fessionally. Re Ford, 9 Law T. 124, is but an
application of the last part of this rule; but it is a
case that may often occur, and should therefore be
noted. The client had employed R. and F. as his
attorneys, and a bill was due to the firm at the time
the partnership was dissolved. F. carried on the
business alone; and during this latter period he re-
ceived deeds from the client, whose attorney he
continued to be, and then sought to retain these
deeds as security for the debt due to the firm, after
the debt due to himself was paid off. The full
Court, confirming an order of Mr. Justice Erle,
held that he had no right of lien for this bill: the
debt was due to him as agent for his late partner,
while the deeds had come into his possession in his
own character of attorney.

point has been again before the Court, and the
principle was upheld in Dunn v. Packwood, 8 Law
T. 371, 2 New Pract. Cas. 65. Erle, J. said, "I
quite concur that a jury ought never to be put
to consider evidence given by a witness, after
having heard a speech from him as advocate in the
cause." We do not see that there is any reason
why this principle, which is one of sound sense, and
not mere form, should be deviated from in the
County Courts.
strictly followed, if, as there is much reason to be-
Indeed, it ought to be more
lieve, many persons will be found to practise there
on the terms of a per-centage upon the amount re-
covered. Allowing such advocates to supply any
defect in the evidence, is plainly offering a boon
and premium to misrepresentation and perjury.

(To be continued.)

COUNTY COURTS.

to his action against him; but the Courts have qua-
lified it in Salk, p. 88, stating that the judgment
was regular, but that if the attorney be not
responsible or suspicious, they would set aside
the judgment, for otherwise the defendant has
no remedy, and any one may be undone by that
means. It must be admitted that the reasoning is
not very clear by which the Court arrived at the con-
clusion that in so doing they did justice to the de-
fendant; for the non-responsibility or suspiciousness
of the attorney is but a vague sort of criterion of
safety to the defendant; and by the hypothesis the
defendant is wholly without blame, and may, notwith-
standing, be ruined. It is true that the plaintiff is
equally blameless, but then the plaintiff, if the judg-
ment be set aside, has his remedy against the defend-
ant as before, and suffers only the delay and possible
loss of costs. We are disposed to lay down a diffe.
rent rule, and to confine the liability of defendants to
cases in which the course of the proceedings has given
him notice of the action being brought against him.
When, therefore, a defendant has been served with
process, and an attorney without authority appears
for him, we think the Court must proceed as if the
attorney really had authority; because in that case the
defendant, having knowledge of the suit being com.
menced, is guilty of omission in not appearing and
making defence by his own attorney; and if he has
any defence on the merits, the plaintiff is without
blame, and defendant guilty of negligence: but even
in that case, if the attorney he not solvent, we should
relieve the defendant upon equitable terms if he had
a defence on the merits. If the attorney was solvent,
it would not be unjust to leave the defendant to his
remedy by summary application against him; on the
other hand, if the plaintiff, without serving the de-60; 8 Law T. 465. It would be well if our statute-tion to tradespeople.
fendant, accepts the appearance of an unauthorized
attorney for the defendant, he is not wholly free from
to give notice to the defendant by serving the writ,
the imputation of negligence. The law requires him
and he has not done so; and upon the same principle
on which we before proceeded, we must set aside the
judgment as irregular, with costs, and leave the
plaintiff to recover those costs and the expense to
which he had been put from the delinquent attorney
by summary proceedings.

This qualification of the rule meets the only shadow of argument that could be raised in favour of the old doctrine, for it will prevent any jugglery on the part of defendants by repudiating an authority in fact given, but which the attorney might not be able to prove.

Negligence of attorney in filing writs to save Statute of Limitations.-The omission of an attorney to file in due time the successive writs to save the Statute of Limitations, pursuant to 2 Wm. 4, c. 39, s. 10, will render him liable to an action for negligence. (Hunter v. Caldwell, 9 Law T. 73; 2 New Pract. Cas. 160.) We shall point out what that duty is under the head of the Statute of Limitations.

Delivery of conveyancing bill-Retrospective
operation of the 6 & 7 Vict. c. 73.-It is strange
that framers of Acts of Parliament should so fre-
quently leave it doubtful whether the provisions of
an Act are to be retrospective or not,-a point, one
would think, as to which their intention ought to
be as definite as their words should be clear. The
Attorneys and Solicitors Act is a glaring instance
of this omission; for it has been held, although it
can hardly have been intended, that all bills for
conveyancing, which before that Act
not taxable, must be re-delivered, and that
were
no action can consequently be brought until a
month afterwards. This was decided in Brooks v.
Bockett, 16 L. J. 178, Q. B.; 2 New. Pract. Cas.

draughtsmen would catechise themselves before they
commence the task, as to what they mean to do,
have done. By a slow but a very expensive pro-
and after they have drawn the bill, as to what they
cess, we shall at length discover that the system of
statute-mongering must be altered.

:

E. W.

THE following letter, complaining of the working of the County Courts Act, and the construction put by one of the Judges upon the 60th clause with reference to summons in the District Court where day defendant resides, appeared in The Times of TuesTHE SMALL DEBTS ACT. your ubiquitous and excellent journal, by way of cauSir, I hope to be permitted to state a fact, through I find the Small Debts Act will serve as a shield to protect the fraudulent instead of facilitating the recovery of money; the fol.. which he gave a check which was afterwards found lowing case, for instance :-A person obtained goods of us to the amount of nearly 117. in payment for to be post dated, and, consequently, refused payment by the bankers. Before it became due he drew his Description of business necessary in a bill.-We money out of the bank and decamped, without leaving regret that it should still remain a doubtful ques-word at his lodgings where he had gone to. By mere tion as to what is a sufficient description of the accident I find that this person is at one of the outbusiness done by an attorney or solicitor to satisfy ports, and about leaving the country. On applying the statute 6 & 7 Vict. c. 73. In our summary of to the judge of the Clerkenwell district for a sumHilary Term, 1846 (suprà, 6 Law T. 440), we nomons under the 60th clause, which says, "by leave ticed Martindale v. Falkner, since reported 2 C. B. of the Court a summons may be granted in the dis706, and expressed our opinion that the majority from the time the cause of action arose," trict in which the defendant resided within six months of the Court had correctly decided that it was not refused, and thus left without any legal remedy whatessential that the name of the court in which the ever. business was done should be given if such information after this man with the view of summoning him there; It is quite out of the question to go 100 miles was afforded to the client, so that he might obtain besides the heavy expenses and loss of time, he may the taxation of the bill. Mr. Justice Maule in that then have removed elsewhere. It being vacation time, case, however, delivered an elaborate judgment that a writ in the Superior Court would not be returnable the specific information as to the cause and the till November, before when the defendant will be far court was necessary. v. Marks, 9 L. T. 105; 11 Jur. 355, the Court of In the recent case of Ivimey Exchequer seems to have agreed in that opinion, for an attorney failed in an action upon his bill, because there was an omission to state in which court

a portion of the business was done. That this rule
is the most expedient we quite admit, for there
cannot be the slightest reason why the attorney
should omit or mistake the court; but we are still
unconvinced that the majority of the Court of Com-
mon Pleas were wrong in Martindale v. Falkner.
Again, however, we would impress upon our readers
that they should deliver all bills distinctly specifying
the cause and the court. The importance of this
precaution is the more manifest, when the other
point decided in Ivimey v. Marks is known, viz.
that in future, misdescription of one part of the
business will vitiate the whole bill, notwithstanding
a portion is correctly described.

Right to practise in Lord Mayor's Court.The Lord Mayor's Court has been substantially declared an open Court to attorneys as far as a wellconsidered judgment, after an elaborate argument, can determine the construction of an Act of Parliament. (Reg. v. The Lord Mayor of London, 8 Law T. 536; 2 New Pract. Cas. 52.) But we suppose that as there is no clause indemnifying the possessors of the close borough for the loss of their exclusive rights, the question will be further discussed in a court of error; for however right the judgment of the Court of Queen's Bench may be, the profits in the interval will far more than repay the costs of the contest. The establishment of the County Courts has lessened the effect of the decision that the absence of a roll in an Inferior Court is no bar to the right of an attorney to merely note Moore v. Angell, 9 Law T. Lien of plaintiff's attorney for costs.-We practise in it, under the 27th section of the Attorneys Pract. Cas. 194, as there is often a misunderstand; 2 New and Solicitors Act. But the reasonable construc- ing of the right of the attorney to prevent the tion put upon the condition of "signing the roll," settlement of an action without his costs being paid. as required by that section, will throw light upon To cite Mr. Justice Coleridge's words, in dischargother statutes. The decision was, that that con- ing a rule to which the plaintiff's attorney sought dition meant, upon signing the roll already existing, to obtain his costs from the defendant, who had where there was one, or if not, the roll that was to settled with the plaintiff after final judgment signed, be provided to carry the Act into operation. We and without payment of his costs:-"The law is heard a rumour at the time that the Palace Court was next to be invaded; but we do not know whether any steps have been taken in the matter, and we believe there are many peculiarities in the origin privileges and powers of that Court, which would render a different result not improbable.

Extent of lien.-The right of lien an attorney enjoys over the papers of his client is, on the one hand, limited to the right of the party from whom he receives them, and, on the other, by the character in which the attorney receives them; and when received in his professional character, they can be subject only to the amount due to him pro

now clearly settled, that it is not enough that the
consequences of the settlement would be that the
plaintiff's attorney would be cheated of his costs,
but that, to warrant an application of this sort,
fraud and collusion must be clearly brought home to
the parties." We may add that, according to
Quested v. Callis, 10 M. & W. 18, the defendant's
attorney has in no case any right to prevent the
settlement of a suit.

Attorney cannot be witness.-In our last sum-
mary we noticed the decision in Stones v. Byron,
(suprà, p. 8), that a party who acts as advocate can-
not be a witness in the same cause. The same

we are

differently, and I know also of a highly respectable
away-in India, I believe.
The judge at the Bristol Court construes the Act
gentleman being summoned from London to Stock-
ton-on-Tees, 300 miles.

law by the learned judge at the Clerkenwell Court,
There is thus a serious difference in construing the
by which I lose just 117. and gain no possible help or
satisfaction but what arises in writing this letter to

you.

Enclosed is the card of, Sir,

Your most obedient servant and constant reader,
E. B.

August 6.

GLOUCESTERSHIRE.

Stroud, Wednesday, August 4, 1847.
(Before J. FRANCILLON, Esq.)
CLISSOLD and ANOTHER v. JEFFERIES.
Bailiffs had levied.
Interpleader-Landlord's claim for rent-Costs.
The landlord served notice of
claim of 151. for one year's rent. There were other
goods in defendant's house, but the bailiffs did not
make another levy. The proceeds of the sale of the
goods seized were paid into court, and an interpleader
Held, that after notice of rent due, it is the duty of the
summons was taken out by the landlord.
bailiff to make a further levy, to make another dis-
tress, and that the execution is to be satisfied out of
the proceeds of the first distress, and the rent out of
those of the second.

Interpleader is no exception to the rule that the costs
of litigation should abide the result.
claim made by Mr. Watts to be paid a sum of money
At the July court was heard an interpleader upon a
levied under an execution issued in this cause against
the goods of the defendant Jefferies.

ant bailiffs of this court, seized and removed from the
It appears that Chandler and Clayfield, two assist-
defendant's dwelling-house a portion of his goods.
Chandler took away the goods in a cart to an inn
called the White Horse, leaving Clayfield at the de-
fendant's house. About an hour after the levy, and
Horse, and while Chandler was there, a notice, signed
soon after the arrival of the goods at the White
by the agent of Mr. Watts, was served on Chandler.
The notice informed Chandler that the sum of 157.
for a year's rent was due to Mr. Watts from the de-

fendant Jefferies for the premises occupied by him. Upon receipt of the notice, Chandler returned to the house of the defendant and shewed the notice to Clayfield. Both Chandler and Clayfield then left the premises. They did not seize any other goods of the defendant than those which had before the receipt of the notice been removed to the White Horse; and no distress had been made by them, or either of them, for the rent due to Mr. Watts. According to the evidence of Clayfield, the goods left at the defendant's house were of sufficient value to have satisfied the rent due to Mr. Watts; at least, such appears to be the opinion of Clayfield; but as he does not appear to have carefully valued those goods, his opinion on the subject cannot, I think, be relied on.

The sum of 61. 2s. 10d. now in court is the produce of the sale of the goods removed to the White Horse. The execution was issued for a debt of 201.

and 31. 3s. 8d. for costs.

By the COURT.-At the hearing of this interpleader, the case of Arnitt v. Garnett, 3 Barn. & Ald. 440, was cited. I think the authority of that case might have been conclusive in favour of the present claim had the statute 9 & 10 Vict. c. 95, establishing this court, given the landlord, in a case like the present, a priority the same as, or like that, which was given by the statute 8 Anne, c. 14.

The statute of Anne provides, in effect, that no goods on premises for which rent is due shall be liable to be taken by virtue of any execution, unless the party at whose suit the execution is sued out shall, before the removal of the goods from the premises, pay to the landlord the rent due, not exceeding a year's rent; and the sheriff is empowered and required to levy and pay to the plaintiff the money paid for the rent, in addition to the execution money. Thus the claim of the execution creditor in respect of his debt and costs is most effectually postponed to the claim of the landlord in respect of his rent.

BLOOMSBURY COUNTY COURT.
Wednesday, August 11.
(Before EDWARD DUBOIS, Esq.)
HILL V. DAVIS.

When a debt was clandestinely incurred by the wife, and
the creditor was aware of it, the Court, though the wife
acknowledged her liability, and wished to pay the
debt by instalments, refused to order payment.
This was an action for the recovery of 41. 10s. for
goods sold and delivered. The defendant's wife ap-
peared by the authority of her husband, who knew
nothing of the debt, and was understood to dispute it
altogether. Mrs. Davis, however, acknowledged her
liability, and wished the Judge to order payment by
known to her husband.
instalments, to enable her to discharge the claim un-

he supplied her with various drapery goods unknown
The plaintiff stated that by the wish of Mrs. Davis
to her husband, who at the same time was paying the
plaintiff weekly for goods he himself had purchased,
and each instalment was put down in a book kept for
from the knowledge of Mr. Davis, the plaintiff gave
In order to keep the circumstance
Mrs. Davis receipts for moneys received in another
book.

that purpose.

The learned Judge observed that it was a debt contracted clandestinely, and refused to order payment.

WESTMINSTER.
Friday, July 30.

(Before D. C. MOYLAN, Esq.)
The Right Honourable Viscount BURY v. CLARK.
Assault-Application of the damages to the establish-
ment of a fund for relief of poverty.

This was an action to recover damages for an as-
sault. It appeared from the evidence for the plaintiff,
that on the 12th inst. he, being attracted by some pen-
holders in the window of the defendant, a stationer in
Jermyn-street, entered the shop, when, upon closer
inspection, he found the articles were only sixpenny
ones, and not silver, as he had supposed. He told
the defendant they were not what he wanted, and
asked if he had none better. The defendant replied,
"No; they are good enough for the price." The
plaintiff observed it was not a question of price, but
he wanted a better article, and not trumpery things
of that kind. The defendant replied, "Trumpery,
indeed; you are a trumpery fellow, and I desire you
will quit my shop." The plaintiff made some obser-
vation upon the offensive and uncalled-for nature of
this remark, when the defendant, in an excited state,
threatened to turn him out, and sent his boy for a
policeman. The plaintiff quietly waited their re-
turn, and from the door seeing a policeman approach,
and supposing him to be the one sent for, went out,
and explained what had passed. The policeman ac-
companied him back to the defendant's door, and the
plaintiff entered to remonstrate, in the policeman's
presence, upon the impropriety of the defendant's
conduct, when the latter rushed from behind the
counter round to where his lordship was standing,
and laying his hands suddenly upon him, without a
word passing, thrust him out violently backwards
into the road. This was the assault complained of,
and the defendant made an ineffectual attempt to pal-

In the case of an execution from this Court, the provision of the statute of Anne is in effect repealed by the 107th section of the statute 9 & 10 Vict. c. 95. That section proceeds to provide that in the case of goods being taken in execution by the process of a County Court, and of a claim for rent being made, the bailiff "shall distrain as well for the amount of the rent so claimed, and the costs of such additional distress, as for the amount of money and costs for which the warrant of execution issued under this Act, and shall not proceed to sell the same, or any part thereof, within five days next after such distress taken; and if any replevin be made of the goods so taken, such of the goods shall be sold under the execution as shall satisfy the money and costs for which the warrant of execution issued, and the costs of the sale, and the overplus of such sale (if any), and also the residue of the goods, shall be returned, as in other cases of distress, for rent and replevin thereof; and for every such additional distress for rent in arrear, the High Bailiff of the Court shall be entitled to have as the costs of the distress, instead of the fees allowed by this Act for making such distress and keeping possession thereof, the fees allowed by an Act passed in the 57th year of the reign of King George the Third, entitled 'An Act to regulate the Costs of Distresses levied for payment of Small Rents."" The meaning of this very clumsily expressed enact-liate the offence. ment seems to me to be this: that a levy by virtue after a claim of rent, the bailiff's duty is to make a of an execution is regarded as a distress, and that second distress for the rent; and that out of the proceeds of the first distress the money for which the execution is issued is to be satisfied, and that out of the proceeds of the second distress the rent is to be satisfied. I therefore think, that as the money now in court consists of the proceeds of the first, or rather the only distress made in this case, the plaintiffs, Messrs. Clissold and Thomas, are entitled to receive it; and that as it was not raised by means of a second distress, Mr. Watts is not entitled to receive it. So far from a priority being given by the section to a landlord, the provision for the case of a replevin shews distinctly the intention of the Legislature that there is not to be any such priority or privilege. I adjudicate that the plaintiffs, Messrs. Clissold and Thomas, are entitled to the money now in court, and I order it to be paid to them.

My chief difficulty is as to the costs. As perhaps there might not have been any occasion for these proceedings if the bailiffs had made a second distress, I order that no fees in respect of the interpleader be paid to the High Bailiff, or any of his officers. As to the other interpleader court fees, they are to be paid in the first instance by Messrs. Clissold and Thomas, and are, with the amount of the other interpleader costs, to be paid to them by Mr. Watts. It may be hard that Mr. Watts, not being in fault, should have to pay these costs; but as between Mr. Watts and Messrs. Clissold and Thomas, it would, I think, be a greater hardship that they, as the successful parties, and not being in fault, should not recover from Mr. Watts, the unsuccessful party, the amount of their costs. In other words, I do not perceive any sufficient reason for making this case an exception from the general rule, that the costs of litigation ought to abide the event.

The learned JUDGE, after some observations upon inexcusable, stated his conviction that he could not, the defendant's conduct, which he considered wholly exercising a just discretion, do otherwise than give judgment against him for the whole 201. at which the damages were laid.

Upon the judgment being recorded, Dod, who had conducted the plaintiff's case, stated to the Court, that it was almost needless to explain that the plaintiff had been only actuated in the course he had pursued by a desire to teach the defendant a useful lesson; that the plaintiff felt that cases would frequently occur where complainants could have no desire to put damages into their own pockets; and that as many instances must come under his Honour's notice where great poverty and distress existed on both sides, and where he must in consequence, have very painful duties to perform, his lordship begged that the 201. damages might be considered as placed by him at his Honour's disposal; and he trusted it would prove the first contribution only towards a charitable fund, which would help to soften his Honour's more painful duties, by enabling him to afford pecuniary assistance or relief in extreme and deserving cases. Dod added, he felt great pleasure in communicating his lordship's request; and his Honour expressed his gratification at assenting to the proposition.

YORKSHIRE.
Wednesday, July 28.

(Before T. H. MARSHALL, Esq.)
THOMPSON v. NETTLETON.
Recovery of money paid to an attorney.

This was an action to recover 171. 7s. against an attorney, for money paid to his use, under the circumstances mentioned below. A jury had been summoned, but the defendant, just before the case was called, consented to a verdict.

Cooper, of Bradford, for the plaintiff, said it saved him from a very painful duty. However, he must ask the Court for immediate execution, and upon these grounds: the defendant, Mr. Nettleton, is a solicitor, having an office in Leeds; the action is brought to recover 171. 7s., 101. of which is due on a promissory note. He was getting the plaintiff money upon mortgage, and he drew a promissory note for 201. payable to himself, on demand, and plaintiff and his brother signed it; upon this note he advanced 101. and promised to give the other the following week at Bradford; they never received it, and he paid the note to Mr. Thackray, also a solicitor, in Leeds, who and plaintiff had to pay 71. 7s. in addition for costs. issued a writ of justicies out of the County Court,

His HONOUR (addressing Mr. Ferns).-What have you to say to that?

Ferns. I cannot say any thing to disprove it. Cooper.-Another thing is, he has pleaded a set-off to the action, and it contains items amounting to upwards of 21. for a memorial, and registering a deed, which was never prepared.

His HONOUR.-Cannot the Law Societies take it in hand?

Cooper. It is a most gross case, and I shall bring it before the Leeds Law Society.

Thomas Thompson, shoemaker, Westgate, Bradford, examined by Mr. Cooper.-I received only 101. and gave a note for 201. I was immediately sued

for it.

The Court granted immediate execution.

ADVOCATES IN THE COUNTY COURTS.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE LAW TIMES. SIR,-Much doubt seems to be felt as to the mean. ing of the 91st section of the New County Court Act. If the word "appear" is taken in the sense of an attorney "appearing" to an action in the Superior Courts, all difficulty seems to vanish. This is the sense in which the clause is taken by Mr. John Johnes, the Judge of the South-West Wales district, who, where the wives of the parties answer to their husbands' names, strikes the plaint out as for nonappearance of the parties. The second part of the clause seems framed to meet the case of a Bar appearing, which no doubt was contemplated by the framers of the Act, and will ere long be the case in every circuit, if desired by the Judge. In that case the clause gives him power to accord "exclusive audience" to the Bar, to the exclusion of attorneys, as at Quarter Sessions, Assizes, and in the Superior Courts. If the jurisdiction of the County Courts is to be enlarged in the way that seems contemplated, this must soon be done in order to raise the respectability of the County Court in public estimation, and the sooner it is done the better for the public; for it is invariably found that the stronger the Bar is, the better is the Court. I am, Sir, yours, &c.

Á BARRISTER.

THE TREATMENT OF FRAUDULENT Debtors.

Sir George Grey has communicated to the various prison authorities a copy of regulations for the prison diet of persons committed under the Small Debts Act for fraudulent or dishonest conduct, or wilful Persons will now find imprisonment a fact, and not a disobedience to the orders of a court of law, who are to be confined in county gaols or houses of correction. sham-a period of privation, and not merely of detention. Thus the schoolmaster is abroad of a truth, and multitudes will now learn to live an honest and sober life, who had hitherto been taught by the laws of their country, that it was no wrong to enjoy luxu ries at the cost of another's industry, and pay for them only when and if it was convenient. It is provided that these offenders—

1. Shall, as far as the construction of the prison will allow thereof, be separated from other debtors; but they shall not be placed in separate confinement, or with any class of criminal prisoners.

2. They shall not be permitted to maintain themselves, but shall be restricted to the following prison diet:

ETC.

PROMOTIONS, APPOINTMENTS, [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 Queen has been pleased to approve of Mr. Richard Pearce, as Consul at Penzance, for his Majesty the King of the Belgians.

REVISING BARRISTERS.-Lord Chief Justice Denman has appointed Lancelot Shadwell, Francis Baily, and Thomas Young M'Christie, esqrs. to be the revising barristers this year, of the lists of voters for members to serve in Parliament for the county of Middlesex, the cities of London and Westminster, the boroughs of Marylebone and Finsbury, and the Tower Hamlets.

The Revising Barristers for the South Wales Circuit this year are:-Mr. Sergeant Jones, Mr. Nicholl Carne, Mr. Lloyd Hall, Mr. Davison, Mr. Grove, and Mr. Benson. The Judges, it is said, have made it a rule not to re-appoint any gentlemen who are Judges of the County Courts.

Mr. M'Gregor has resigned his place at the Board of Trade, in consequence of his election as member for Glasgow in the new Parliament, and will be succeeded, as Principal Secretary to the Board, by John Shaw Lefevre, esq.

to prevent poor people from being deluded. The
trustees of this society were now said to be Captain
Sir John Ross, R.N., C.B., Sir Joseph A. Douglas,
R.N. and John Barron, esq. The society was formed
in 1839, and according to their printed circular, they
had had above 200 cases in hand. There was a list
of 80 cases in which opinions had been taken lately,
but it was a remarkable fact, that no single instance
was given in which the society had succeeded in re-
covering a sixpence for their clients.

Mr. Ross said the witness Champ had been tried
and convicted at the Old Bailey of perjury and con-
spiracy. He produced a copy of his conviction. And
the other witness had committed perjury in this case,
by swearing he saw Mr. Williams sign the name of
Mr. Boyle, the counsel, to the opinion. Mr. Boyle
would disprove this.

Sir PETER said he was not going to rely on either of the witnesses. Their evidence was no longer part of the case.

Mr. Champ complained that it was unjust so to use a copy of his conviction, when Mr. Ross knew he had received her Majesty's free and unconditional pardon, on the ground of his innocence.

Mr. Horry claimed that the character of Mr. Williams should at once be relieved from the imputation of forgery.

Mr. Boyle, of Lincoln's-inn-fields, was then called.
Upon being shewn the two signatures, he said they
were written by him.

Sir PETER LAURIE said he was satisfied there was
no ground for imputation on Mr. Williams's charac-
ter in respect to this signature.
The hearing was then adjourned sine die.

OXFORD CIRCUIT.

cases for trial in the county, 4 of which will be tried by special juries.

THE LONG VACATION.-On Tuesday, the 10th inst. the long vacation commenced, and will continue to the 24th of October, with respect to proceedings in the superior courts. There is no vacaton in the new County Courts. The Palace Court has no vacation, and is now the only court in which actions to 201. can be brought, except in certain cases, other than the new County Courts. These courts, in districts beyond twenty miles from London, have had transferred to them, by an Act of the late Parliament (10 & 11 Vict. c. 102), the business hitherto transacted by the Commissioners of the Insolvent Debtors' Court on circuit.

ECCLESIASTICAL JURISDICTION.-An Act was passed on the 22nd ult. (10th and 11th Vict. c. 98), to amend the law as to Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction in England. Under this Act the functions of the several Diocesan Courts in England, which have been suspended, are to commence operation on the 1st of November. It is declared by the preamble, that much inconvenience ensues from the continual suspension of the courts.

GERMAN JURISPRUDENCE. An extraordinary circumstance occurred at a recent sitting of one of the courts of justice at Ulm, in Wurtemburg. A peasant named Louis Radstecher, of the village of Ruhethel, was about to be tried for having killed another peasant of the same village. In answer to the questions of the presiding judge, he energetically denied his guilt. The judge told him that he had confessed it before the examining magistrate, when he said that he had done so on account of the moral torture to which the examining magistrate had subjected him. "This magistrate," he went on to say, "threw in my face the hands of the murdered man, which had GLOUCESTER, Thursday, August 5. Twenty been cut off his corpse. He also shewed me two ribs years ago the average entry of causes here was over of the corpse, and said that if I did not avow the crime 50, the average number of prisoners over 150, and the of which I was accused the dead man would appear average length of the assizes about 17 or 18 days. at night before my bed, and would say to me,' Louis, To-day the entry of causes is 20, the number of pri- Louis! restore me the life you have taken!' The soners 67, and the assizes may be over by Saturday magistrate then asked me if I believed in ghosts, and, night. The commission was opened yesterday. The CLOSING OF THE ACCOUNTANTS IN BANK-Judges went into court to-day at ten o'clock, but no great number of them would come and drag me to on my answering in the affirmative, told me that a RUPTCY OFFICE.-An order has been issued by the parties being ready to proceed in the Nisi Prius hell if I did not confess! Terrified at these threats, Lord Chancellor, for closing the books of the Account- Court, Mr. Justice Coleridge, who presides there, I confessd all that he wanted, and afterwards signed ant in Bankruptcy, from the 17th instant to the 4th was obliged to adjourn for a couple of hours. In the of October next inclusive, during which time no divi- Crown Court, the charges to the city and county immediately summoned before the court, and as he my confession!" The examining magistrate was grand juries had not closed before twelve o'clock. The admitted that he had employed the means of intimicause list contains only 20 entries, and is regarded as dation stated by the prisoner, the court declared the a most rotten one, most of the cases in it being un-examination null and void, and postponed the case for important, several undefended, and only 3 reserved three months. It then addressed to the Minister of for special juries. Of the 67 prisoners named in the Justice a report of the conduct of the examining calendar, there are charged-with the murder of an magistrate.-Galignani. adult, 1; the murder of an infant, 1; manslaughter,

COURT PAPERS.

dends can be declared.

NOTICES OF THE ADMISSION OF
ATTORNEYS,.

MICHAELMAS TERM.

Pursuant to Judge's Orders, granted since the List.
QUEEN'S BENCH.

Story, John Mellor, 50, Lincoln's-inn Fields, and Heming-4; concealment of births, 2; rape, 1; assault with

field, York, articled to J. Berks, Hemingfield

man, sen. Crewkerne

Templeman, John Marsh, jun. Crewkerne-J. M. TempleWalpole, William Sturman, articled by the name of William Walpole, jun. 22, Clarendon-square; Norwich; and Boyton Lodge, near Bury St. Edmunds-J. Walpole, NorthYoung, Horace, Church-row, Limehouse, and Lincoln's-inn Fields-J. Young, Sise-lane; J. Whitehouse, Lincoln'sinn Fields.

wold

NOTICE OF APPLICATION TO RENEW
CERTIFICATE.

MICHAELMAS TERM.

Ratcliffe, Robert, New Mills, in the Parish of Glossop,
Derbyshire.

LEGAL INTELLIGENCE.

HEIR-AT-LAW SOCIETY. GUILDHALL, Wednesday, August 11.-We give further particulars of the case of the Heir-at-Law Society.

Mr. George Ross, the manager of the Heir-at-Law Society, again attended the further hearing of the complaint against him.

Mr. Horry appeared as his counsel. Sir PETER LAURIE, on taking the chair, announced that he intended to adjourn the hearing for a month, till he returned from the country. He had received some letters from various parts of the country containing information respecting the society, which led him to expect that much more useful intelligence might be obtained if sufficient time were allowed. One of the letters he had received was from a Mr. Fitzgerald, at Manchester, a claimant of the supposed Barber property. He stated that 51. had been paid by Mr. Barber, of Rippingale, and party. The like sum by Mr. Stubbs, of New Bride-lane, Stockport, and party. The same by Joel Bates, of Whaley, near Disley; and he believed by a good many others. The writer had not been a pecuniary sufferer, as he placed no confidence in the society, but there were in à circuit of fifteen miles round Stockport 1,500 poor people, who had spent hundreds of pounds in the case, and had never got it into court. Many of them lived in cellars and worked in factories. The writer's own branch of the family had expended 2501. upon the business in the course of the last forty years. Sir Peter thanked the writer. It was a duty to the public

It appears

felonious intent, 2; burglary, 16; killing a fallow
deer, 1; the remainder being charged with larcenies
that should have been tried at sessions.
that the magistrates of Staffordshire are the only
magistrates throughout the circuit who hold an ad-
journed sessions immediately before each assizes, in
order to relieve the calendar from all offences which
are not of importance enough to be reserved for the
consideration of her Majesty's justices of oyer and
terminer and general gaol delivery. It is desirable
that their example should be more generally followed,
as thus ample time would be afforded for the really
important cases, which alone should be reserved for
the assizes, and for the Nisi Prius causes, which are
too commonly, but not on this circuit on this occa-
sion, burked by being referred or made remanets.

'WESTERN CIRCUIT.
BRIDGWATER, Thursday, August 5.-The business
of the assizes for the county of Somerset commenced
here this morning, the commission having been
opened yesterday evening. The Lord Chief Justice
Wilde presides in the Crown Court, and Mr. Justice
Williams on the civil side. The cause list presents to
the gentlemen of the learned profession the unwel-
come intelligence that litigation is by no means on the
increase in this county. Until the last few years,
50 causes were not an unusual number to be entered
for trial, and at the present assizes there are only 15,
all of which, with the exception of 3, are to be tried
by common juries. In the Crown Courts the busi-
ness is very heavy. The calendar contains the names
of 85 prisoners, two of them are accused of murder.
Since the publication of the calendar, several cases
were added, and the number has now reached to
nearly a hundred.

EXETER, Thursday, July 22.-The commission for holding the assizes for the county of Devon was opened in this city yesterday afternoon by Mr. Serjt. Kinglake. In the calendar there appear the names of 50 prisoners, and among these are 11 persons, being the mate and crew of the ship James Campbell, who are charged with a mutiny in having imprisoned the captain, and taken possession of the ship. In the calendar they are only charged with an assault. The trial excites the most intense interest. There are 6 cases of burglary, 2 of arson, 1 of forgery, 1 of rape, and 1 of manslaughter; the other charges are of a very trivial nature. In the cause list there are 21

pointed to inquire into the state of the law in Jersey CHANNEL ISLANDS.-The commissioners apJersey News) were received from the Home-office on have issued their report. Three copies (says the Wednesday, addressed to the Governor, the Bailly, and the States of Jersey. In the course of a few hours it became known that the commissioners had recommended organic changes, involving a paid police; the separation of the judicial from the legislative powers; and a re-organization of the former, in which the present jurats find no place. These, and some alteration in the powers and duties of the crown officers, and an opening made for changing the language of the courts of justice, form the principal alterations proposed. They may be enumerated as follows:1. The abolition of the present court, and the institution of three courts, each presided over by a qualified summary, preliminary, and final judge, to be paid by the crown. 2. Throwing open the bar. 3. The adoption of the English language in all cases where parties require it. 4. Trial by jury. 5. The abolition of our honorary, and the institution of a paid police, for day and night. 6. The establishment of a police court, or sitting magistrate, for the summary disposal of petty offences. 7. Assimilation of the criminal law to that of England. If there should be any difficulty in providing funds to pay the cost of this administration of public justice, the commissioners recommend that her Majesty's government should impose a duty of 4d. per pound on the tobacco consumed in the island, which, it is estimated, would produce a revenue of 4,000l.-quite sufficient for the purpose.

WILL OF CHARLES MAY, Esq.-The late Charle May, Esq. of Cobham, Berks, has bequeathed 2001. to the Royal Berkshire Hospital, and directed his executors to invest 400l. in the Three per Cent. Consols, the interest to be paid on the 21st of December yearly to such ten poor men and ten poor women who are the oldest inhabitants of the parish of Burghfield, Berks. The whole of his freehold estate, with the residue of his personal property, to be divided into ten equal parts, one share to be given to each of his seven nephews and nieces, one to his sister Catherine May, and two shares to his sister Mrs. Ann Cooper, besides a specific bequest to her of 4001.; his niece Mrs. Maurice having died before the testator, he has left her share to her husband, the Rev. T. Maurice, and her children, and has appointed his nephew, Mr. W. E. Cooper, and the Rev. T. Maurice,

Soon after the report of the case appeared in the LAW TIMES, I wrote to the Secretary of the Law The disqualification in this last case was, Society, Chancery-lane, drawing his attention to the aware, only negative, and did not arise out of the case, and suggesting that he should bring it before same source as the other; yet I think that it bears the Council. Some other letters also passed be-sufficiently upon the point to favour the opinion that a re-election is not necessary.

To Readers and Correspondents.

"A. J." (Worcester). The possession of a degree at either period required to be observed at the Inns of Court by students for the Bur. This at least is the case at the Inner and Middle Temple, at Gray's Inn, and, we believe, now, at Lincoln's Inn. The only advantage possessed by

of the Universities, does not, as a general rule, shorten the

the bearer of an university degree at the Middle Temple is, that after keeping twelve Terms, and being five years on the books of the Society, a member may be ca lel to the Bar at the age of twenty-one, instead of twenty-three, as in all other cases. We believe the newly chartered College at Birmingham cannot give a degree which would be accepted by the Inns of Court. The Bill rejected relating to the Poor Removal Act was last week mistaken for the Act passed, in the remarks on New Statutes. The doubt as to the retrospective operation is not removed by the new Act.

"A LONDON ATTORNEY."-The only authority on the commercial usages of the city, that we are aware of, is "Pulling's Laws and Customs of London," the second edition of which was published about three years ago.

THE LAW TIMES.

SATURDAY, AUGUST 14, 1847.

ACTION.

pro

that if this were done universally, the Certifi-
cate Duty would be paid in November for the
last time, and the legislation of the next Par-
liament would wear a different aspect towards
the Lawyers than that of the last.

But while thus earnestly exhorting our
readers to use all the legitimate influence they
so largely enjoy, for fair purposes of self-pro-
tection, we cannot but accompany the exhorta-
tion with an equally earnest warning to them
not to seek too much, nor to appear in the
form of opponents to the changes which are
inevitable. On the contrary, let them go to
the representatives of the people, promising not
merely a silent assent, but a cheerful and active
co-operation in the amendments of the law and
of its administration, required by the new wants
of the age.

If they would find sympathy and support, they must address the Members of Parliament somewhat after this fashion:

Christie, W. D. Weymouth

Cripps, W. Cirencester

Dundas, Sir D. s. G. Sutherlandshire
Ewart, W. Dumfries

Godson, R. q.c. Kidderminster
Greene, T. Lancaster

Grey, Right Hon. Sir G. (Home Secretary), North Northumberland

Hayter, W. G. q.c. Wells

Hogg, Sir J. W. bart. Honiton
Inglis, Sir R. H. Oxford University
Jervis, Sir J. knt. A.G. Chester

Law, Hon. C. E. q.c. Cambridge University
Lefevre, Right Hon. G. S. Hampshire
Nicholl, Dr. Cardiff

Romilly, J. Q. c. Devonport
Stuart, J. Q.c. Newark

Talfourd, T. N. Q.s. Reading (a)
Tancred, H. W. Q.c. Banbury
Thesiger, Sir F. knt. q.c. Abingdon
Walpole, S. H. q.c. Midhurst

Practising Barristers not before in Parliament, now returned: :

Baines, M. T. q.c. Northern Circuit, Hull
Brockman, E. D. (Recorder of Folkstone), Hythe
Cockburn, A. E. q.c. Western Circuit, South-

ampton

Evans, J. q.c. Haverfordwest

Headlam, T. E. Equity Bar, Newcastle

Hildyard, R. C. Q.c. Northern Circuit, White

haven

Jervis, J. J. Equity Bar, Horsham

Martin, S. q.c. Northern Circuit, Pontefract
Palmer, R. Equity Bar, Plymouth

Turner G. Q.c. Equity Bar

Whateley, W. q.c. South Shields
Wilcock, J. W. Equity Bar

Practising Solicitors, or who have formerly prac

Benbow, J. Dudley

Blewitt, R. J. Monmouth
Grimsditch, T. Macclesfield
Neeld, J. Chippenham

Practising Solicitors not before in Parliament, now returned:

"We come to you, Sir, on behalf of the Lawyers of this town, to submit to you their grievances, to inform you of their wants, and to ask your aid in Parliament to remove the THOSE men of the North, with their busi- one and advance the other. This paper emness-like habits, their earnestness of purpose, bodies our views. It proceeds from no club or their activity in the pursuit of whatever object clique; it is the solemn manifesto of an Assoengages their attention-do they not put to ciation that knows nothing of local or personal shame the men of the Metropolis, whom nothing interests, but which has united the whole body will stimulate to exertion for any object that of Solicitors in Country and Town, from the does not directly and immediately affect the Land's End to the Borders, for the proud purfits of their business? So it is with the Lawyers pose of lifting their Profession to its proper tised, and have been re-elected :— in London as compared with those in the proposition in society, by making it yet more vinces. It is impossible to rouse the former to worthy of the important trusts which are conaction for aught that concerns the common fided to it, and of the new responsibilities daily welfare of their Profession, if it be not also a devolving upon it. Our demand is threefold. matter that affects the fee-book. The latter We require the redress of grievances that unhave, besides their regard for their own offices, justly affect us. We require that in future a strong professional feeling that leads them legislation on matters relating to the law, we, earnestly to desire and actively to pursue what- as the practical men, shall be at least consulted; ever promises to advance the common welfare of and that our interests shall be sacrificed to no the body to which they belong, and to raise their lesser consideration than the interests of the pub-peared as candidates, but withdrew from the contest, PROFESSION in public esteem and in its social lic, to which we are willing to concede whenever status. The Metropolitan and Provincial Asso- it is shewn that our respective interests are conciation was commenced in the country-in the flicting. And, thirdly, we ask the aid of the LegisNorth-and there it seems to be doing, while lature in the efforts we are about to make to its Members in the Metropolis and elsewhere raise the moral and intellectual character of are only talking. Last week we published the our Profession by means of a more liberal eduresolution of the Yorkshire Law Society. We cation, by better guarding the portals of admishave now to record a still more energetic move- sion to it, and by keeping stricter watch upon ment on the part of the men of Manchester. the conduct of its members. We believe it to At the last meeting of the Committee of the be as important to the community as to ourgreat, flourishing, and influential Law Society in education, in association, in status. We selves, that the attorney should be a gentleman of that town, a resolution was passed unani- ask the Legislature to help us to make him so. mously to the following effect ::May we count on your aid?"

Resolved-That Mr. CROSSLEY, Mr. MAKINSON, Mr. HERON (Town-clerk of Manchester), Mr. GIBSON (Town-clerk of Salford), Mr. STREET, Mr. ALLEN, and the Honorary Secretary, be appointed a deputation, for the purpose of submitting to the Members for Manchester and Salford the Address issued by the Metropolitan and Provincial Law Association, and to request their earnest consideration of the same.

To such a request there can be but one reply; and then if they are fortunate enough to find in the new Parliament a fitting representative, master of their case, sympathising with their views, familiar with their wishes, having at once the desire and the ability to give expression to them, and win the ears of an audience thus prepossessed to listen, the work will be accomplished.

Bremridge, Barnstaple
Cobbold, J. C. Ipswich
Hodgson, T. H. Carlisle
Pearson, C. Lambeth

Barristers not before in Parliament who have ap

or have been unsuccessful :—

Bethell, R. q.c. Equity Bar
Butt, G. M. q.c. Western Circuit
Chambers, T. Home Circuit

Cobbett, J. P. Oldham, Nothern Circuit
Crowder, R. B. q.c. Western Circuit
Fyler, G. Northern Circuit
Gaselee, Serjeant, Home Circuit
Glover, Serjeant, Oxford Circuit
Humfry, L. C. q. c. Midland Circuit
Payne, William, Home Circuit, London
Parry, J. H. Home Circuit
Phillimore, J. G. Oxford Circuit
Pendergast, M. Norfolk Circuit
Rolt, J. Q. c. Equity Bar, Stamford
Shee, Serjeant, Home Circuit, Marylebone
Symons, J. C. Oxford Circuit
Warren, Samuel, Finsbury.

Barristers in the last or former Parliament, now unsuccessful :

Bodkin, W. H. Home Circuit, Rochester
Escott, B. Winchester

Freshfield, J. W. London

Kelly, Sir F. Cambridge

Roebuck, J. A. Northern Circuit, Bath.
Solicitors withdrawn or unsuccessful:-
Harvey, D. W. Marylebone
Wilks, J. St. Albans
Wire, D. W. Boston.

SHAM LAWYER.

In the North they do not content themselves with entering resolutions in a committee-book -they act. Accordingly, one of the honourLAWYER LEGISLATORS. able members for Manchester was called upon THE new Parliament presents a goodly array forthwith, and the document in question was of Lawyers, the number being considerably formally submitted to his consideration. Mr. increased; 30 who were in the last Parlia-Sham Lawyer :BRIGHT and Mr. BROTHERTON were absent, ment have been re-elected, while 4 only have but they have been asked to appoint an early day for an interview.

Carrying out the spirit of the resolution, the Committee have determined in this manner to make a personal call upon every M.P. elected within the district represented by the Society, and presenting "the address," to request a careful and impartial perusal, and a fair hearing for the rights and wrongs of the Lawyers in the new Parliament.

If the Attorneys of every other town in England, Wales, and Ireland, would follow the example of Manchester, incalculable good must come of it. In cities and boroughs they should call upon their own members. In unrepresented places, the county members may be visited. It may be confidently prophesied,

been rejected: 16 are elected who have not
sat before, making an actual increase of 12.
Among these we are pleased to see no less
than four practising solicitors, and we trust
that their cordial aid may be counted upon in
the questions affecting the Profession that
must come before the next Parliament. With
some corrections, the following is the list as
stated by the Legal Observer :-

Of the members of the Bar, the following is a list
of those who served in the late and have been re-
elected for the new Parliament:-

Aglionby, H. A. Cockermouth
Bernal, R. Rochester

Bouverie, E. P. Kilmarnock

Buller, C. a.c. (Judge Advocate), Liskeard
Cabbell, B. B. Boston
Cardwell, E. Liverpool

We give place to the following threat of a

Leeds, July 16, 1847. SIR,-Unless the sum of 17. 11s. 11d. due from you to Mr. Wm. Ellis, of Ormby, be paid to me, at my office, before or on Tuesday next, a County Court instant payment of it without further notice. summons will be taken out against you to compel Yours, &c.

To Mr. W. N.

GEORGE CHAMBERS, Sheriff's Officer, 14, Bank-street, Leeds. BIRTHS, MARRIAGES, AND DEATHS. [The charge for the insertion of the above is 58.] BIRTHS. BABINGTON.-On the 5th inst. at 31, George-street, Hanover-square, the wife of Benjamin Babington, esq. of Lincoln's-inn, barrister-at-law, of a daughter. BAGGE. On the 2nd inst. at Ardmore House, Waterford, the wife of S. Bagge, esq. J. P. of a daughter.

(a) The Queen's Ancient Serjeant is placed in this list, having formerly been in Parliament, though not in the last.