat as clerk of the county magistrates about the same time, after an election in the ordinary course, was warmly greeted by a full Bar. The lesson is one which municipal cliques will do well

to remember.

PATENT agents were taught a very useful lesson in the case of Lee and others v. Walker, which was decided by the Court of Common Pleas on the 9th ult. A patent agent obtained for his clients provisional protection for an invention, but by delay allowed another inventor, whose invention was provisionally specified at a later day, to be beforehand in obtaining a patent. The patent agent thought that a patent so obtained was worthless, being ignorant of the decision of the LORD CHANCELLOR in Ee parte Bates v. Redgate (21 L. T. Rep. N.S. 410.) The following is a paragraph in our reporter's headnote: "The existence of a prior provisional specification is not a ground on which

the ATTORNEY-GENERAL ought to refuse to allow a second provisional specification by another inventor to be filed; and in the event of the later applicant for provisional protection being the first to obtain a grant of the letters patent, his patent is a bar to the grant of letters patent for the same invention to the earlier applicant for such provisional protection." The agent was, therefore held liable in an action for negligence. Mr. JUSTICE GROVE said that patent agents are bound to know the law affecting the practice of their profession, and advised them to follow the decisions of the courts with some care. We trust they will succeed in understanding what they read.

A SINGULAR article appeared in the Pall Mall Gazette on Monday with reference to the debate on Sir ROUNDELL PALMER'S resolutions. Within thirty-six hours of the debate-Sunday intervening ---we are told by our contemporary that the "long and earnest discussion among the lawyers of the House of Commons on Friday evening appears to have produced in the mind of the British public a feeling of profound perplexity. Now it is perfectly obvious that between Saturday morning and Monday morning our contemporary can have had no possible means of ascertaining the condition of the British mind at all, and to arrive at the conclusion that in that mind a feeling of profound perplexity had been excited is a piece of journalistic impudence of a gross kind. In the same article this remarkable passage occurs: "The truth is, the interest which is really at stake is not professional, but popular and general. The English public, which cares nothing about it, is in reality most intimately concerned with the reform of legal education." British public is therefore represented as being "profoundly perplexed" about a matter for which "it cares nothing," whilst the matter is really one which concerns it most deeply. The truth doubtless is that the public has not entered into the question under discussion, and that it never will. The " profound perplexity" is a bit of imaginative writing on the part of our contemporary; but whether it did exist or not is a small matter. The fact that the public is not much concerned about legal education enhances the credit due to the lawyers for initiating a reform and the discredit due to those who throw difficulties in the way.

The

It appears

A POINT of great importance to that large class of shareholders who think second thoughts are best, was decided this week in Lewis Harris's case, by Vice-Chancellor MALINS. Mr. HARRIS applied on the 5th March, 1866, for 200 shares in the Imperial Land Company of Marseilles, and on the 15th of the same month an allotment committee, consisting of three of the directors of the company, allotted him half the number applied for. On the morning of the 16th the usual letter of allotment was posted to the applicant, and reached him in due course next day. Mr. HARRIS, however, had written on the afternoon of the 16th to the company withdrawing his application. Several questions had to be decided by the court, but the principal one was whether Mr. HARRIS'S letter was a valid repudiaion of the allotment. The VICE-CHANCELLOR, without calling on the liquidator's counsel, decided that it was. from this decision that an application for shares is a continuing offer until allotment or withdrawal, and that the postage of the letter of allotment to the applicant completes the contract, although the applicant may have sent a withdrawal of his offer before such letter reached him. It will be noticed how much this decision narrows the rule laid down in Hebb's case (L. Rep. 4 Eq. 9), that the person applying for shares is not bound until the acceptance of his offer has been communicated to him. It now seems that if the applicant receives the letter of allotment, the contract to take shares was completed when the letter was posted; but if the letter is never received, it would appear from Finucane's case (17 W. R. 813), that under ordinary circumstances there is no completion of contract by its postage by the company.

THE Government is on the verge of another gross blunder in the matter of legal administration. As we announced last week it is the LORD CHANCELLOR'S intention to transfer Mr. J. A. RUSSELL, County Court Judge of Manchester, from that city to Liverpool, and to give to Mr. OSBORNE the district of Manchester in addition to that of Salford. But it appears that Salford has one or two outlying districts, and these the LORD CHANCELLOR proposes to tack on to the district of the neighbouring Judge, Mr. GREENE. Mr. GREENE, already overworked, resigns. Thereupon the LORD CHANCELLOR asks Mr. RUSSELL to remain until the 30th instant at Manchester, and Mr. GREENE to continue his duties until that date. These manoeuvres are simply resorted to in order to save a Judge, for we understand that Mr. RUSSELL is much valued at Manchester, and does not wish to be transferred, whilst Mr. OSBORNE, who was at the Equity Bar, is not pre-eminently fitted for a commercial centre like Manchester, and, moreover, is ill, and has been doing his work by deputy for the past two months. We believe the LORD CHANCELLOR has requested the Salford stipendiary magistrate to do Mr. OSBORNE'S work until he recovers his health. And what is the business

which is being thus trifled with? In Manchester last year the court disposed of 8049 cases without, and twelve cases with, a jury. The business of Salford during the same period comprised 7981 cases without a jury, and five with, besides equity and bankruptcy matters. Therefore the LORD CHANCELLOR proposes to double the work of the Manchester Judge whilst reducing the judicial power. We are glad to hear that these arrangements are not to be quietly submitted to. The Manchester and Salford Corporations, the Manchester Trade Protection Society, the local Bar, and the Manchester Law Association object to the change, and have obtained an appointment with the LORD CHANCELLOR for Wednes day next, with a view to induce him to reconsider his decision. We once more warn the Government that this policy of retrenchment will ruin the County Courts, and seriously diminish the chances of successful reform in the future.

THE vigorous manner in which the law has been recently administered by the justices of Middlesex in refusing a licence to Cremorne Gardens, Highbury Barn, and other places of public amusement naturally draws attention to the existing state of the law. The statute under which the theatres and music-halls are licensed is the 25 Geo. 2, c. 36, passed in the year 1752-a time when the manners and habits of enjoyment of the people of the metropolis were very different from those of their overworked descendants. The antiquated watchmen of those days no doubt had considerable difficulty in preserving the public peace, and there was then no strong reserve of police, whose duty it was to inspect and report the manner in which the places of public amusement were conducted. On the contrary, we find it stated in the Act that the multitude of places of entertainment was a just cause of thefts and robberies, and as the lower sort of people were in the habit of frequenting these places, and there spend ing their small substance in riotous living, which led them to seek unlawful means of supplying their wants, it was enacted that every house, garden, or other place kept for public dancing or music in the cities of London and Westminster, and within twenty miles thereof, must be licensed by the justices at quarter sessions, on pain of being considered a disorderly house, and of forfeiting the sum of £100 to any common informer who might sue for the same. Although the Act so far is stringent, yet we do not cavil at its provisions; the granting of a licence is put under the absolute control and power of the Middlesex magistrates, and so long as they do not exercise undue authority, no better corrective tribunal can be chosen. We now come to treat of that portion of the Act, which, in the present day, is intolerable, and we must express our surprise that it has remained on the Statute Book so long. It goes on to enact that no house, garden, or public place, kept for the purpose of music and dancing, although legally licensed, shall be open for any such purpose before 5 o'clock in the evening, under pain of the forfeiture of the licence, and refusal of all future permission to perform. The way in which the difficulty thus created is overcome appears from the evidence of a witness who was called before a select committee of the House of Commons, in the year 1853, appointed to inquire into the matter, who there stated that a subscription concert is got up with patrons and patronesses, and by that means the statute is eluded. The witness said "If a concert were to be given in the ordinary way, in Exeter Hall before 5 o'clock in the evening, there is very little doubt but that every person attending it might be apprehended as a rogue and a vagabond, and the parties subject to a penalty of £100, and no concert ever be held in the building again." Such results never were in the contemplation of the Legislature, and a select committee having sat and taken the subject into serious consideration so long ago as 1853, it is nearly time that their labours should bear fruit in the shape of an amendment of the present law.

THE TICHBORNE CASE.

THIS great case has terminated in the only way which, after the speech of the ATTORNEY-GENERAL, it was expected that it would terminate-it has been stopped by the jury. The precise form in which the plaintiff's counsel chose to take his defeat is of no moment, and whilst the Profession, like the public, was for a considerable period divided in opinion, it is difficult to suppose that any member of it entertains a doubt that the defeat is crushing and utterly irretrievable.

Vast as the labour is which has been imposed upon all parties concerned in the trial of the cause, the issue was excessively simple, and the question is now bandied about, Why did not the jury see through the imposture, and long since put an end to the suspense and the cost? Now the jury has more than once been very highly and most deservedly complimented, and we cannot see that they delayed a moment in taking advantage of the means offered to them by the defence of coming to a definite conclusion. The first communication made by them had reference to the tattoo marks; here was the first complete loophole in the network of evidence thrown around them, and without the semblance of haste or want of consideration they escape from the impending torrent of witnesses to be called to prove a defence with which they already concur. That is to say,