Imágenes de páginas

Historical Sketches.- Inadequate Fees of Practitioners in the County Courts. 521 an old Inn of Chancery, situate in Seacole Lincoln's Inn must have been a re-constiLane, a little south from St. Sepulclire's tution of the society. It has long, however, church, called Saint George's Inn, and ceased to exist as an Ion of Chancery. was procured from Sir John Fineux, knight, sometime Lord Chief Justice of

We have thus given a brief account, in the King's Bench, for the rent of 6l. per chronological order, of the establishment annum, by the name of New Inn.”

of these learned and honourable societies This tradition is further confirmed by in their several Inns or Hostells; and shall Stowe, who states that

hereafter proceed to show the mode and “In St. George's Lane (near St. Sepulchre’s manner in which they exercised their church) on the north side thereof remaineth several important functions. yet an olde walle of stone including a piece of ground by Seacole Lane, wherein (by report) INADEQUATE FEES OF PRACTIsometime stood an inne of chancery; which house being greatly decayed, and standing re

TIONERS IN THE COUNTY mote from other houses of that profession, the COURTS. company removed to a common hostery, called of the signe “Our Lady Inne," not far from Clement's Inne, which they procured from Sir

Some of the mischiefs anticipated from John Fineux, Lord Chief Justice of the King's the inadequacy of the fees allowed to Bench, and since have held it of the owners, by practitioners in the County Courts have the name of the New Inne, paying therefore already been made manifest. We cannot sixe pound rent by the yeere as tenants at their do better than quote a leading article from owne will; for more (as is said) cannot be the Times of 16 th September, in which the gotten of them, and much less will they be put subject is ably considered. Here our from it !”

readers will find the question treated with FURNIVAL's Inn.

regard to the interests of the public,—which From the daughter and heir to William on all these occasions is evidently conLord Furnival, in the time of Henry 4, nected with that of the profession. the inheritance of Furnival's Inn descended

“ One of the most formidable evils there to the Earl of Shrewsbury; and in consi- seemed reason to apprehend was, that the lowderation of 1201., the then Earl, by his ness of the fees allowed to professional men deed, bearing c'ate the 16th day of Decem- under the new act would cause an irruption of ber, 1 Edward 6, sold it to Edward Gryffin, harpies, under the name of agents, to prey upon Esq., then Solicitor-General to the King, ciently remunerative to the respectable practi

the suitors, whose cases would not be suffiWilliam Ropere, and Richard Heydone, tioner. A gross instance of this kind was no. Esqs., and their heirs, to the use of the ticed under the head of “Police” in our paper Society of Lincoln's Inn. This is no of Tuesday.& A person, who called himself an longer an Inn of Chancery.

agent, was charged with having defrauded a

poor servant girl of half-a-crown, under the THAVIES INN.

pretence of assisting her to that cheap and exIn the reign of Edward 6, one Gregory profess to afford to those who resort to them.

peditious justice which the County Courts Nicholls, citizen and mercer of London, Upwards of a month since, the plaintiff- a dobeing possessed by inheritance of the pro- mestic out of place, to whom, of course, the perty of this mansion, granted it, in the speedy recovery of a debt due for wages was of fourth year of the same prince, to the the most vital importance-applied at the benchers of Lincoln's Inn, for the use of Brixton County Court for a summons against students of the law; which society soon her late master for 11. 2s.6d., which she alleged afterwards constituted it one of their Inns

that he owed to her. Before she could stir a of Chancery, and vested the government would seem that no pains were taken by the

step, a plaint was handed her to fill up, and it in a principal and fellows, who were to pay, officers of the court to facilitate this operation, as an acknowledgment to the mother house, which, though simple enough, might naturally the annual rent of 31. 6s. 4d.

embarrass a servant girl, if no assistance or exAn Inn of this name is mentioned by planation were offered her. The small funcDugdale to have been occupied by students tionaries engaged in subordinate positions of the common law, prior to their removal about courts of limited jurisdiction are apt to to the Temple. If so, this grant from the barest execution of their duty, and they even

evince an utter indifference to anything beyond

seem to take a malicious pleasure sometimes in It seems evident that St. George's Inn the perplexities they might easily relieve by a must also be included in the legal seminaries of the city.

& The 14th Sept.



Inadequate Fees of Practitioners in County Courts.- New Statutes. little gratuitous courtesy. Civility, however, Courts Act, but we hope the circumstances are as it costs nothing, and, consequently, brings uncommon, and that exposure may render it nothing, is most sparingly supplied by these easy to guard against such occurrences for the underlings, who think it a privilege to thwart future. We find a plaintiff to whose position a the public, whose servants they are, and who cheap and speedy mode of obtaining justice will do nothing which the duties of their place seemed peculiarly applicable; yet, at the end may not positively require. In the case we are of a whole month, after going to the County now noticing, it appears that the complainant Court, she finds herself minus half-a-crown, had a piece of printed paper placed in her hands, and as far as ever from recovering the money and was told to fill it up --upon which the self due to her.” styled "agent” thought it a good opportunity to go forward and offer his services. If the NEW STATUTES EFFECTING ALTERA. officer of the court is merely to place a paper

TIONS IN THE LAW. into a plaintiff's hand without giving the applicant any information or help in putting the document to its proper use, it is a farce to say that a suitor can proceed on his own behalf

10 & 11 Vict. c. 94. without the expense of a legal practitioner. It would be a parallel case to provide a steam- An Act to amend an Act to enable Canal Com. packet fitted with all the necessary apparatus,

panies to become Carriers upon their Canals. and pretend to save the passengers the expense

[22nd July, 1847.] of a captain by telling them to steer themselves, 1. 8 8. 9 Vict. c. 42.-Recited act incorpofor that the machinery was all at their service rated with this act.—Whereas an act was passed if they chose to make use of it. A County in the 9 Vict., intituled “An Act to enable Court professing to administer justice without Canal Companies to become Carriers of Goods professional intervention is a mere delusion, upon their Canals,” whereby, upon the recital unless it contains within itself not only the that by divers acts of parliament railway commeans of cheaply and rapidly determining panies had been empowered to convey upon plaints, but of assisting suitors in taking the their railways all such goods, wares, merchanproceedings that may be required.

dize, articles, matters, and things as might be "We do not doubt that the judges of the offered to them for that purpose, and that new tribunals would be ready in every case to greater competition for the public advantage carry out the intention of the legislature by would be obtained if similar powers were making the practice of the courts as clear and granted to canal and navigation companies, it intelligible as possible to the meanest compre- was enacted, that it should be lawful to the prehension; but if preliminary difficulties proprietors, trustees, or undertakers of any occur, which the subordinate officers will be at canal, river, or navigation, or their respective no pains to remove, the new system cannot committees, directors, or managers, or their have a fair trial. We do not believe that the superintendents or other agents, to carry as servant girl who sought to recover 11. 2s. 6d. common carriers for their own profit upon due to her for wages would so readily have their respective canals, rivers, or navigations, been snapped up by the “agent” who eased and upon any railways or tramways belonging her of half-a-crown, if the inferior officers of thereto, and upon other canals, rivers, and the court had been at the least trouble to put navigations communicating directly or inher in the way of obtaining for herself the directly therewith, all such goods, wares, merjustice she required. It appears that the clerks chandize, articles, matters, and things as might refuse to fill up the plaints, and declare that be intrusted to them for that purpose, and to they would be liable to a penalty for doing so, purchase, hire, and construct, and to use and a pretence that is utterly absurd, for, if the employ, any number of boats, barges, vessels, plaintiffs were bound to perform this duty for rafts, carts, waggons, carriages, and other conthemselves, any one not able to write would be veniences, and to establish and furnish haulage, excluded from the advantages of the County trackage, or other means of drawing or proCourts, without that professional advice, which pelling the same by steam, animal, or other it is the professed object of the measure to do power, or for the purpose of collecting, carryaway with altogether.

ing, conveying, ivarehousing, and delivering “ If the legislature has thought proper to dis- such goods, wares, merchandize, articles, courage the employment of legal advisers in matters and things : And whereas the prothe County Courts, the officers of those tri-prietors, trustees, and undertakers of many bunals should at least take care to prevent the canals, rivers, and navigations are unable to places of professional men from being usurped avail themselves of the provisions of the said by a set of persons whose interference is wholly recited act by reason of their having no statuirregular. We regret that an example could tory power of raising money to be applied to not be made of the agent who had received the purposes of the same, and it is expedient half-a-crown for the purpose of taking out a that the said recited act should in that respect summons and had not appropriated the money be amended, and that powers should be granted to the purpose for which he had obtained it. to such proprietors, trustees, and undertakers The whole case is not by any means a favour- to raise money for the said purposes, but that able specimen of the working of the County object cannot be effected without the aid of pare

New Statutes.- Privilege from Arrest.- Visit to the Old Lawyers. Analytical Digest. 523 liament: Be it therefore enacted by the Queen's, PARLIAMENTARY PRIVILEGE FROM most excellent Majesty, by and with the advice

ARREST. and consent of the Lords spiritual and temporal, and Commons, in this present parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, This subject, which we took occasion to That the said recited act shall be incorporated notice on the dissolution of the last parliament,* with this act.

before the recent question arose regarding one 2. Canal companies empowered to borrow of the honourable members for Finsbury, conmoney as prescribed by 8 8.9 16 and 17, tinues to engage much of the public attention. and apply the same to the purposes of recited Referring to our last two articles at pp. 449 act. Saving rights of existing creditors.-- and 469, we may here notice that the Court of And be it enacted, That it shall be lawful Common Council of the city of London are to the proprietors, trustees, and undertakers of about to petition parliament on the subject. any canal, river, or navigation who shall have From no quarter could the question so well in the manner provided by the said recited act originate as in the city of London, where the adopted the powers and provisions of the same discharge of all obligations,—still more of to borrow on mortgage or bond in the manner judgment debts,-is of such vital importance. or as nearly as may be in the manner pre- 'Í'he following is the notice of motion given scribed by the Companies Clauses Consolidation by Mr. Anderton, on the 16th September. We Act, 1845, or the Companies. Clauses Consoli. are glad that the subject is in the hands of so dation (Scotland) Act, 1845, as the case may able and respectable a member of the probe, any sum or sums of money not exceeding fession :in all at any one time one-tenth part of the paid-up capital stock of such proprietors, Commons, that the members of that house

“ That this court do petition the House of trustees, or undertakers respectively, and to apply the monies so raised to the purposes of shall not, by virtue of their being so, be privithe said recited act, or any of such purposes; issued against them by their creditors, for en

leged from arrest, upon writs of execution, Provided always, that the monies so borrowed shall not be applied to any other purposes

forcing the payment of their judgment debts.” whatsoever : Provided also, that the monies so to be borrowed, together with any monies Otherwise borrowed by any such proprietors,

VISITS TO THE OLD LAWYERS. trustees, or undertakers as aforesaid, shall not in all exceed one-third part of the paid-up capital of such proprietors, trustees, or undertakers respectively, and that no mortgage or bond to be granted for any monies borrowed from York to Durham was long and tedious,

The journey of the judges, 80 years ago, in virtue of this act shall prejudice or affect any and the public at Durham had often a long time security previously granted for any monies borrowed by virtue of any other act or acts of learned and worthyjudge,advanced in age, arrived

to wait. On one occasion Mr. Justice Gould, a parliament relating to any such canal, river, or navigation.

at Durham late in the day, thoroughly fatigued, 3. 8 8.9 Vict. cc. 16 and 17, incorporated detail of commissions and lists of magistrates

and was hurried to the court to open it:-a long with this act.-And for the purposes of this act, be it enacted, That such of the clauses and learned judge fell asleep; the list went on until

and other official business took place; the provisions of the Companies Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845, and of the Companies Clauses the officer cried out“ John Thompson;" when a Consolidation (Scotland) Act, 1845, respec- accent, in answer loudly said, “ My Lord, John

man in the body of the court, with a Durham tively, as the case may be, as relate to the bor- Thompson is deed," the judge awaking out of rowing of money by companies on mortgage his sleep said, “ or bond, and to the conversion of borrowed

no excuse at all, fine him fortymoney into capital, shall be incorporated with

shillings !!!" this act. 4. Companies not exempt from provisions of

On another occasion, the Bishop of Durham any future general act.-Ánd be it enacted, That who entertained the judges at Durham Castle, nothing herein contained shall be construed to during the assizes, got up from the dining table exempt any canal or navigation company who and advancing to Mr. Justice Gould, who enhave adopted or shall adopt the powers of the joyed a glass of wine, said to him and the neral act regulating the manner of charging absent about half an hour ; I have left you, my said recited act from the operation of any ge- small party, about tən, “I am going to the tolls and other charges upon canals or naviga-lord, a dozen of wine;" the judge looking tions in respect of passengers, goods, animals, articles, and things of a like description that earnestly on the bishop said, “My lord, do you may be passed in the course of this or any

STINT me?" future session of parliament.

5. Act may be amended, 8c.-And he it en- a See the number for 7th August. acted, that this act may be amended or repealed by any act to be passed in this session of parliament.

A A 5






Superior Courts : Lord Chancellor.-Rolls.-Vice-Chancellor. RECENT DECISIONS IN THE SUPE- propriety of the order. [Lord Chancellor. RIOR COURTS.

The application was made under the exigence of the order, and was merely for a mitigation of the sentence.]

Mr. Speed followed Mr. Cooper, and cited Lord Chancellor.

Harding v. Harding, 16 Law Jour. (Chane.)

179. (Lord Chancellor. In that case there Newton v. Jones. May 22nd, 1847. might have been debts, as the accounts had PAYMENT OF EXECUTOR'S LEGACY INTO

not been taken. Here you state that all the

debts and legacies, except this annuity, have ,COURT. The amount of a legacy to an executor who tor shall retain 5001. because he had a legacy

been paid.] It is not equitable that one execunever acted, paid to him by the acting co-to that amount left him. An executor has no erecutor and residuary legatee, who afterwards died, and appointed the former to be priority over other legatees. In this case the

defendant had neglected to see the annuity one of his executors, will not be ordered to

secured. be paid into court for the purpose of se- The Lord Chancellor. It does not appear curing an annuity bequeathed by their tes- to me that this suit raises the ground upon tatrix, and which the acting executor during which the question can be decided. The bill his life had duly paid, but had neglected to is not framed for that purpose. It states that

all debts and legacies have been paid, except Mr. Wood, with whom was Mr. Twells, the plaintiff's annuity. I think the order of stated, that this motion sought to discharge an Vice-Chancellor Knight Bruce is wrong, and order made on the 26th of March last, by Vice. must be discharged. Chancellor Knight Bruce. An annuity had Costs of the first order costs in the cause. been bequeathed to the plaintiff by a certain No costs of the order for extending time of testatrix, who had also bequeathed a legacy of payment. 5001. to the defendant, and the residue of her property to his co-executor, Mr. Richardson. The latter paid all the debts and legacies, and

Rolls Court. continued to pay the annuity regularly until his Robinson v. Norton. July 28th, 1847. decease, but had neglected

to secure it by an investment of any kind. By his will he ap

DISMISSAL OF BILL.-BANKRUPT. pointed the defendant and another his exe- A motion to dismiss a bill for want of prosecutors, against whom the present bill was cution after the plaintiff has become bark. filed by the annuitant, stating the above

rupt is irregular. facts, and praying that Jones and the other executor of Richardson might be de

Mr. Bagshawe moved to dismiss the bill in clared jointly liable to pay the plaintiff's this cause for want of prosecution. It apannuity. Jones put in his answer admitting peared that the plaintiff had become bankrupt. the payment and receipt of his legacy, but Mr. Elmsley, contrà, objected, that the notice denying that he had ever acted as executor of was irregular; the defendant should have mored, the testator, and also admitting assets of his that the assignees might proceed with the suit testator, Richardson. A motion was then made within some short time, or that the bill might by the plaintiff for payment into court of the be dismissed. amount of the legacy, as assets, and his Honour

Mr. Bagshawe contended, that the court made the order now complained of, directing would make an order to this effect on the mothe defendant Jones to pay into court one-half tion to dismiss. of the amount of the said legacy, which it was

But Lord Langdale refused the motion with calculated was about the then value of the said costs. annuity. By a subsequent order obtained by the defendant on the 4th instant, one-fourth of

Vice-Chancellor of England. the said sum of 5001. was directed to be paid on the 25th instant, and another fourth at the

Eldrid v. Whitefoot. July 30, 1847. end of three weeks from the latter date. The PAYMENT OF MONEY OUT OF COURT.-PElearned counsel contended, that such an order could not be sustained, as the bill raised no case against the defendant Jones, and they cited

On a petition for payment of money out of Lord Shipbrook v. Lord Hinchinbrook, íi Ves. court to parties entitled to shares in the 252.

same, certain other parties, also entitled, Mr. Cooper supported the Vice-Chancellor's appearing by counsel, although not parties order. [Lord Chancellor, An executor who

to the petition, allowed to participate in the is also a legatee admits that he has received a

order, they contributing pro ratâ to the legacy. Is that a sufficient ground for order

costs. ing it to be paid into court ?] By applying to In this case a sum of money, portion of a the court for further time within which the legacy of 2001., was standing in the name of money is to be paid, and for liberty to pay it by the Accountant-General to the separate account instalments, the defendant has recognised the of certain parties. A petition was presented




Superior Courts: V. C. Knight Bruce.--Exchequer.-Analytical Digest. 525 by some of the parties, praying for payment house," the chief articles whereof are enumeout of court to them of their shares of the fund. rated in a schedule.” The schedule was un

Mr. Shapter appeared for the petition. stamped and not in any way annexed to the

Mr Lewis appeared for Thomas Eldrid and deed. It was objected that the schedule was Edward Eldrid, who were also entitled to por- not admissible in evidence for want of a stamp. tions of the fund, and asked, that their shares The learned judge being of that opinion, nonmight be ordered to be paid to them. They suited the plaintiff. A rule nisi having been were not parties to the petition, neither were obtained to set aside the nonsuit, they mentioned in the prayer.

Wells showed cause. The bill of sale could The Vice-Chancellor made the order, Thos. not be received in evidence without the scheEldrid and Edward Eldrid contributing pro dule, as both were executed at one time, and ratá to the costs.

the former refers to the latter. The schedule Note.-This order is constantly refused at is part of the deed, and in fact they form but the Rolls, it being considered necessary there, one instrument. Weeks v. Maillardet, 14 East, either to have the prayer of the petition altered, 568; Burgh v. Preston, 8 T. R. 483. The or a separate petition presented by the parties only goods which passed by the bill of sale seeking to be included in the order.

were those enumerated in the schedule.

W. H. Watson appeared to support the rule,

but was not called on. Vice-Chancellor Knight Bruce.

Alderson, B. This case is distinguished from Gascoyne v. Lamb. July 9th, 1847. Weeks v. Maillardet, because there the deed

was insensible without the schedule, for it was PRACTICE.-EVIDENCE.-CREDITOR'S SUIT.

a conveyance of all the articles in the schedule ;

here the deed may be considered as enumeratIn a creditor's suit, where no evidence was ing the articles, by describing them as all the

given in the cause of the plaintiff's debt, articles in a certain house. the usual decree was made on an affidavit Rolfe, B., and Pollock, C. B., concurred. of the testator's signature to the promissory Rule absolute.

note on which the debt was founded. David Rowley, who died intestate in ANALYTICAL DIGEST OF CASES, 1836, leaving his heir at law and customary heir, an infant, was indebted on a promissory note to the plaintiff in the suit. He died seised

Common Law Courts. of copyhold property, and the plaintiff having filed a creditor's bill, the administrator admitted PRINCIPLES OF THE COMMON LAW the debt, but there was no proof of it in the AND GROUNDS OF ACTION.

Mr. Malins appeared for the plaintiff'; and Mr. Rasch for the infant heir, submitted that Personal liability. --Special verdict.-Declasome evidence should be given of the consi- ration, in assumpsit, alleged a promise by dederation, or some proof of the debt, and cited fendant to pay plaintiff a certain debt, and to Keaton v. Lynch, 1 Y. & C., C. C. 437; and arrange with him the time and mode of paying Whittaker v. Wright, 2 Hare, 310.

it. Issue being joined on non assumpsit, a His Honour made the usual decree on an special verdict was found, which set forth a affidavit of the signature of the intestate to the letter from defendant to plaintiff, containing note.

the following passage, relied upon by plaintiff

as the substantive contract :-"Your bill of Erchequer.

charges in this matter, amounting to 5271.5s.,"

(the sum claimed in the action,) “ I also underDyer y. Green. Trin. Term, 3 June, 1847. take (on behalf of Messrs. Esdaile & Co.,) to

pay, and will arrange with you the time and Upon the trial of an interpleader issue, the mode.” An earlier

part of the letter contained plaintiff gave in evidence a bill of sale and an unqualified promise by defendant to pay schedule. The bill of sale assigned to him plaintiff another sum; and in letters written all the property in a certain house, stating plaintiff and defendant named E. & Co. as the

shortly before, and set out in the verdict, the that the chief articles thereof were enumerated in the schedule. The schedule was

parties to the negotiations, and mentioned the not in any way annexed to the deed. Held, by E. & Co.,” but spoke of the negotiations as

debt now claimed as “to be settled and paid that the schedule was admissible in evidence

to other debts with reference merely to plaintiff without a stamp, the deed being sensible

and defendant. without the schedule.

Held, by the Court of Exchequer Chamber, This was an interpleader issue to try the that the first-mentioned letter, upon the face of property in certain goods. At the trial before it, and especially when connected with the Pollock, C. B., at the Middlesex Sittings in other passages above-mentioned, imported, as Easter Term, the plaintiff tendered in evidence to the sum claimed, only an undertaking by a bill of sale and schedule. The bill of sale defendant as agent for E. & Co.; and that, in assigned to him all the property in a certain default of the special verdict directly stating,




« AnteriorContinuar »