Anderson and Stanford, solicitors, 17, Great James-street, Bedford-row, London. FAULKNER (George), Wood-green, Tottenham, Middlesex, Esq. Feb. 10; Gregory, Rowcliffes, and Rawle, solicitors, 1. Bedford-row, London. FENDALL (Rev. James), Hartton, Cambridgeshire. March 25; and Ravnes, solicitors, Biggleswade. GUEST (Edward), 80, Mornington-road. Regent's-park, London, gentleman. Feb 15; R S. Gregson, solicitor, 8, Angel-court, Throgmorton-street, London. HALL (Wm.), Bull's Head, High-street, Whitechapel, Middlesex, licensed victualler. Feb 8; Nash, Field, and Layton, solicitors, 2. Suffolk-lane, Cannon-street, London. HARRIS (Thos.), Hillesden. Torquay, Devon, Esq. March 25; Gregory, Rowcliffes, and Rawle, solicitors, 1, Bedford-row, London. HAYWOOD (James), Birmingham, solicitor. Feb. 18; Saunders and Bradbury, solicitors, 41, Cherry-street, Birmingham. HODGKINSON (Thos.), Wolverhampton, furniture broker. Feb. 20; T. Bolton, solicitor, Wolverhampton. HULETT (John), Wellington, Salop, innkeeper. March 25; G. Marcy, solicitor, Wellington. KEEP (Mary), 23, Unper George-street, Edgware-road, Middlesex, widow. Feb. 15; S. Camp, solicitor, 12, PaternosKEY (Joseph), Great Sheepy, Leicestershire, gentleman. Feb. 9: Radford and Sons, solicitors, Atherstone, War ter-row, Lond n. wickshire. LAWSON (Robert), Watts's-buildings, and Orchard-place, Kingsland-road, Middlesex, floor-cloth manufacturer. Feb. 16: J. Mills, solicitor, 3A, Brunswick-place, City-road, London. THE CORRUPTIBLE-For the benefit of those who are wearied of wading through the detail of the electioneering corruption it is worth while to note a few of the most surprising revelations made before the commission now reopening proceedings at Lancaster. It certainly is astonishing to find how high up in the social scale the purchasables are to be found. John Ball, farming fifty or sixty acres of land, received 10. for his vote for the Liberals. Robert Baston, paying 1802. a-year rent for his farm, voted for the Tories for the honorarium of 107. John Bond, a publican, was paid 107. by the Tory side. Three other farmers, named Cottam, paying good rents, voted for the "farmers' friend," but took care to get 10%. apiece for the patriotic act; and so did Joseph Crosskell, who pays 250l. a-year for the land he rents. It is to be remarked too, that these easy folks were not "high" in their demands, for it appears that the votes of the farm labourers were secured at the same cost as those of their employers. A master blacksmith voted for the Tory and received only the usual market price, 101, which was scarcely fair, inasmuch as he took 137. from the Liberals, and gave them no vote in return. One personage, an innkeeper, satisfied the demands of conscience and pocket with much ingenuity, voting for one Liberal for love," and for the Tory "for money." It is but just to this worthy publican to add that he sold his vote for half-price. The sharpest practitioner of all was a farm labourer, who was paid by the Liberals to work on their side, and then went and voted for the Tory for 12. A lawyer who had twenty LIGHTFOOT (Thos.), Bank-house, Accrington, Lancashire, parade, Leeds. MAGUIRE (Anne). Ballyhande, Westmeath. spinster. Feb. 1; J. T. Hinds, solicitor, 28. Westmoreland-street, Dublin. OLIVER (Oswald), Elwick. Hart. Durham, gentleman. Jan. 21; Newby, Richmond, and Watson, solicitors, Stockton-onTees. O'REGAN (Right Rev. A), 4. Michael's-grove, Brompton, Middlesex. Feb. 18: Tucker and New, solicitors, 4, Kingstreet, Cheapside, London. PAIN (George), Salisbury Wilts, brewer. March 1; Hodding and Co.. solicitors, Salisbury. away in charity. We should be glad to know whether he did this before the commission was appointed or afterwards.-Pall-Mall Gazette. THE BENCH AND THE BAR. The executive committee of the Conservative Land Society have nominated Mr. C. J. Selwyn, POTTER (T. H.), Angel-court, London, Esq. Feb. 13; Cun- street, Kidderminster. ROSSETER (J. M). 3, Cleveland-gardens, Hyde-park, Middlesex. Esq., March 1; Nicholl, Burnett, and Newman, solicitors, 18. Carey-street, Lincoln's-inn, London. SCALE (T. J.), Wellesley-house, Upper Norwood, Surrey, Esq. Jan. 31; Bailey, Shaw, Smith, and Bailey, solicitors, 5, Berner's-street, London SHIRLEY (Rev. W. W), Canons-house, Christchurch, Oxford. Feb. 9: Ranken and Co., solicitors, 4, South-square, Gray'sinn, London. SMITH (Richard), 17, North-street, Hackney, Middlesex, gentleman. Feb. 14; H. S. Mitchell, solicitor, 5, Great Prescott-street, Whitechapel. SULLIVAN (George), St James Barton, Bristol, tailor. March VENABLES (Wm. and Elizabeth), Stourport, Worcestershire, coaldealers. March 1: T. F. Cook, solicitor, Stourport. VINEY (Wm.), Angel-hill, Tiverton, Devon, currier. March 25; W. Partridge, solicitor, Tiverton. UNCLAIMED STOCK AND DIVIDENDS IN THE BANK OF ENGLAND. [Transferred to the Cominissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt, and which will be paid to the persons respectively whose names are prefixed to each in three months, unless other claimants sooner appear.] CAUDWELL (Wm.), Drayton, Berks, farmer. Dividend on 26001. New Three per Cents. Claimant, C. Caudwell, GALE (Edwd.). Antigua, gentleman. 557. 18s. 3d. New Three per Cents. Claimant, A. F. Tweedie, administrator. executor. Sir Roger Tichborne, the long-lost heir to the baronetcy and estates of Tichborne, near Alresford, in Hampshire, has arrived at Tichborne, from Australia. He was immediately on his arrival recognised and acknowledged by his tenantry and by the inhabitants of the neighbourhood. A British subject having recently died in the city of Chicago intestate, the British consul there claimed the right to administer his property. The judge decided that a consul had no authority in such a case, and dismissed his suit with costs. The property goes into the hands of the public administrator. A SOLICITOR SENT TO PRISON FOR FOUR MONTHS. -The Cockermouth bench of magistrates have committed to four months' hard labour in gaol a solicitor of great practice and considerable standing in Cockermouth, Mr. Joseph Ramsay, for abusing and assaulting his wife. Mrs. Ramsay said her husband came home drunk at one o'clock in the morning, and, after reviling her, he got her by the hair, kicked her, and otherwise ill-used her. Her father, Mr. E. Meynell, stated that this system of ill-usage had lasted for a long time, and his daughter had often taken refuge from her husband's ill-treatment in his house. When the bench announced that they had determined to commit defendant to four months' hard labour in gaol, Mr. Ramsay, who was standing listlessly in the dock, fell back suddenly, and on being removed he fainted. His wife, also, who merely aimed to have him bound over, became fearfully excited, and appealed to the bench in a distracted way to modify their decision. The magistrates, however, were inexorable. Chancellor Malins, who has filled that position since the formation of the society in 1852. Mr. G. G. Scott writes to say that he has found himself compelled to retire from the competition for the New National Gallery in consequence of the claims on his time of the competition for the new Law Courts. to the relief fund, and that the remaining charge, regarding the proposed loan, is false from beginning to end, both as to fact and motive. Mr. Garth, in his reply, says he has no personal knowledge either of Mr. Bright or of Rochdale, but that his statements were based on printed reports, on some of which he has been unable to lay his hands. In acknowledging this letter. Mr. Bright writes:-"I come to this conclusion-that you wished to get into Parliament, and were not particular as to the path which might lead to it. You threw dirt during your canvass, doubtless knowing that, if needful, you could eat it afterwards. There are many men who go through dirt to dignities,' and I suspect you have no objection to be one of them."-The following note forms a sequel to the correspondence between these gentlemen: "To John Bright, Esq, M.P. Sir,-In acknowledging your letter of the 4th inst., I only think it necessary to observe that the conclusion at which you say you have arrived, and which you are pleased to express in such elegant phrase, is to me a matter of the most perfect indifference. Whether your opinion of me is correct or not I shall leave to those who know me better to determine. I am quite aware that I am not your match in the use of discourteous and insulting language, and, therefore, instead of concluding my letter in the agreeable form which you have thought proper to adopt, I beg to subscribe myself with conventional courtesy, your obedient servant, RICHARD GARTH.— Temple, Jan. 5." MAGISTRATE AND PARISH NOTE. The current Law under this Department is noted by NOTES OF NEW DECISIONS. GOVERNMENT STORES-ILLEGAL POSSESSION. ---On an indictment, charging the prisoners with receiving and having in their possession certain Government stores, having the Queen's mark upon them, some evidence is necessary to show that the defendant knew that the Government mark was on the stores: (Reg. v. O'Brien, 15 14 L. T. Rep. N. S. 419. Smith, J.) MARLBOROUGH-STREET POLICE COURT. Monday, Jan. 7. (Before Mr. TYRWHITT.) Management Aet. REPRESENTATION OF COLCHESTER.-Mr. J. T. Miller, M. P. for Colchester, has determined not to resign his seat for Colchester in obedience to a demand which has been made upon him by some of The Duties of Parish Vestries.-The Metropolis Local his former friends. Mr. Miller has been ill, and Conservative party, taking it for granted that he would resign, invited Mr. E. K. Karslake, Q. C., to become a candidate, and made all necessary preparations for an immediate election. To a letter pressing his resignation, Mr. Miller has replied, declining to give up his seat until a dissolution deprives him of it, and adding that he considers it most cruel and unhandsome that, after his long term of service an endeavour should be made to set him aside for the merely selfish purpose of a small clique. THE SCOTCH SOLICITOR-GENERAL.-During the latter portion of last week the Solicitor-General for Scotland, Mr. Edward S. Gordon, paid a visit to Inverness, his native town, and on Friday evening presided at the annual dinner of the Royal Academy Club, an institution which has recently been origin ated for the purpose of advancing the interests of the academy. Mr. Gordon's reception was warm and cordial. At a meeting of the town council, held on Monday last, it was agreed, on the motion of Bailie Dallas, seconded by Bailie Mackintosh, to offer him the freedom of the burgh. Provost Lyon Mackenzie having stated that the Solicitor-General had left that morning for the south, the clerk was instructed to communicate with him with the view of ascertaining when it would be convenient for him to accept the proffered honour. Previous to leaving Inverness, Mr. Gordon offered to become a director of the Royal Academy, which necessitates a contribution of 30% to the funds of that institution.-Scotsmun. MR. GARTH, Q. C. AND MR. BRIGHT.-The Manchester Examiner publishes a correspondence between Mr. John Bright and Mr. Richard Garth, who was recently elected for Guildford. During his canvass Mr. Garth said of Mr. Bright that he had been hooted from his own premises in Rochdale, was distrusted by his own people, and dare not stand for his own town; that during the cotton famine he did not subscribe a halfpenny for the relief of the distressed, but instead wished to lend money to the unemployed, to be repaid by instalments extending over a number of years, in order "that during those years he would have these people as his serfs at his beck and call, to do what he pleased with them, and to prevent their rising when he chose to put wages at whatever rate he liked." Mr. Bright replies that he had never been" hooted from his own premises," has been asked several times to become a candidate for Rochdale, and might, as could be confessed by the Conservatives, now represent Rochdale if he wished; that he had subscribed as liberally as others Mr. Bentinck, M P., Charles-street, BerkeleyPiccadilly, applied for a summons against the vestry square, and Mr. Percy Doyle, Halfmoon-street, of St. George, Hanover-square, for neglecting to remove the snow from the streets in the parish. left Halfmoon-street almost impassable, making no Mr. Doyle said his complaint was that the vestry attempt to clear away the snow. vestry on the subject, but the only reply he received was that his letter should be laid before the board on the next board day; but as it was not known when that day would arrive, he felt that the only course left to him was to apply to a magistrate for a summons against the vestry. He wrote to the Mr. Bentinck said he also applied for a summons against the vestry on the ground of neglect. His application was made under the 125th section of the Metropolis Local Management Act, and the 65th section of the 25 Vict. .c. 102. The clause under the first-named Act stated, board, and they are hereby required, to appoint and emThat it shall be lawful for every vestry and district ploy a sufficient number of persons, or to contract with any company of persons, for the sweeping and cleansing of the several streets within the parish or districts, and for collecting and removing all dirt, ashes, rubbish, ice, snow, &c.; and if any such company or person shall fail to execute such works, he shall forfeit a sum not exceeding 51. His object in making this application was to raise the question publicly, and to ascertain whether householders and the public had any remedy or not. The parish of St. George's was somewhat peculiarly situated. It was divided into two wards--the inner and outer ward. The vestry contracted for one of the wards and undertook the other themselves. He did not complain that the vestry had tried and failed, but that they had done nothing, and seemed apparently content with doing nothing. Mr. Doyle considered that the offence was clearly made out, inasmuch as he was unable, owing to the non-removal of the snow, to get in or out of his house. Had Providence not done what the vestry neglected to do, the inconvenience to the public would have proved unbearable. He paid rates and taxes to the vestry for cleansing the streets, and he might just remark, to show that the cleansing process was not an impossibility, that all the snow in the city was removed two days after it fell. The contractor for his district had been applied to, and his answer was that it was too cold for his horses to be taken out. Mr. TYRWHITT said it was by no means easy to decide the question offhand. It was a pity the Legislature had not inserted a clause in the Act strictly enjoining vestries to cleanse the streets. There were several Acts of Parliament to be looked into closely, and before granting a summons he would take time to consider what the law really is. Jan. 9.-Mr. TYRWHITT said he was sorry the applicants had been at the trouble of coming to the court with books for the purpose of supporting their application for a summons, as he conceived they had mainly been induced to do so through a letter which had recently appeared in the Times. Magistrates were not the Dogberries they were supposed to be. Being barristers, and provided with legal books, they were generally pretty well acquainted with the law and with Acts of Parliament of all sorts. Mr. Tyrwhitt then said :-I have attentively considered the Local Management Act, 18 & 19 Vict. c. 120, ss. 125 and 234, with 25 & 26 Vict. c. 102, s. 65, and in passing, I may observe on the letter cited on the last occasion by Mr. Bentinck from the Times of the 4th inst., that a person dating from Lincoln's-inn, and terming the authorities "local Dogberries," has overlooked the fact that sect. 234 is repealed by the 25 & 26 Vict. c. 102, s. 105. I merely mention this to show how these letters are sometimes concocted. However, the question for the magistrate is whether he has summary jurisdiction to inflict a penalty on the vestry of St. George for not sweeping the streets in their parish during the late snow. It is well settled that without express words inflicting a penalty and making it recoverable before a magistrate he has no such power, and I find no such words. Sect. 125 of the Local Management Act is the only section bearing on the subject-it requires the vestry to appoint and employ a sufficient number of persons, or to contract with any company or person for such sweeping. No penalty is attached on the vestry for not so doing, but a penalty of 51. is inflicted on the scavenger who after such contract shall fail properly to perform the work. Supposing the vestry not to have employed a sufficient number of persons to sweep the streets, or not to have contracted for doing that work, the remedy against the vestry would be by indictment for disobedience to the statute, or, had the snow lasted, by mandamus. It may be that the Legislature was content with requiring vestries to appoint scavengers, and took it for granted they would do so; but with that the magistrate has nothing to do. I am, therefore, of opinion should do wrong in issuing a summons against the vestry. Mr. Bentinck wished to assure the magistrate that in bringing books to the court he meant to show no feeling of disrespect. He was himself a barrister, and his sole object was to assist the court. In coming forward he was not influenced by the letter to which reference had been made, as he was aware that the writer was in error. His object was to raise the public question. He quite agreed with the decision just given, and was pleased to find that the ratepayers had no remedy against the vestry, as the Legislature must be called upon next session to provide a remedy. Mr. Doyle said it was not the contractor who had refused to send out the horses, as reported on the first application, but the surveyor, who declined to send them out on account of the niclemency of the weather. He wished to make an assertion, that it might be contradicted if wrong that the vestry had made no application to the Conservators of the Thames for permission to shoot the snow into the river, it being the practice in Russia to dispose of the snow by throwing it into the rivers. He more especially wished to make the assertion, as he knew that in the neighbourhood of Gray's-innlane carts were seen bringing quantities of snow, which were shot into the man-holes in the street, and if the snow could not burst the sewers it surely could not injure the Thames. He was aware that rubbish could not be shot there, but with snow the matter was different. The applicants having thanked the magistrate, retired. NORWICH CITY JUSTICES. GUILDHALL, Jan. 7, 1867. (Before the MAYOR and other Magistrates.) Nathaniel Thomas Stewardson (acting overseer of the poor of the parish of Saint James, in the city of Norwich) appeared in answer to a summons issued on the 3rd instant, under sect. 67 of the Norwich Poor Act 1863, for having failed to pay over to the treasurer of the guardians of the poor of the Norwich Incorporation the sum of 217. 98. 9d. (part of the sum directed by the guardians' precept to be collected as poor-rates) within the time limited by the Act, i. e. within forty-eight hours after collection, for which default he was liable to a penalty of 50%. E. C. Bailey (clerk to the guardians) appeared in support of the information, Linay (managing clerk to Sadd, Norwich) appeared for the defendant. The necessary formal proofs of the appointment of defendant as overseer, the making of the rates, and that defendant had collected the money, were duly put in. Linay addressed the bench on behalf of the de-required to do so, would only be an insult to your fendant, who had been adjudicated a bankrupt on intelligence. I know that according to the authorithe 27th Dec. last, and contended that, as the ties I may order the body to be disinterred, either guardians could prove under the bankruptcy for the for the purpose of taking an original inquisition amount withheld by the defendant, the bankruptcy where none has been taken, or a further inquisition was a discharge for the amount collected by defend- where the first was insufficient, yet I should not act ant and not paid over, and referred to sect. 161 of upon this authority unless I felt myself warranted the B. A. 1861; and in support cited Rex v. Tucker, by circumstances. Should any new facts present 5 M. & S. 510, and contended that defendant was themselves to render a new inquiry desirable, I am not liable to any penalties. prepared to do my duty and have the body exhumed, and to at once proceed with a new inquiry. Cranch.-And with a fresh view, of course. Bailey said that, although the bankruptcy might be an answer to the claim for the amount withheld, it was no answer to the defendant's liability to pay the penalty for not paying the money within the time specified by the Act. Linay, in reply, contended that defendant could not be convicted, inasmuch as before any proceedings were taken, he was by his bankruptcy absolved from paying over the amount collected, and consequently could not be criminally liable to pay any penalty for not paying the money within the time specified by the Act. It transpired that the guardians had delayed criminal proceedings through the representations of defendant's wife, made before the bankruptcy, that the defendant would be able to pay the amount. The JUSTICES dismissed the summons, and remarked that if the guardians had intended to have taken criminal proceedings, they should have done so without delay or giving time to the defendant. THE LAW OF INQUESTS. The Carlton Murder. The Coroner.-Yes. Cranch.-The only question is whether the jury would not return an open verdict. The Coroner.-I am quite prepared to receive such a verdict if all are agreed; but I feel that it would be wrong of me to make any comment upon evidence which I have not heard, or to advise the jury in coming to a conclusion thereon. There would be no harm in receiving such a verdict if the jury are unanimous, but if it should hereafter require any judicial act of mine, and I be required to issue a warrant against any person, I should lay myself open to grave censure and responsibility. Cranch.-In point of fact the proceedings are nudum. The Coroner.-Yes; and if I am to inquire into them I must commence de novo. It is a great pity, I think, the coroner's practice and duties are not more clearly defined. The law, as it at present stands, was adapted to a state of things existing many centuries ago, when the condition of society was very different to that of the present day, and it is very desirable that some alteration should be made in accordance with the requirements of the present day. Cranch.-I have attended all the meetings before the magistrates, and although I am not at liberty to divulge what there took place, I may say that evidence has been taken which has not been laid before the jury. I will not say if it was intended to keep it back. Sergt. Holland.-The evidence Mr. Cranch alludes to is quite ready now. The coroner's inquiry into the circumstances of the murder of Mr. Henry Raynor, of Carlton, on the 17th Nov. last, suspended by the death of Mr. Swann, was resumed on Tuesday the 1st inst. Mr. W. Newton, the coroner for the Newark division of the county, who has been appointed to act in Mr. Swann's place till his successor be elected, presided at the court, and on the assembling of the jury he informed them that he arrived at the conclusion that, according to law, he had not the power to proceed with the inquest, taking it up at the point at which it had arrived at the last adjournment. He and to commence the whole proceedings de novo; had the authority to exhume the body, if necessary, but the law said that both the coroner and the jury must view the body at the first sitting, and as he had not done so, he could not, under present circum-examined before this jury, gave very different evistances, go on with the inquiry. The exigencies of dence before the magistrates to what he did here. the case, he thought, did not demand that a fresh The Coroner observed that the question could not view of the body and a fresh inquiry should take be discussed before him. place; but if at any future time facts should come to light, making such a course desirable or necessary, he would be prepared to exercise the power which under the statute he possessed. The sitting took place, as before, at the Volunteer Inn, Carlton. Cranch, the attorney for the man Watson and his wife, in custody on the charge of murdering Mr. Raynor, was the only legal gentleman present on the occasion. The jury having answered to their names, Cranch.-I do not allude to any particular evidence; I only say that there has been much more evidence before the magistrates than before the jury. Holland. The evidence is quite ready. Cranch.-I can only say that a man named Luck, The Foreman.-Do you not require any verdict from us as to the cause of death? The Coroner.-I will take a verdict from you, but I should consider that I was not treating you with proper respect if I took a verdict which I could not legally record. In reply to Mr. Cranch, the coroner said he did not hesitate to say that if he issued a warrant for the committal of any person upon a verdict returned by the jury, without the proceedings being commenced de novo, he would lay himself open to an action for false imprisonment. The jury then discharged themselves, as the coroner said they must do, and their respective recognisances were revoked. Smith, town clerk of Leeds, has resigned his office. THE TOWN CLERK OF LEEDS.-Mr. John Edward We learn from the Wilts County Mirror that Mrs. Vyse, who murdered two of her children some years ago, and was acquitted on the ground of insanity, has just received Her Majesty's free pardon, and has returned to her family in a state of perfect health. She has been at the Fisherton-house Lunatic Asylum, near Salisbury, since her trial. ANOTHER FALSE CHARGE.- At Croydon on Saturday the magistrates unanimously dismissed a charge against a gentleman of having indecently assaulted a girl of fourteen years of age in a railway carriage on the Bromley line. The girl declared that they were alone in the carriage, but it was shown that this was untrue, that there were several persons in the same compartment as herself and defendant; that she made no complaint to any of the passengers or officials, and that there was no appearance of her having been crying as she said she had done, all The Coroner said:-Before I proceed to address you, I cannot but allude to the melancholy circumstance which has required me to be present on this occasion-I refer to the lamented death of my friend and colleague, Mr. Swann. Up to the period of his death, and for thirty-six years previously, he performed the duties of a responsible public office with zeal, punctuality, and carefulness, earning for himself the respect and goodwill of all those who had to act with him. The death of Mr. Swann has, in reference to the duty before us, left a somewhat complicated state of things; and as the law stands, I must tell you that your duties as jurors are at an end. According to the statute, an inquest of death can be taken by a coroner super risum corporis only, and if there be no view the inquisition is void. Although the statute De Officio Coronatoris does not say expressly that the coroner shall take his inquest on the view of the dead body, and that an inquest otherwise taken by him shall be void, yet it is clearly laid down by all the books that a coroner has no authority to take an inquest of death without a view of the body, and that if he do so the inquisition is merely void as being an extra-judicial proceeding. A view of the body is absolutely necessary to give due effect to the inquisition; in fact, an inquisition without it would be coram non judicenull and void. It is true you have viewed the body, and I might again swear you and take the evidence anew; but, from the statute De Officio Coronatoris, which after describing the mode of taking the inquest, says et iis inqu sitis statim sepeliantur corpora mortuorum vel occissorum, it would seem that anciently the body was lying before the jury and coroner during the whole inquiry. In truth, the body itself is part of the evidence for the jury; and, therefore, if they see it before and not after they are sworn, a material part of the evidence is given when the jury is not upou oath. I feel that I could not legally receive a verdict from you, and that the inquisition when signed by me would be valueless. Under the circumstances, it is better I should not receive any verdict from you. To do so, and not be able to take any further judicial action upon it, if | Post. the way. It also came out that she had made a similar charge against her cousin but eighteen months since. MIDDLESEX PRISONERS.-At the West Riding Quarter Sessions, held on Monday at Wakefield, Colonel Smyth asked for an order of the court to complete an arrangement with the magistrates of Middlesex for the reception of several of their prisoners at the gaol of Wakefield. The prisons in Middlesex were overcrowded, and as they had several spare cells, the arrangement would be a satisfactory one, especially as the scale of payment, 221. per head per annum for cell and maintenan would clear expenses. Mr. E. Tew suggested that the entire management should rest with the West Riding justices and their officers. The chairman (Mr. H. W. Wickham, M.P.) thought the arrangement desirable, and the order was made.-Yorkshire ce, HACKNEY CARRIAGE LAWS.-Two cabmen were summoned before the magistrates at Bradford, Yorkshire, a few days since, for having refused to take up a woman who she said had been suddenly taken in labour. It appeared that in January last the guardians had issued a placard intimating that a conveyance was kept at the workhouse for removing infected persons, and cautioning owners of cabs not to allow such persons to be conveyed in their vehicles. The cabmen, in defence, said that under this notice they believed they were doing right in refusing to convey the woman in question; and the summonses were dismissed. CORPORATE SUPPORT FOR REFORMATORIES.-Acting upon the report of one of their committee, the Liverpool Town Council have resolved to erect near Liverpool, at a cost of 3000%. (on ground leased for 601. a-year), buildings suitable for a juvenile reformatory. This establishment (to which the corporate officials are at all times to have access) will be managed by the Liverpool Juvenile Reformatory Association, who will have to pay the corporation 4 per cent. on the cost of the building and the rent of the land. The corporation will also pay 18. per head for each boy committed to the reformatory by the magistrates of Liverpool. CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.-On Monday morning the January Sessions for the jurisdiction of the Central Criminal Court were opened at the Courthouse in the Old Bailey. The calendar contained the names of 47 prisoners, 19 of whom had been committed from the city of London, 19 from Middlesex, three from Essex, five from Surrey, and one from Kent. There was one charge of murder; four persons were charged with forgery, four with burglary and housebreaking, two with arson, six with uttering counterfeit coin, one with embezzlement, six with misdemeanor, five with robbery, two with stealing post letters, two with receiving stolen goods, and fourteen with larceny. What notice of appeal to be given. 10 days Clerk of the Peace D. P. Pellatt. Cottam, of Heaton, pays 130 a-year for his farm, and received 10. for voting for Lawrence. John Cottam pays 1387. a-year, and received 107.; and Thomas Cottam, of Overton, who besides paying a rental of 2361. a-year, farms land of his own, received 107. from Maddocks, of Liverpool, and 10%. from Mr. Danson. The last witness said that Danson knew he had received 10%. from Maddocks before he paid the second 107., and it was not unlikely that he told Danson afterwards that he would not vote at all unless he got a third 107. All the Cottams voted for Lawrence. Joseph Crogskill, farmer, of Overton, pays 250l. a-year for his farm, and received 121. for voting for Lawrence. CONVEYANCER. NOTES OF NEW DECISIONS. VENDOR AND PURCHASER SALE UNDER DECREE MISDESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY. A COAL-PIT FIRED BY UNIONISTS.-A most dis- BRECKNOCK BOROUGH ELECTION, 1866.-The CLERKENWELL POLICE-COURT. Mayne, Chief Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, has issued an order by the sanction of the Home Secretary, that all the charges taken at the Hunter-street police-station, belonging to the E division, and which usually come to this court for decision, should be taken to Bow-street. The order further states that when the prosecutor declines to attend owing to inconvenience, or when the charges taken in the day could not reach Bow-street in time for decision, but could be brought to this court in time, then they are to be brought here as usual. The charges from the E division have invariably been few, but it is stated that the arrangement has been made for the convenience of the parties having charges at Clerkenwell, and who mostly reside nearer Bow-street. SOUTH STAFFORDSHIRE DISCHARGED PRISONERS' AID SOCIETY.-On Monday the second annual meeting of this society was held at Wolverhampton; the Earl of Lichfield, president of the society, in the chair. Amongst those present were Sir John Morris, the mayor; Mr. W. O. Foster, M.P., Major Thorneycroft, and several clergymen and gentlemen. The society, as its name implies, is to assist to obtain an honest livelihood those prisoners who are found to be worthy of such bounty on their dismissal from gaol, either by food, clothing, tools, or actual relief, travelling expenses, and such like. Several instances were mentioned of the success of the society, but the funds seem to bein any thing else than a satisfactory condition, and subscriptions are much needed. Several lengthy speeches advocating the claims of the society were made, and a vote of thanks to the noble chairman terminated the proceedings. THE SHERIFFS FUND.-On Tuesday steps were taken to revive and reform the sheriffs' fund, at a meeting of the governors in the Lord Mayor's Parlour, at the Old Bailey. The fund was chiefly instituted for the relief and assistance of prisoners and their families, aud although it represents 12,6007. in stocks and an annuity of 1007. from the Court of Chancery, it has lately been very much neglected. At the meeting on Tuesday several new regulations were discussed and adopted, Mr. Sheriff Waterlow and Mr. Hill appointed trustees, and Mr. Alderman Abbiss appointed treasurer. The most important rule adopted was one to the effect that the fund might be applied under the direction of the committee for the benefit of such families of prisoners, or such discharged prisoners, as the committee should deem fit objects. To that a clause was added, on the motion of Mr. Alderman Sidney, that it should also be applicable to the pecuniary aid of other cases of distress which might come under the official notice of the sheriffs. 9d.; At a sale under a decree in a suit for foreclosure, instituted by a mortgagee in possession, the parties interested had liberty to bid. The particulars of sale omitted to state that this was the case, and they contained no stutement whether the sale was without reserve or otherwise. The auctioneer, however, was shown to have repeatedly' stated both circumstances at the auction; and it was held that, although the plaintiff and the actual purchaser were the principal bidders at the sale, and the former ceased bidding when the bids amounted to the sum due to him on his security, the purchaser, having notice from the auctioneer of the liberty given to the parties, was not entitled to be discharged from his contract. Where there is such misdescription of the property as in the eye of the court amounts to fraud (although actual fraud be not shown) the common condition that error shall be the subject of compensation, and shall not annul the sale, has no application; for a statement made in want of good faith goes to the validity of the contract. The particulars stated (1) that certain considerable portions of the property were held by yearly tenants at mentioned rents; they omitted to state that these tenants had given notice to quit; (2) that a farm, forming one-third of the lands, had lately been in the occupation of a tenant at 2907. 15s. per annum; whereas he had quitted fifteen months before the sale, and although he had held the farm at that annual rent, he had occupied it for three months before his tenancy began, at a nominal rent, and had continued in the occupation for one year only, and the vendor had since agreed to let the farm for 2251. a-year, though the agreement did not take effect. Held, upon these facts, that the purchaser was entitled to be discharged: (Dimmock v. Hallett, 15 L. T. Rep. N. S. 374. L. JJ.) DEED SET ASIDE FOR FRAUD.-B. relying on a false representation by her solicitor that it was necessary to raise money to pay off an old mortgage on her sister's estate, and that she would incur no liability by doing so, executed a mortgage of her estate in favour of the defendant. The solicitor applied the mortgagemoney to his own purposes and the fraudulent nature of the transaction was not discovered till his death. The Court set aside the mortgage. "Although," said the V. C., "it happens that both the plaintiff and the defendant have unfortunately been imposed upon, yet, as no part of the estate has been properly vested in the defendant, he must be the sufferer in the present instance:" (Lee v. Angus, 15 L. T. Rep. N. S. 380. V. C. S.) LANCASTER COMMISSION.-The inquiries of the Lancaster Election Commission were resumed, and it is now stated that the commissioners have determined to examine every voter in order to ascertain the exact number by whom bribes were taken. At the last election the constituency numbered about 1400, including an exceptionally large number of freemen. Of these 1319 recorded their votes, and it has already been ascertained that close upon 800 were bribed by sums varying from 5l. to 207. A number of witnesses were called, who deposed to receiving various sums-about 10. or 127. generally-for their vote. Mr. Thomas Johnson, a solicitor, said: "At the single-handed contest between Mr. Fenwick and Mr. Saunders in 1864, I acted as agent for Mr. Fenwick. Up to that time I had refused a retainer for the Liberals for more than twenty years, and I regret that I was induced to accept it then. I have no personal knowledge of money having been spent for illegal purposes in the election in 1864, but I have reason to believe that a good deal more was spent than passed through my hands. I received 10007. for the pur- MARRIED WOMAN-CONTRACT AFFECTING HER poses of the election, and at the close of the poll I REAL ESTATE. The wife of B., by a will made had a balance of about 55. left in my hands. in 1838, left certain real property to C., a marWhen my book was closed, I asked Mr. Fenwick ried woman, and a legacy of 1000l. and an anwhat I was to do with it. He told me to pay it over to Mr. Henry Welch. I did so, and when Inuity to D. By a will made in 1858 she rereceived an intimation that I should be required to voked the former will, and left all her property give evidence here, I told Mr. Welch that I should to B. On her death B. entered into possession, mention the fact of having paid the 55l. to him. and commenced a suit against the heir-at-law He then told me that if I added a couple of ciphers of the wife in the Court of Probate to establish to those figures it would about represent the sum the second will. By a compromise made in the which passed through his hands. The payment of suit, and signed by C.'s husband for himself and 55. was made several weeks after the election, and wife and by C.'s solicitor on her behalf, B. I disliked the transaction so much that it confirmed agreed to give up the property and all benefit me in my resolution never to accept a retainer under either will on the terms of being paid again. I received twenty guineas for my own services; but I felt that it was impossible for me to 15,000, out of the estate. B. gave up the estate apply it to my own use. I therefore gave ten and helped to establish the will of 1838. guineas to the teetotal society towards paying off her husband then refused to pay the 15,000, their debt, and distributed the rest among the pub- and it was held that, inasmuch as B. was aware lic institutions of the town." Three farmers were that C. was a married woman at the time he called, named Cottam, who resided a few miles from made the contract, her estate was not bound: Lancaster, and voted as freemen. The first, Adam (Nicoll v. Jones, 15 L. T. Rep. N. S. 383. V. C. C. and Wood.) This is doubtless very good law, but Commutation Tables will show the worth of 100. of DUTIES OF EXECUTORS-DISCHARGE FROM LIABILITY.-Where executors or administrators have proceeded under Lord St. Leonards' Act (22 & 23 Vict. c. 36, c. 29), and have either actually paid legatees entitled in præsenti, or have appropriated sums to answer interests in futuro, they have secured for themselves the same protection they would have had by distributing the assets under a decree: (Clegg v. Rowland, 15 L. T. Rep. N. S. 385. V. C. M.) Correspondence. MICHAELMAS RENTS ON CORN AVERAGES.— I again avail myself of the return of the close of the farmer's year to send you, for the information of your agricultural readers, and more especially those 1861 1862 1863 1864 1865 1866 1867 £ 8. d. 112 3 4 109 13 6 107 5 2 103 3 10 98 15 10 97 7 94 But it would be understood that if the leading case which was selected was decided in favour of the shareholders, many of these summonses would not be resisted. Mr. Lording said most certainly. The matter stood over accordingly. Thursday, Jan. 10. (Before the CHIEF CLERKS in Chancery.) This was another busy day before the Chief Clerks who may have adopted the system of corn rents, JOINT-STOCK COMPANIES' LAW question of the 401. call will be heard on Saturday based on the average price of wheat, or of wheat, barley, and oats, a statement of the average prices, founded on the returns published weekly in the London Gazette. Highest Price. 8. d. s. d. Wheat, July 17, 1866.. 55 10... Oct. 3, 1865 40 10 15 0 Barley, Oct. 2, 1866... 40 1... Oct. 3, 1865 29 11 Oats, July 10 & 17, 1866 20 7... Oct. 3, 1865 20 2 ... ... 10 2 P.S.-I annex a table showing the fluctuations from week to week, producing the above results. The changes likely to take place before this time next year may render it useful for reference. WEEKLY AVERAGE PRICE PER IMPERIAL QUARTER IN ENGLAND AND WALES FOR 53 WEEKS, ENDING MICHAELMAS 1866: London Gazette. VOLUNTARY WINDING-UP. -The B. bank having stopped payment, an order was made for a voluntary winding-up under supervision. A scheme was afterwards adopted by the shareholders and creditors for the resuscitation of the bank, and the Court sanctioned the arrangement: (Re The Agra and Masterman's Bank, 15 L. T. Rep. N. S. 408. V.C. W.) GENERAL. Lording (from the office of Messrs. Freshfield and Newman) said the 20th inst. was the last day in the Contract Corporation application to complete their evidence in the case. Perhaps the present cases should stand over to that day. The CHIEF CLERK acquiesced in the adjournment to the day mentioned. He wished to know how the costs in these matters were to be considered. How were the costs to be paid? Lording said he should, on the part of the liquidators, ask for costs against the several applicants. Adjourned to the 20th. OVEREND, GURNEY, AND CO. There was a summons in this case before Mr. Buckley, to admit a claim, which stood over. The case will be resumed before Vice-Chancellor Malins on Monday next. LAW STUDENTS' JOURNAL. First Division:-Biggs, Russell Hugh Worthington, University College; Bowman, Andrew, M.A, Sydn., private study; Bowman, Edward, M.A., Sydn., private study; Clavequin, Edward, private study; Groves, Frederick William, BA., King's BILL FOR REPAYMENT OF DEPOSIT-MONEY.-College; Mears, Thomas Lambert, first B.A., private B. applied for shares, and paid 1004. for deposit. study; Pears, Edwin, private study. The directors, instead of forming a company with the objects stated in the prospectus, on the faith of which B. had applied, formed a company for larger and different objects, and paid the 100%. to the new company. B. applied successfully to the court to have his name struck off the register, and now he filed his bill praying that the directors might be declared trustees of the 100% for him. It was held that, as no fraud was alleged, B. was not entitled to relief in equity: (Stewart v. Austin, 15 L. T. Rep. N. S. 407. V.C. W.) LIABILITY OF PROMOTERS. - An agreement among the directors of a proposed joint-stock company, that one of them shall be responsible for all preliminary expenses, does not exonerate any other director on the faith of whose acts a third person is induced to contract with the company: (Riley v. Packington, 15 L. T. Rep. N. S. 418. Keating, J.) ROLLS CHAMBERS. On Monday a number of summonses relating to In the matter of Barned's Banking Company seven Explain briefly the institutions mentioned in the title of this Act, and show that the Act is correct in reciting of these institutions that they "and the consequents upon the same have been much more burthensome, grievous, and prejudicial to the kingdom than they have been beneficial to the King. Explain the 11th section of the Act: "Provided also that neither this Act nor anything therein contained shall infringe or hurt any title of honour feudal or other by which any person hath or may have right to sit in the Lords' House of Parliament as to his or their title of honour or sitting in Parliament and the privilege belonging to them as Peers, this Act or anything therein contained to the contrary in anywise notwithstanding." What is it intended to save? What source of revenue did this Act provide for the King? What other scheme was proposed? 2. Show the justice or injustice of Sir Henry Vane's condemnation with reference to the statute 11 H. 7, c. 1 ("None that attend upon the King and do him true service shall be atteinted or forfeit any thing") and the doctrine as to a "king de jure " and a "king de facto." 3. Give some account of the causes which wrought the downfall of the Earl of Clarendon. Do any of the articles of his impeachment appear to be well grounded, and why? 4. What is meant by the "Appropriation of Supplies," by the annual "Appropriation Bill"? On what occasion and under what circumstances Act of Parliament, and when did it become an Appropriation clause first inserted in an was customary? What constitutional doctrine is involved in the annual practice of passing an Appropriation Act through Parliament, and how far did or does such Act secure the fulfilment of its object? 5. Discuss Blackstone's position that "a commoner cannot be impeached before the Lords for any capital offence, but only for high misdemeanors: a peer may be impeached for any crime" (IV. Bl: Com.) c. 19. 6. What is meant by the "exclusive right of the Commons as to Money Bills."? Give an account of its origin. 7. What is meant by the "right of a jury to return a general verdict"? What protection to liberty does that right contain? State the circumstances of Bushel's case and the arguments by which Vaughan, C. J. upheld the abovementioned right of a jury. 8. State the four different theories given by Hallam, as to what class of persons originally possessed the elective franchise. 9. How does Hallam show that the Revolution was incompatible with received principles? 10. What constructive interpretation did lawyers put upon the law of treason, and why was such interpretation necessary? What alteration was at last made in the law? 11. What limitations of prerogative are embodied in the Act of Settlement? What are the objects of such limitations, and how far have such objects been thereby attained? 12. What arguments may be advanced against the Treaty of Utrecht? 13. What constitutional question is involved in the leading case of Ashby v. White? What maxim of law is that case usually cited to exemplify? Give a short account of how the case of Ashby v. White arose, and the reasons on which Holt, C. J. based his judgment, and of the resolutions of the House of Lords in the matter. 14. Justify Hallam's position "that the Executive Government, though shorn of its lustre, has not lost so much of its real efficacy by the consequences of the Revolution as is often supposed." 15. State the points of resemblance and of difference between a Scots and English Parliament? 16. What are the principal articles of the statute of Drogheda (Poyning's Law)? REAL PROPERTY LAW. 1. What is an estate (a) of freehold, (b) by the curtesy, (c) in coparcenery? To what incident of the last estate does Littleton's derivation of the word coparcener point? 2. Define voluntary, permissive, and equitable waste. frequenter judicavi frequenter in consilio fui," "sedeas in alto tu licet Tribunali." 11. State Cicero's argument in support of his 2nd proposition that from the words of the edict there could be no bonorum possessio against Quintius. 12. What was the exact nature of a sponsio in the Roman system of procedure? What old form of 3. What was the effect of the statute of West-action did it represent? What special advantage to minster the second as to the alienation of land? both the parties in a suit did such a form as this How was the statute practically repealed? offer? new 4. Can an owner of land now create a tenancy, under himself, in fee; and, if not, why? 5. Lands are bargained and sold for years to A., then released to A. and his heirs; in both cases for valuable consideration :- state the different steps by which the fee becomes vested in A., giving the rule of law or equity, or the statute on which each depends. Why is the bargain and sale only for years? 6 What is the meaning of the maxim "seisina facit stipitem?" What alteration has been made in the principle which it embodies, and how? 7. In copyhold, who is the freeholder and who the lord paramount? How does copyhold differ from customary freehold ? Explain the saying, "the oak scorns to grow except on free ground." 8. Briefly state the rule in Shelley's case. Land is given (a) to A. for his life, and after his decease to B. for his life, and, by a subsequent gift, to the heirs of A. after the decease of B. : (b) to B. for his life, and then to the heirs of the body of A. What estate docs A. take in these two cases? 9. To what estates does the incident of merger apply? When was a term not merged at law, though the estates vested in the same person? How was a rentcharge accelerated by merger of a serm? 10. How is an executory interest created? What is the difference between such an interest and a contingent remainder? What check is put upon a these two estates tendency to perpetuity in respectively? 11. In what leading principle of construction does the view taken as to wills of lands by the statute of Hen. VIII. differ from that of the modern Wills Act? How does the difference affect a residuary devise? What is the meaning of an indefinite failure of issue in the construction of devises? 13. Assuming that there had been a missio in possessionem decreed in favour of Nævius, what was the flaw in Cicero's attack upon Dolabella, and why was the proceeding per sponsionem the proper one? 14. What is the meaning of "litis contestatio?" What effect did it have upon the proceedings in an action? Name and describe shortly the different parts of a formula. (To be continued.) COUNTY COURTS. MERTHYR COUNTY COURT. (Before T. FALCONER, Esq., Judge.) DAVID JONES AND OTHERS v. WILLIAM DANIEL AND OTHERS. A bequest to four daughters of the testator by name, "their child or children :" Held, to be a bequest to the children in substitution only This was a cause on the equity side of the court. Frank James for the defendants. His HONOUR said:-The question in this cause is, the construction of the terms of the will of Thomas Jones. He made his will 15th Feb. 1844, and he bequeathed ten leasehold houses and club-money unto his sons-in-law, William Daniel and Morgan Jones "in trust for the benefit of my children hereinafter named, and I empower them to receive the rents of the houses, and enjoin them to keep them in tenantable repair, pay the ground rent halfyearly, keep a proper and correct account of all receipts and payments, and, at the end of every quarter, distribute the balance between my daughters Mary, Hannah, Margaret and Elizabeth, their child or children, share and share alike." The testator had another child named Sarah, who died before him. She had an only child, Rachael, who afterwards married David Jones, and both of these persons have been long resident in America. For this grandchild the testator made an express and special provision in his said will. His other four children named in his will survived him-namely, Mary, wife of William Daniel, the defendant and a distin-Jones, a trustee;, Margaret, wife of Thomas Jones; trustee under the will; Hannah, wife of Morgan 12. In what cases, and through what enactments, has the disposition of land or its income been interfered with by our Government, since the abolition of feudal tenures, on the ground of public policy? What do you consider to be the tendency of recent legislation on this subject? ROMAN LAW. How does Austin classify the various meanings of the word "law?" To which classes do the following respectively belong: Law of Mortmain, Monastic Vows taken in England by a subject at this day, Laws of Force, Judiciary and Judge-made Law, Petition of Right, Military Law, Jus Gentium, Laws of Honour, Customary Law, Martial Law, 2. Define "Command," "Duty," "Sanction."-guished as contracts Juris Gentium? How does Austin differ from other writers in the use of the last word? 4. How far is the division into legislative and executive powers correct? 5. In truth justice is the daughter of the law, for the law bringeth her forth: (Co. Lit. 142 a.) Explain this proposition fully. 6. How do you define Sovereignty? "A Lege Rex" "A Rege Lex "-Which of these proverbs do you consider expresses the truth, and why? 7. What in Austin's opinion is the criterion of right and wrong? What is the opposite opinion? Give the names of any writers on ethics by whom these opinions respectively have been held. 8. Give a short outline of the arguments with which Austin opposes the theory of a moral sense. 9. Why is a discussion of these questions necessary n a treatise on jurisprudence? Mention any instances in which ethical theories have influenced legal doctrines. 10. What is meant by "The Social Compact?" To what extent do you consider it a tenable or useful hypothesis? 1. What is the exact meaning of the word consensus in the expression "obligationes fiunt ex which are specifically termed consensual consensu," and why are the four Roman contracts 2. What reasons can be assigned for the Roman rule that where a simple agreement to contract partnership is entered into without any other explanation a partnership universorum quæ ex quæstu veniunt" is understood? 3. State the rule of the Roman law regulating the power of one partner to bind another, and explain the principle and consequence of this phrase; "Societas jus quodammodo fraternitatis in se habet." The and Elizabeth, wife of Benjamin Davies. daughter Mary had one child alive on the death of the testator, namely, Mary Anne, wife of the defendant David Roberts, and two children, still alive, were born afterwards. The daughter Hannah had one child, Thomas Jones, alive on the death of the testator, and two children born after his death, who died infants. She died on the 30th March 1846, and her son Thomas died under the age of twentyone years, on the 9th Nov. 1844. Margaret had two children who were alive on the death of the testator, 4. "In the expressions quasi contracts, quasi namely, the plaintiffs David Jones and William delicts, the word quasi is exclusively a word of clas-Jones, and there were four children who were born sification:" (Maine.) Explain this, and illustrate after his death. Elizabeth, the fourth daughter, had it by reference to any of the Roman quasi contracts no children. This statement represents the memor delicts. bership of the family referred to in the clause of the will which I have cited. Was the property divisible among the four daughters of the testator who survived him, or was it divisible among these four daughters and such of their children who were born before the death of the testator? In the one case, the four daughters were entitled to an equal fourth share, and, in the other case, it would be divisible in nine shares. The children who were born after the death of the testator, when, in fact, the fund became distributable, were clearly not entitled to any share. The testator says he was desirous to benefit the children thereinafter named. The only children of his own, whom he names in connection with his bequest, are his four daughters. Then he adds to the words a bequest to his four daughters by name, "their child or children," share and share alike. Now, the four daughters could not have a child who should words following the words "their child" are “or their children." 5. Point out accurately the difference between Societas and Communio rerum; and explain these words: "Cum eo tu in voluntariam societatem coibas, qui te in hæreditaria societate fraudarat." (Cicero pro Quintio, c. 24, s. 74.) 6. On what ground was the liability of the Hæres to the firm for the partnership contracts of his testator admitted, seeing that socii hæres socius non est; and that the death of one partner produced a dissolution of the partnership? 7. What is the meaning of the word duplex in the following sentence, "tribus (istis) duplicibus judiciis, familiæ erciscunde, communi dividundo, finium regundorum "? What difficulty in drawing up a formula might this duplicatio lead to, and by what general rule was that difficulty avoided? 8. What old modes of excuting judgments were dis 11. State briefly the plan of Bentham's Principles placed by the "missiones in bonorum possessionem "? be otherwise than the child of one of them. The of Civil Legislation. 12 What are the chief evils produced by attacks on property? What different meanings has the word "Property?" 13. "Slavery is hiring for life." Examine this. 14. What are the essentials of a contract? With what object should special ceremonies be made requisite for making marriages legally valid? Are these objects attained by the laws of the United Kingdom or any of them? 15. How far do the rules laid down by Bentham for disposing of property after the death of the owner differ from those of English law? Give a short account of the method of proceeding by these missiones, and explain how it was that the consequence of a missio in possessionem was the penalty of infamy. 9. "Dolabella,' says Cicero, injuriam facere fortissime perseverat. Aut satisdare, aut sponsionem jubet facere." Explain the words italicised. Which course did Quintius adopt, and why? What was the peculiar injustice and hardship of either course according to Cicero's view. 10. Explain fully the following technical phrases:" "Postulare ut judicium detur," "edere actionem," "vades dare," vadimonium promittere," "differt The words are not "and their children," so as to read to my daughters and their children. If the words "their child" are treated as expressing contingently "or a child of some one of the daughters," in the reading the construction necessarily is a gift to the daughters "or" their children. Such a reading would make the words "or their children" substitutional in the disposition of the interests given to the daughters in case they, or any of them, had died in the lifetime of the testator, leaving children. There could not come into existence a person answering the description of "their |