and by these different means he created a great deal of enthusiasm among a large number. These daily examinations after lecture were followed out on a more extended scale, by monthly, quarterly, and annual examinations. At the monthly examinations, which usually lasted half an hour, the Professor sometimes gave prizes, from himself, to such of the pupils as shewed the most knowledge of some particular subject or work, Lord Coke's Reports for instance. The general or annual examinations lasted several hours, or a day or two, and at this prizes were distributed before the public. This course of teaching proved eminently successful. He had gene. rally attending on his lectures from 50 to 150 during the five years he lectured. But the most efficient part of his instruction was, perhaps, that given in private. He held a private-class course in his own chambers (grounded on the customary practice of barristers), for a fee of 100 guineas each, to allow gentlemen "to have the run of their chambers." This course did not so much consist of a regular series of lectures, as of legal conversations on particular text-books, which he thought most advisable should be adopted in the course of study by the young; such as books upon Evidence, books upon Constitutional Law, the State Trials, or treatises on other subjects of the kind, generally subjects of immediate interest, and such as excited much public attention at the moment; for instance, on Commercial Law when he came from the assizes, upon the business of Nisi Prius, and on questions connected with the trials which had just taken place, so as to adapt himself to the different tastes and inquiries of his pupils, and, though in a desultory manner, to win their attention. This and the more philosophic cast of his instruction as contrasted with that to be had in geneal in chambers, appears to have attracted a large number of unprofessional cultivators of law studies to This private class, many of them at the time preparing for future magisterial, legislative, and official functions; amongst them, the present Speaker of the House of Commons, Mr. Henry Currey for two Sears, &c. &c. may be numbered. Besides the Course given by Professor Amos, another on Jurisprudence was given by Professor Austin (a gentleman well known for his high qualifications in this depart ment), but whose lectures, from the more abstract character which they assumed, were not so numerously attended as those given by Professor Amos, but such as did attend were very intelligent men." In general the lectures of Professor Amos, from their reference to practical points of direct and often personal and present interest, attracted all classes. The attorneys predominated over the barristers, and the barristers over the unprofessional or private gentlemen; the latter appear to have preferred the private-class course. THE LAWYER. Summary. and connect the English Law of Contracts with the of the Act, and by the Queen's Bench the are held in regard by students, and are so far of value Your Committee having thus far examined into the The college of Haileybury has one professorship of law. It was formerly held by Sir James Mackintosh, to whom the present professor, Mr. Empsom, about twenty years ago succeeded. His course embraces two years, being the time generally required for a student's residence. As the student comes at a very early age, about seventeen, the professor is compelled to adapt his course to this circumstance. Accordingly, he begins in the most literal sense from the beginning. After stating that the pupils for the most part arrived quite ignorant of the law, Professor Empson continues; "I think the best introduction is by taking something as near jurisprudence as might be; consequently I take a book on morals in the first instance; and for that purpose, not looking to ethics, but looking to the purpose for which the use of morals is connected with law, I conceive that Paley's Moral Philosophy is the best text-book I can take, and I use it as a sort of introduction to jurisprudence. I sometimes have taken Grotius in the same way." After stating the broad principles which distinguish morals from law, he goes on to say: "I then take general divisions: the rights of property, the rights of persons, the principal relations and daties of private life; and then taking this chapter in Paley, I take a corresponding chapter in the Civil Law, or in Blackstone, or in Kent's Commentaries (an American professor of considerable eminence), and I lecture in two parallel lines upon these subjects, on what are the rights and duties on the subject in morals, and then on the rights and duties on the same subject in law, and then compare them both together, shewing where they agree, and where they differ, and THE defeat, by very narrow majorities, of why they do agree, and why they do differ; and by two of the three Bills for the amendment of that means we begin. As the professorship embraces, besides the law of England, what is called the Poor Removal Act, and the passing of the General Polity, under the name of General Polity you third, leaves the law in a more perplexed state introduce what you like in the way of law. This first than ever. All that could be urged in answer course is simply with a view of introduction, by way to the proposal, that the vexata questio should of accustoming the minds of young men, to look at law without taking fright at it; to be accustomed be settled by legislative enactment, was, that to connect it with reason and morals, and also the disputable points of the statute were already with the practical relations of life, and to see before the Queen's Bench, and would be setwhere it branches out of it. Having got over that, tled there. True; but at what a cost to 1 take a branch of the Civil Law of England, any parishes, and with what a world of litigation One branch of Civil Law, and go more extensively before all the doubts daily arising can be so into it; I take, for instance, Contracts: I take either Pothier's Book on Contracts, or some book on Con- disposed of! At this moment it is questiontracts, and then Mr. Addison's Book on Contracts, able whether Wales is included in the operation THE MAGISTRATE. Summary. REVIEW OF CASES IN THE EQUITY, BANKRUPTCY, ECCLESIASTICAL, ACCUMULATION. Thellusson Act.-Few cases now occur under this head, most of the questions that can possibly arise being already settled. In The Corporation of Bridgnorth v. Collins, 9 Law T. 99, it was held that the Act which directs that no person shall, by deed or will, settle or dispose of any real or personal property in any such manner that the rents or produce shall be accumulated for a longer term than the life of the settlor, &c. has no application to those cases where accumulations are not positively directed by a will, but are made under it by reason of events occurring after the death of the testator. ADMINISTRATION. Limited, practice as to.-A singular state of things has arisen in the case of Davies v. Chanter, 8 Law T. 289, on the question of letters of administration. The Ecclesiastical Court having positively refused to grant to the nominee of the plaintiff any other than limited letters of administration, the Vice-Chancellor of England decided that he could not proceed with the suit, on the ground that the limited administrator, being a nominee of the plaintiff, could not sufficiently represent the estate of the intestate, the object of the sult being to charge the intestate. So that, if the two Courts persist, the one in refusing general administration, and the other in not acting upon the particular grant, the unfortunate plaintiff is likely to be the sufferer; and there certainly is great difficulty in the case, and the question is a very serious one. On the appeal, Skeffington v. Budd, 9 Cl. & Fin. was cited to shew that a court of equity will not allow a case to fall to the ground because there is only a limited administrator; but it was not necessary in that case to determine the point. The Chancellor intimated his intention to consult the judges of the Ecclesiastical Court, and to consider the point. Limited administration- Cæterorum grant.— It seems an erroneous practice had sprung up in the Prerogative Court of granting, after more than a year had elapsed from the death of a party, administration for a limited purpose, without citing those interested in a general administration of the effects of the deceased, and without their renunciation. However, this is now put an end to by the decision In the goods of J. Currey, 9 Law T. 39. In that case it appeared that a trustee in the re mainder of two terms of years died in 1823, and six years after, administration, limited to his interest in those terms, was granted, as if the deceased had died intestate, but without citing the widow or the next of kin. In 1846 the widow produced a will, and applied for probate cæterorum as the sole executrix thereof. The Court refused the grant, and directed that in future such administrations should not pass without the next of kin being first cited. BANKRUPTCY. Under this head few cases have lately occurred worthy of remark, but we may refer to a case of very considerable importance, as far as insolvency cases are concerned, which, should the views taken therein by the learned Commissioner be adopted by the rest of the Court, will produce a very considerable change, and will have a most favourable operation for creditors. The case we allude to is one of a deed in aid of an examination in bankruptcy; and, default of issue to M. L. the wife's niece, in fee; the wife having died without having made any ap pointment, and without issue, the husband filed a bill against the wife's heir-at-law, to compel a spe. cific performance of the articles; and it was held, that the contract must be carried into execution entirely, including the limitation in fee to the niece. COSTS. Appeal for.-The rule that an appeal cannot be 8 Law T. 416, the bankrupt came up upon his own would not exercise to compel a trustee in the case allows an exception to its operation. An instance Bankrupt on his own petition.—In re Gilliam, two out of three of the commissioners decided they allowed solely for costs is not an inflexible rule of practice; on the contrary, the Court sometimes petition, but there were no assets for distribution of a jointress, but in her case only, to produce title-in point occurred in Chappell v. Purday, 9 Law T. among creditors; and the question arose whether deeds, except on the terms of confirming her join- 145, where an injunction to restrain an alleged the preamble of the 5 & 6 Vict. c. 116, and the ture; but the jointure-deed itself was to be pro- piracy of copyright had been applied for, and the form of petition prescribed by the 7 & 8 Vict. c. duced. The whole case is well worth perusal. bill was retained, with liberty to the plaintiff to 96, had been complied with when there were no Proof-Surety-Discharge.—In ex parte Webhave applied to the Insolvent Debtors Court. The by C. and obtained from the holder liberty to re- bill had been dismissed without costs. effects to divide, or whether the party ought not to ster, re Acraman, where A. accepted a bill drawn bring an action to establish his title at law; and a verdict having been given for the defendant, the The founCommissioner (Goulburn) said, persons without new, upon securing the payment by a bill drawn by estate were only fitted for the Insolvent Debtors A. and accepted by D., A. and D. became bank-dation of the plaintiff's suit having thus failed, it Court, where their cond ict could be investigated, rupts before the latter bill became due. The assignees dismissed with costs, and that an appeal upon that was held on appeal that the bill ought to have been and they could be punished, but not for a court of of A. relinquished a lien in respect of the debt upon bankruptcy, which was only a court for the distri-C.'s goods, and a composition was made by C. with ground, though solely an appeal for costs, was bution of assets. He thought that unless the bene- his creditors, in which the holders of the bill and consistent with the practice of the Court. The fits, intended by the Acts referring insolvents to the assignees concurred, the holders receiving the distinction between cases in which an appeal will or that Court, for creditors could be obtained, the amount of the composition on the debt on the bill. will not be allowed seems to be, that where the debtors ought not to have the benefits intended for them, and he would act upon that idea in future. sons taking out their own fiats. Whether these The same principle would apply in the case of perviews will be carried out remains to be proved. Choice of assignees.-In another case, where a bankrupt issued his own fiat, and the assignees were chosen by creditors who were represented by the bankrupt's solicitor, they were set aside and a new choice was made on the petition of a creditor whose proof was postponed at the time of the appointment, because of insufficient evidence, but which was afterwards fully admitted the amount of debt proved being sufficient to decide the choice. (Ex parte Morse, re Layt, 9 Law T. 202.) Held, that the holders were not at liberty to prove CLERGY. Church Discipline Act-Production of papers. -In a proceeding under the Church Discipline Act (3 & 4 Vict. c. 86), the bishop of the diocese in which the inquiry commenced, sent all the papers connected with the case, whether produced before the commissioners or not, to the registry of the Vicar-General of the Archbishop of Canterbury. Application was made to the Court of Arches to Committal.-In Coombe's case, 2 Rose, 396, as request the Vicar-General to allow the party prowell as in Brown's case, 2 Rose, 400, Lord Eldon ceeded against access to certain of these papers, held that where a bankrupt committed by commis- which were alleged to refer to charges which had sioners is again brought before them, and is re-been abandoned. These papers were not produced manded, there ought to be a warrant of recommit- before the commissioners: Held, that as by sections ment or detainer, stating the cause of recom- 5 & 7 of the Act, the party was entitled to be furmitment, and on the authority of those cases it nished only with the report, and the evidence given has been held, in Re Martin, 9 Law T. 230, that before the commissioners, the application must be where a bankrupt who was committed by a sub-refused. division court for not giving satisfactory answers to been a record of such statement before the com entitled to be discharged. COLLISION. 66 questions relating to his property, and on his ap- Construction of Trinity House Rules.-The case Pilot, duty of. It is the duty of a pilot, when in charge of a vessel, to superintend, among other things, the hanging of the anchor, and to take care that everything is properly done to bring the vessel to anchor in the port to which he is conducting her. Where damage is done by the anchor of a vessel being improperly catted, it was held that, a pilot being on board, under a compulsory Act of Parliament, the owners were exonerated. (The Gypsey King, 9 Law T. 131.) CONTRACT. Production of documents-Trustee.-A very important question arose in the late case of Re Reay, 8 Law T. 476, as to the authority of the Court of Bankruptcy to call for the production of title deeds by a witness, who held them as trustee for a party with whom the bankrupt had in them a common interest; or, as was ultimately decided in Marriage-Limitation to collaterals.-Limitathe affirmative, whether a jointress may refuse to tions to parties for a voluntary consideration may disclose the contents of deeds relating to her join- be enforced if the other limitations of the deed be ture, unless upon the terms of having her jointure enforceable. Accordingly, in Davenport v. Bishopp, confirmed. The question appeared to be one of so 9 Law T. 33, the husband and wife, in contemplagreat importance as to require the summoning of a tion of marriage, covenanted with each other, and subdivision court to hear it discussed; and, in the with trustees, that all the real and personal estate end, the learned commissioners differed in opinion, which might devolve upon the wife during covertwo being in favour of the jointress, and one for ture, should be settled upon the wife for life, to her disclosure absolutely. It was agreed on all hands, separate use, with remainder as she should appoint; that since the case of ex parte Caldecott, Mont. and, in default of appointment, to the husband for 55, a purchaser is bound to produce his purchase-life, then to the issue of the marriage in tail, and in circumstances are such that the Court cannot decide the question of costs without rehearing the whole decree as to costs is wrong, then an appeal for case, an appeal will not be allowed; but where it is apparent, on the face of the proceedings, that the costs will lie. Charity-Unauthorised charges of relator's solicitor. The case of Attorney-General ▼. The Ironmongers' Company, 8 Law T. 406, may serve as a lesson to solicitors not to take steps in charity matters without the authority of the Master. There the relator's solicitor was not allowed professional charges, though, on the ground of his having been instrumental in benefiting the charity, he was allowed his expenses out of pocket, the amount of which he was allowed to verify by affidavit, without a reference to the Master. Churchwarden-Accounts.-Where a churchwarden, chosen by a select vestry, had not for many years exhibited his accounts of certain charities connected with the parish, not being required to do so by the select vestry, and some of the parishioners instituted a suit against him for the accounts, and the accounts were fully set out in the answer, the defendant was obliged to pay the costs to the hearing, but no costs were given on either side after, though the answer claimed a larger sum as due to the defendant than was found due. (AttorneyGeneral v. Gibbs, 9 Law T. 35.) Solicitor's lien.-It is a rule that a lien for costs is not in general any ground for non-production of documents, the parties required to produce being obliged to pay the costs; nevertheless, in Wroughton v. Barclay, 8 Law T. 442, where two solicitors, partwhich were admitted by the defendants in the suit ners, claimed a lien, on account of costs on documents to be in their power, and one of the defendants was one of the two solicitors, the Court declined to order the defendants to pay these costs, in order to facilitate the production of documents. Taxation.-Some few cases have occurred since our last review, under this head, of which that of Re Hare, 9 Law T. 1, may be noticed as bearing on the questions of retainer and joint petition. Two out of three liable petitioned for taxation, and it was held that a judgment by default against the third in an action to recover the costs did not preclude taxation; that the two might petition, admitting their liability, but disputing the retainer of the solicitor as to part of the bill for business done for the third; and that the question of retainer could be tried by the Master just as well as by a jury. GUARDIAN. Testamentary-Trust to educate.-A testamentary guardian may be limited as to his power, and in Knott v. Cottee, 8 Law T. 463, it was held that a recommendation made by a testator with respect to the persons by whom his children are to be educated, is in the nature of a trust, and will be imperative upon a testamentary guardian. But a testamentary guardian will, nevertheless, be allowed unlimited access to his wards, notwithstanding the testator has pointed out other persons to have the care of the education of his infant children. Undue influence.-The case of Maitland v. Irving, 8 Law T. 312, ought to serve as a warning to parties, if any thing could, not to use for their own purposes the influence resulting from the rela tion of guardian and ward. In that case the plain-from the granting and withholding the injunction. ATTORNEY-GENERAL very naturally expressed his tiff, a young lady, formerly a ward of court, conti- The measure of injury which the plaintiff might surprise, and observed, that the framers of the Act nued to reside with D. M., her late guardian (her sustain from the non-interference of the Court could not have contemplated such a possibility, uncle by marriage) and one of the defendants, a could not be equal to that which the defendants deeming that the labours of the Judges would be too year and a half after she came of age. By reason might suffer from the granting of an injunction onerous to permit their attention to be given to the of certain transactions in which D. M. was involved which could not afterwards be sustained; the more duties of the House of Commons. And wherefore with the other defendants, the plaintiff was induced so, as in the one case the damage done might be are they not? Certainly, it is not because of the to give a guarantee on behalf of her late guardian, ascertained and recovered, but not so in the other." lightness of the cause-lists. May it not be from the and afterwards to exchange the guarantee for cer- His lordship observed that it had been supposed he nimbleness with which they are, in some instances, tain promissory notes. D. M. having failed to had carried the principal too far; but he found that despatched? make good his obligations to defendants, they com- in Hill v. Thompson, 3 Meriv. 622, Lord Eldon The Bankruptcy and Insolvency Bill has passed its menced proceedings at law against D. M. and the would not grant an injunction, and thereby express third reading, and henceforth, the country jurisdicplaintiff on the notes; but the Court refused exe- an opinion on the validity of a patent, which was tion in insolvency will be transferred to the County cution in respect of the same. going beyond what he had ever done. However, Courts ;-the Judge to perform the duties of Comthe principle of non-interference in such cases is missioner, the Clerk to be the Official Assignee. subject to an exception where the patent has been The only new point of practice of particular inin existence for a lengthened period of time, for interest that has reached us during the week, is a such a case it is held good against all the world, rule established by Mr. INGHAM, in future to retill proved bad, and is of course protected. And quire a formal order to be served with the sumthese observations apply only to cases where there mons, where the defendant resides out of the is a doubt of the right of the party; for where there jurisdiction, and the summons issues into another is a clear infringement of right, an injunction will district. be granted, as it would be absurd as well as unjust to tell the party to go and first establish his right at law. INFANT. Jurisdiction. In sending a case to the Master to inquire as to a guardian to infants, it is presupposed that there is property to support them, or that the relations will maintain them-of their intentions to do which there must be sufficient evidence; but where that is not so, the Court will not take the children from the mother without previously seeing they will be taken care of. The children must be restored to their legal custody before any directions can be given as to their custody. In Re North's Infringement of right-Trial at law-In Stevens infants, 8 Law T. 309, 313, the paternal relations v. Keating, 8 Law T. 405, the Lord Chancellor had taken the children from the mother upon the stated the practice of the Court in such cases, and ground of her having become a Roman Catholic; referred to Collard v. Allison, 4 My. & Cr. 487, and and the Vice-Chancellor, on an application by the Neilson v. Thompson, 1 Webster's Pat. Cas. to mother for a writ of habeas corpus, had suspended shew that the reports of his decisions therein did the return of the writ till the Master had reported not, in the smallest degree, countenance the impresupon a reference as to guardians made on a petition sion which it seems prevailed in the Profession that by the relations. The Lord Chancellor intimated his lordship had expressed opinions in cases of inthat such order could not be maintained, inasmuch junction different from the established doctrines of as the return to the writ ought to shew the children the court, as laid down by Lord Loughborough and were in the legal custody before any direction as to Lord Eldon. And his lordship held, that though custody could be given the legal question should the Court ought to exercise great caution in refirst be determined. The Vice-Chancellor also gave straining the exercise of a right where there is a the mother access to the children only for two hours doubt as to the question of legal title, yet where there a day in the presence of others, but the Lord Chan- is a clear infringement of an established right, it cellor ordered she should have unlimited access. would be unjust to send the party having that right to law before granting an injunction. That where a patent right had been long possessed, the Court the ground of presumed error or defect in the pawas not at liberty to exercise any discretion upon tent, but must grant an injunction to restrain an infringement until the patent had been shewn by proceedings at law to be invalid. Railway shares-Fraud.-The case of Stikeman v. Dawson, 8 Law T. 551, is well worth perusing, as bearing on the question of dealings with infants. In that case it was held that a man cannot be charged in equity, after attaining his majority, with a purchase, sale, or contract made during his minority, because without any false assertion by him the person seeking to charge him, believed him not to be a minor, and believed so on the ground that adults only could have such dealings as those into which the infant entered. The case was this: Sharebrokers who had purchased in the market for another person (whose purchase-money they had to repay) railway shares from brokers acting for A.B. afterwards found to be an infant, instituted a suit against A. B. who had then attained his majority, and the father of A. B. and the brokers who had sold the shares, for the purpose of having a valid transfer of the shares sold or of similar shares; the Court dismissed the bill against all the defendants, but without prejudice to any action or any other suit. INJUNCTION. And in M'Neill v. Williams, 8 Law T. 493, where the right of the party was not clear, and the legal title was not established, it was observed by the Court that great weight is given to the consideration of the question, which of the two parties to the dispute is more likely to suffer by an erroneous or hasty judgment thereon, and to the consideration of the very possible, if not probable effect which an injunction may have to the defendant's prejudice in an action. Company v. Knott, 8 Law T. 529, the Lord Chan- (To be continued.) COUNTY COURTS. The tendency or inclination of the Court of Chancery has been of late years rather to restrict and diminish than to extend or increase the class or number of cases in which it interferes by injunction, in cases of contested rights before the establishment of the legal title; and it has also of late years, among other things, given great weight to the consideration of the question, which of the two parties to the dispute is more likely, by an erroneous or hasty judgment of an interlocutory na- A CONVERSATION in the House of Commons has ture against them, and also to the consideration of made known another obscurity in the County Courts the effect which an injunction may possibly or pro- Act, of which, however, it must, in justice, be said, bably have to the defendant's prejudice in an ac- that fewer doubts have, as yet, been discovered in tion. And in the case of The Electric Telegraph it, considering its bulk and the variety and import Company v. Knott, 8 Law. T. 529, the Lord Chan-ance of its provisions, than in any other "leading" cellor said," I have frequently had occasion to statute within our memory. Is a Judge of the express my opinion as to the course which the County Courts disqualified from sitting in the Court ought to adopt, when application was made House of Commons? The language of the statute to its extraordinary jurisdiction in support of a is extremely obscure; the ATTORNEY-GENERAL legal right. I have said before, and say now, that if there is any doubt whatever respecting the validity of the legal right, the Court ought to be extremely cautious in exercising its power of interfering by injunction; and there are two reasons why this power of the Court should not be lightly put in motion; the first is, that if it should turn out that the applicant's legal title should fail, the Court would have interfered without any necessity; and the second and principal reason is, that there is no comparison in the mischief which might result DEVONSHIRE. Holsworthy, Friday, July 9. (Before W. MACKWORTH PRAED, Esq.) LANE v. HOBBS. work and labour done. Summons for goods sold and delivered—Particulars of connected as to explain one the other. The summons stated the action to be "for medicines Rowe, for the defendant, contended that the statement of the cause of action, "medicines and other cines," as he was not a licentiate of the Apothecaries' It was clear the plaintiff could not recover for "medithings," as set out in the summons, was insufficient. Company. He could not recover for surgical attendance, for the 75th section provided, that no evidence should be given by the plaintiff of any demand or cause of action, except such as stated in the summons. Surgical attendance could not be included within the words "other things," for if any meaning could be given to such words, they could be only held to include other things of the like nature with those to the reference of the summons, "particulars of before particularised, viz. medicines. With regard which are hereunto annexed," these words could not import into the summons, from such particulars, any new cause of action; and in this case the words must be read thus, "particulars of which medicines are hereunto annexed." The JUDGE, however, held that, under Rule 5, the particulars must be considered as so much forming part of the summons, and that the cause of action was sufficiently stated. DERBYSHIRE. Glossop, Friday, July 9. (Before JOSEPH ST. JOHN YATES, Esq.) ROBINSON v. RATCLIFFE. 201. abandoning 41. 13s. 9d. excess. SAME v. SAME. 147. 78. 10 d. Splitting demands. Johnson, for plaintiff. Stirke, for defendant. The following facts were proved :-Plaintiff keeps an ironmonger's shop in Hillgate, Stockport, and has also an iron-foundry in the Wellington-road in the same town. The first action is to recover the amount of a bill for iron castings made at the foundry. The second for the amount of a bill for ironmongery sold at the shop. The two establishments were proved to be perfectly distinct, there being separate books and a distinct book-keeper at each. Orders executed at the foundry, and vice versa. Money also were frequently given at the shop for work to be confessed himself unable to give a decided opinion due on an account owing to the foundry was freupon it; and to place the matter beyond question, quently paid at the shop, and vice versa. But in Sir JAMES GRAHAM is to move a clause to be every case the work to be done, or the money which added to the Bankruptcy Bill, expressly prohibit- | had been paid, was entered exclusively and invariably ing the County Court Judges from sitting in Par- in the books of the establishment to which such work liament. or money peculiarly belonged. Defendant admitted that he knew the two establishments to be distinct; that he had always received separate bills, and had made his payments separately; adding, that on one occasion he had been very angry because plaintiff had placed to the credit of his (defendant's) foundry account a payment of 101. which he had specifically But the most curious part of this affair is the origin of the discussion. Sir JAMES GRAHAM stated, that it was understood to be the intention of one of the Judges to become a candidate at the ensuing election. To whom did he allude? The appropriated to his account with the other establishment. The COURT gave judgment for plaintiff in the first action for 201. entering abandonment of 47. 13s. 9d. excess, to be increased by consent to 197. 1s. 74d. in case his Honour should be of opinion that the two accounts formed together only one cause of action. The second action was accordingly adjourned to give time for consideration. CUMBERLAND. Kendal, Thursday, July 1. (Before T. H. INGHAM, Esq.) WINDER ET UXOR v. STORY. Practice Summons out of district. This Court will, in all cases, require an order for leave to sue a defendant resident in another district, which order should set forth the application for leave to sue, and the fact that it was granted and should be served with the summons on the defendant. Scott, for plaintiffs; Cowburn, for defendant. Plaintiff works in the Lound Foundry, and formerly lived at the Low Mills, near Kendal, where defendant kept a bobbin-mill, but is now a toll-keeper living at the Clapham toll-bar, near Settle. The action was brought to recover 201. due from the defendant on his joint promissory note given to the wife of the plaintiff. The defendant resided out of the jurisdiction of the Court. Cowburn, for the defendant, contended that before the leave of the Court could be given to issue a summons out of the jurisdiction, there must be a good and valid debt subsisting of not more than 207. in amount,-or, if greater, the plaintiffs must abandon the excess; and that if leave were given to sue without such abandonment, it was error. In this case, on consulting the clerk's book, it appeared that no record had been kept of the amount for which leave was given to sue. The defendant, also, ought to have been furnished with some evidence that the summons was issued with the leave of the Court, as the leave was granted ex parte, and he had no opportunity to shew cause why it should not be granted. If the Court should be of opinion that, on a full statement of all the circumstances, it would not have granted leave, then it will give him all the benefit it can now do by striking out the cause as one that ought not to have been entered. His HONOUR said he should allow this cause to proceed. In future, he intended that an order setting forth the application for leave to sue, and the fact of its having been granted, should accompany and be served on defendants, along with the summonses. In this case, which relates to certain transactions The VICE-CHANCELLOR made the order. Imme- Bethell and Nichols, as counsel for the plaintiff, entered the court, and Mr. Bethell asked that the cause might go on, on the ground that it was understood that it should be argued to-day, and so arranged between himself and Mr. Cooper. Cooper then said, that his brief had been indorsed and taken away, and, in its absence, it was impossible for him to argue the case, the order in which had been made, counsel not being present for the plaintiff; and he must therefore stand upon the order as made. Bethell then observed that it was a most disreputa- Cooper then said, that such language should not be Bethell.-Now, is that a fit thing? The VICE-CHANCELLOR.-I certainly understood, Cooper said that was his understanding. The VICE-CHANCELLOR.-I don't think I can do Bethell. I do not care whether you pay regard to HIGH BAILIFFS OF THE NEW COUNTY COURTS. After some further wrangling in the same strain, Bethell.-You know that I was instructed to ap- Cooper.-I have too much respect for my friend's PROMOTIONS, APPOINTMENTS, my friend's observations. ETC. [Clerks of the Peace for Counties, Cities, and Boroughs will oblige by regularly forwarding the names and addresses of all new Magistrates who may qualify.] The VICE-CHANCELLOR.-I shall take judicial notice that the weather is very hot. (A laugh.) Cooper.-It would be absurd in our profession to say that I would call my learned friend to an honourThe Queen has been pleased to appoint Steetmanable account. I have too much pity for my learned friend and his family to do so. A. Rawlins, esq. to be her Majesty's Treasurer for Bethell.-Take what course you please. I repeat the island of Nevis, and W. H. Holmes, esq. to be the expression. Provost-Marshal for the colony of British Guiana. The Lord Chancellor has appointed John Walford Cutler, esq. of Birmingham, gent. to be a Master Extraordinary in the High Court of Chancery. The Lord Chancellor has appointed Charles Bennett Roche, of Daventry, in the county of Northampton, gent. to be a Master Extraordinary in the High Court of Chancery. The Lord Chancellor has appointed Henry William Whitehead, of Rochdale, in the county palatine of Lancaster, gent. and James Armitage, of Huddersfield, in the county of York, gent. to be Masters Extraordinary in the High Court of Chancery. NEW MAGISTRATE.-Midsummer Sessions, 1847, Giamorganshire. William Salmon, esq. M.D. of Penllorie Court, qualified as a Justice of Peace. LEGAL INTELLIGENCE. A SCENE IN COURT. In the Vice-Chancellor's Court on Tuesday, in the case of Chainbre v. Siggers, the following extraordinary scene occurred: Cooper. We were at college together, and I never expected to hear such language applied to me by my learned friend. Bethell. It is a circumstance I have no pleasure in recollecting at all. The calendar contained the names of ten prisoners, whose offences, excepting one of arson, one of manslaughter, two of burglary, and one of stealing Postoffice letters, to which the prisoner pleaded guilty, were of an insignificant character. there was an indictment for a misdemeanour under the Bankrupt Act, which, having been found at the last assizes, was taken at the sitting of the Court. Besides these BUCKINGHAM, Saturday.-The commission for the county of Bucks was duly opened by Mr. Baron Alderson and Mr. Justice Patteson, the learned jadges of assizes of this circuit, yesterday afternoon, and both the courts were opened for the despatch of business this morning at 10 o'clock. On the criminal side the calendar is light, numerically speaking; but among the sixteen names therein mentioned, stands that of Barnard Fossey, who is charged with the offence of manslaughter in connexion with the recent lamentable loss of life at the Wolverton station. The case is one which excites much interest, and is likely, from the number of witnesses to be called, to occupy the attention of the Court for the entire day on Monday, when it is to be taken. NORTHERN CIRCUIT. YORK, Monday, July 12.-The assizes at this place commenced to-day, the commission having been opened on Saturday by Mr. Justice Wightman. The other learned judge, Sir Frederick Pollock, did not arrive until last evening. The cause-lists, which are not yet published, are expected to be very light. There are 110 prisoners named in the calendar, 4 of whom are charged with murder, 2 murder and robbery, 3 rape, 1 attempting to shoot, 3 manslaughter, 17 burglary, 3 housebreaking, 9 cutting, wounding, or stabbing, 5 forgery, 7 uttering forged documents, 18 robbery with violence, 6 horse-stealing, 3 arson, 1 housebreaking and rape, and 5 concealment of birth. Three of the persons named are for offences committed within the city. The authorities of the city have expressed a desire that these latter may be tried at the Guildhall, instead of in the county, at the Castle, as is usual, and the Lord Chief Baron, upon application made to the Court this morning, intimated that he should comply with the wish. The learned Judges began the business of the assizes at noon to day, the Lord Chief Baron presiding at Nisi Prius, and Mr. Justice Wightman in the Crown Court. WESTERN CIRCUIT. WINCHESTER, Tuesday.-This circuit commenced yesterday. Mr. Justice Williams arrived in this city, and having opened the commission, proceeded to the cathedral and attended divine service. There are upwards of forty prisoners for trial; and from the appearance of the calendar, the offences with which the parties are charged would seem to be of a very serious character, several persons having been committed for cutting and wounding. The cause-list has in it sixteen cases, three of which are to be tried by special juries. Chief Justice Wilde, accompanied by his lady, arrived yesterday evening. This morning the business of the assizes commenced, Chief Justice Wilde sitting at Nisi Prius at 10 o'clock, and Mr. Justice Williams opening the Crown Court at 11 o'clock. OXFORD CIRCUIT. OXFORD, Saturday, July 10.-The commission was opened here to-day. The number of prisoners is nine, and the number of causes two. One is an action for goods sold and delivered, and virtually indefensible; and the other is an action on a warranty as to the character of some elm saplings, bought some five or six years back of the defendant by the plaintiff. The courts open at nine on Monday, and will, in all probability, get rid of all the business in the course of the day. ABINGDON, July 9.-The commission for this circuit was opened here yesterday with the usual formalities. Business commenced this morning_at ten o'clock in the Nisi Prius Court, and soon after eleven in the Crown Court. There were only six causes and eleven prisoners for trial. Of these one was charged with manslaughter, one burglary, five with larceny, one with bigamy, two with assaults with intent, &c. and with a common assault. HOME CIRCUIT. HERTFORD, July 9. The commission for the Cooper. I rely on my position at the bar, and my position in society, for the consequences. It afterwards appeared that application was sub-county of Herts was opened on Thursday, and, consequently made by Mr. Cooper to his client on the trary to the usual custom, business was proceeded with subject, but an answer peremptorily refusing to give in both courts in the after part of the day. There were eighteen causes for trial, five of which are special up the order was returned. jury cases, and fifteen prisoners for trial on the Crown side. The cases tried hitherto have been quite devoid of interest, and Mr. Baron Parke was engaged nearly the whole of the day in trying a case involving a question as to the warranty of soundness of some sheep at the time of their sale, the details of which were of no interest except to the parties. It was expected that the Crown business would be finished last night, und Mr. Justice Coltman will then assist in disposing of the cause-list. THE SUMMER ASSIZES. assault. THE BISHOP AND THE "WESTERN TIMES.". The Bishop of Exeter has given notice of trial in this case, which is an action against the editor of the Western Times for libel, and it will be tried at the forthcoming assizes. As it is a criminal prosecution, the Bishop will be examined himself, and the greatest burn, Q.C. Mr. Butt, Q.C. and Mr. Serjeant Kinglake, are retained on behalf of the defendant, who has pleaded a justification.-Plymouth Journal. interest is felt in the result of the trial. Mr. Cock Heirs-at-Law, Next of Kin, &c. Wanted. 947. Next of KIN of SARAH BRINLEY, of Swansea, Gla- May 3, 1831), or their representatives. 950. NEXT OF KIN OF JOHN THOMAS CROSBIE, of Liver pool, master mariner (died May 2, 1838), or their representatives. 951. HEIRS-AT-LAW of JAMES WARDLE, of Rushton Spencer, and Leek, Staffordshire, died July 4, 1828. Also, his legal personal representative or representatives. 952. HEIR OF HEIRS of HERBERT HAY, late of Glyndbourne, at the time of death of the Rev. Francis Tutte, Jan. 12, 1824. 953. HEIR OF HEIRS-AT-LAW, and CUSTOMARY HEIR or HEIRS, according to the custom of the manor of Ring. mer, Sussex, of the Rev. FRANCIS TUTTE, of Glynd. bourne, Glynde, Sussex, died Jan. 12, 1824. 954. HEIR OF CO-HEIRESSES-AT-LAW of ANNE GOODE, formerly of Pailton, Monk's Kirby, Warwick, spinster, died in 1798. Something to advantage. 955. RELATIONS or NEXT OF KIN of JOHN BOND, of Cheese-lane, Bristol, Widower, died in August 1827. Something to advantage. 956. NEXT OF KIN of WILLIAM BOOTH, of Annesley Woodhouse, Nottingham, farmer, died Nov. 1824. 957. RELATIONS or NEXT OF KIN of ANN WAY, who died in the House of Industry, Isle of Wight, on the 8th 958. NEXT OF KIN of MRS. MARY COTTON, of Devonshirestreet, Portland-place, Middlesex, and Welwyn, Herts, deceased, who was born either at Broseley or Madeley, of Feb. 1839. Something to advantage. Salop, about the year 1765, and whose maiden name was Cresswell. Something to advantage. 959. NEXT OF KIN of SARAH CLOES, late of Tysson-street, St. Matthew, Bethna!-green, Middlesex (died Decem- THE LAW TIMES. SATURDAY, JULY 17, 1847. MR. FRESHFIELD FOR LONDON. FINDING that Falmouth could only be secured by means which he could not sanction, Mr. FRESHFIELD withdrew from the contest, and has accepted a requisition to become a candidate for the city of London. proved his efficiency and his willingness for We see by the Legal Observer that the Incorporated Law Society has had its attention directed to these associations, and that it has taken counsel's opinion as to their legality, which opinion is as follows: "The object of the societies appears to be, that the members of it shall, out of a common fund, assist each other in carrying on suits in the Small Debts Courts, although they have no common interest in the subject-matter of the suits. This is clearly illegal. (Hawkins, P. C. book 1, ch. 83; Gwillim on Tithes, 4th vol. 1381, Oliver v. Bakewell.) conduct may be proceeded against as a violation of "There may be difficulty in saying whether such any of the statutes passed in early days against maintenance; but it is unnecessary to consider that question, it being clear that maintenance is an offence at kins, s. 28, ch. 83; Pechell v. Watson, 8 Mees. & common law, independent of the statutes. (HawWelsby, 691.)" Therefore do we call upon the members of our Profession, one and all of them, without It may be doubtful whether the Courts nowreference to political or party considerations, a-days would construe maintenance as strictly and solely as being the man who has engaged as formerly. But however this may be, the to fulfil for them the office of which they have conduct of those attorneys who have made use stood in such urgent need, to give their hearty of such societies to solicit the business of the and energetic support to Mr. FRESHFIELD. Let all of them who have votes, on this occasion of vital import to their Profession, so far forget all lesser considerations as to give to him one of those votes; and let those who are not electors contribute the scarcely less efficient aid of their influence and exertions to procure for him the votes of their friends. clients of others (and instances are not rare), is undoubtedly in the highest degree unprofessional, and besides the notice they have received from the Law Society that it is intended to prosecute, we shall not hesitate to publish their names and practices, should any more complaints reach us after this intimation that it is probably illegal, and certainly indecorous. JURIES. The readers of the LAW TIMES will not mistake the purpose of this appeal. They know how long and earnestly it has been urging the necessity of having in the House of Commons a Representative of the Profession. protection against power and prejudice, it must HOWEVER excellent is trial by jury as a They are aware that, some weeks since, Mr. be admitted that in the great majority of casesFRESHFIELD, then personally unknown to us, that come before the tribunals it is an ex-was pointed out as the man who, by his inti-tremely unsatisfactory mode of trial. That it mate connection with the Profession as having is practically felt to be so, is proved by the been once a Solicitor of the foremost rank, County Courts, where a jury is left to the now a Barrister, and occupying a station option of the parties, and the result is, that, in that gives him the highest personal claims- nineteen cases out of twenty, they prefer the as practically acquainted with all that concerns opinion of an intelligent judge. And who can the Profession-as having proved, in former wonder, when every Assize, and every Nisi Parliaments, both his willingness and his capa- Prius sitting in London, presents such incity to perform efficient services for them, stances of the perverseness or stupidity of was peculiarly fitted to fill the vacant post. juries. A remarkable one occurred this They know that when, as a candidate for Fal-week in the Court of Exchequer at Guildhall, mouth, his return was considered secure, we in the case of Waller v. Bishop. The jury, stated that he was willing to undertake the unable to agree, were locked up. Then ensued duties described, and would feel honoured in this scene :their confidence. They will not, therefore, see in this appeal to them any other than an anxious desire to accomplish an object which we believe to be essential to the best interests of the Profession; and that in the entreaty to the Lawyers to aid the return of Mr. FRESHFIELD, we are actuated by no party or personal motive whatever, and that we speak only as a Lawyer to his brother Lawyers, having a common interest to protect and a common duty to perform. With party politics we have here no concern. It is indifferent to us, as Lawyers, whether conservative or whig obtain the ascendancy. From neither has the Profession much to hope, from both has it much to fear. We ask not, care not, by what party Mr. FRESHFIELD is put forward; enough that he has promised, so far as it may be compatible with the public interests, to become that ASSOCIATIONS FOR THE RECOVERY which has been so long required, so anxiously sought the representative and advocate of our Profession. As such, his election is far more important to the Lawyers just now than the success of any party or person. Change of ministers will not change the tide of blundering legislation; the same hands to whom law reforms are intrusted by one Government will be its framers under any other. But it is of vital moment that a practical Lawyer in the Legislature should keep watch and ward over the crudities thrust upon the senate; should point out defects, obtain due security against destruc tive changes, make the complaints of his fellows known, and vindicate them from the aspersions which, in word sometimes, but in deed continually, are being thrown upon them by the makers and menders of our laws. Mr. FRESHFIELD, we repeat, will be all this, should the honour be conferred upon him to which he aspires. In former Parliaments he OF SMALL DEBTS. ORIGINALLY intended for the mutual protection of creditors from the frauds of debtors, by providing a fund by means of which opposition might be made to fraudulent debtors, certain societies were formed which for a while adhered to their original and excellent purpose, and so far deserved support; but too many were afterwards perverted from their design by the Attorneys to whom they were entrusted, and were made, in fact, Societies for the Recovery of Debts, or, more plainly, a scheme under cover of which an Attorney was enabled to apply to the clients of others, and monopolise a business which did not properly belong to the purposes of such societies. The County Courts afforded a new pretext, and prospectuses have issued proposing societies to recover debts in those courts, through the medium of the solicitor to the society, who is, of course, the self appointed originator, and often at once committee and secretary. The jury retired at half-past five, and a few minutes before seven sent a note into court praying that they The Lord Chief Baron having, at the suggestion of the counsel on both sides, left the court, and the counsel having left also, note, and asked the attorneys on both sides if they would consent to discharge the jury? Mr. Baines, from the Marshall's office, read the The plaintiff's attorney refused to do this; and The jury being so informed, remained in consultation until eight o'clock, when they again sent to ask if they might be discharged, as the probability of their agreeing was less than ever. The attorneys for the parties still withholding their consent, Mr. Baines sent a message to the Lord Chief Baron, communicating the request of the jury and asking for instructions; but at nine o'clock, and before the messenger had returned, for the full amount for the plaintiff. The jury came into court and delivered a verdict It is plain that this verdict was given under duress; the fear of being locked up for a night without candles, food, or bed, operated upon the dissentients, and though it could not have changed their opinions, changed their verdict. They violated their oaths under compulsion of law. They did not all "a true verdict give according to the evidence;" nor under the established system can such be looked for. strongest stomach and not the soundest head carries the day in a "locked up" jury; and yet is this the boasted system of which Englishmen are so proud! Its excellences in some particulars blind us to its defects. But the one may be preserved and the other removed. Let The |