LAW SOCIETIES. THE JURIDICAL SOCIETY. THE ELECTIVE FRANCHISE. The Juridical Society met at its rooms, St. Martin's-place, on Wednesday night, Mr. Denman, Q. C., M.P., in the chair, to hear a paper read by Mr. M. Best on the above subject. The object of the paper was to prove that never at any period had universal suffrage been the law of England. In Saxon days the Wittenagemot was an assembly in which bishops, priests and deacons, thanes, earls, and aldermen were represented; but there was no representation of the people. Much pains had been taken and much ink spilt as to the question when there was first assembled a Parliament in the modern sense. The better opinion was that the first real Parliament duly elected was that assembled by Simon de Montfort in the 49th year of Henry III. Previous to the Act of the 8 Hen. 6, which went to restrict the suffrage to 40s. freeholders, it is held by antiquaries that all liberi homines had the right to vote for members of Parliament. But a question of great nicety arose as to who were the liberi homines, some holding that the phrase meant simply freemen as opposed to villeins or slaves; others that liberi homines meant, not free men, but freeholders. At the period antecedent to the Act mentioned above, a tax was levied on the electors of counties, out of which a fixed salary was paid to members. Tenants of ancient demesnes were not subject to that tax, and it was therefore very likely that such tenants had no The 7 Hen. 6 did not, in his opinion, give manhood suffrage; but even if manhood suffrage was given by it, if the liberi homines mentioned in were ordinary free men, it only proved that universal suffrage existed for about twenty-five years-namely, for the period between the 7th Hen. 4 and the 8 Hen. 6. As to the cities and boroughs in the times to which he had referred, franchises of different kinds existed in them, some giving the vote to all tenement holders, others to all persons who paid rates; but in every case it was plain that the principle that every man had, as a man, a right to vote, was never acknowledged. votes. Mr. Worsley contended that liberi homines meant all free men, and that previous to the 8 Hen. 6, universal suffrage was the law of the land. Bentham, Sir W. Jones, Blackstone, all the great constitutional lawyers held this doctrine. first volume of Blackstone's Commentaries, the In the following passage referring to question occurred: "The true reason for requiring that important any qualification with regard to property in voters, is to exclude such persons as are in so mean a situation that they are esteemed to have no will of their own. If these persons had votes they would be tempted to dispose of them under some undue influence or other. This would give a great, or an artful, or a wealthy man a larger share in elections than is consistent with general liberty. If it were probable that every man would give his vote freely without influence of any kind, then, upon the true theory and genuine principles of liberty every member of the community, however poor, should have a vote in electing those delegates to whose charge is committed the disposal of his property, his liberty, and his life." Blackstone was a writer with whom not even the wildest Conservative would quarrel. If that great writer's theory was correct, no man ought to be deprived of his vote unless they were persons "who had no will of their own;" who, if they had votes, would dispose of them to "any great, or artful, or wealthy man" who might purchase them. If this description did not apply to the five or six millions of men excluded at present from the franchise, these men were suffering a gross injustice; if it did apply to them, if the vast body of Englishmen were sunk to a condition so low that they could be justly described in the words quoted above, it was the most terrible fact ever proclaimed in the civilised world. Mr. Droap agreed with the views of the essayist, and remarked that in early times, even if the commons were elected by universal suffrage, they met only to confirm the views of the King, and exercised little influence in the State. Mr. Charles Clerke also agreed with the essayist, and after briefly touching on the antiquarian portion of the paper, asked would Mr. Worsley or any other gentleman assert that every fellow who maltreated his family and badly performed all the duties of life was, on having attained the age of twenty-one, to be entitled to a vote? In no country in the world had it ever been held that a man was on account of his age to be admitted to political rights. Mr. Fry said that it was quite plain that in the counties of England there never had been universal suffrage prevailing. By the Act of the 8 Hen. 6, a property qualification was established. qualification had since been maintained in some That shape or other. Previous to and long after that statute villeins existed in England. No one had ever pretended that villeins had a vote, and therefore universal suffrage had never existed in English counties. In the English boroughs, however, a very different state of society, and consequently a THE LAW TIMES. different kind of franchise, prevailed. There were Mr Lambert said that it was evident from old minated. THE SUNDERLAND LAW SOCIETY. FEB. 9, 1867. 14th Feb., number of days 39. to end 13th April, number of days 28. May, number of days 7. Trinity Term to begin 27th May, to end 25th June, number of days 30. end 23rd July, number of days 28. end 27th Aug., number of days 35. rable that the number of judges in Chancery should upon the Lord Chancellor for the purpose of present7. That a deputation from this meeting do wait ing him with a copy of the above resolutions. Your committee have since been informed that the deputation had a satisfactory interview with the changes so important that he did not feel justified in Lord Chancellor, but that he considered the proposed attempting them except under the sanction of a chair; Messrs. T. Thompson, E. H. Haswell, M. Present-J. S. Robinson, Esq. (president), in the Royal commission, and he intimated that one would Allison, R. Thompson, J. Kidson, A. J. Moore, T. opinion that some provincial solicitors should be be issued; and his Lordship also expressed his W. Ranson, J. C Scarisbrick, S. Alcock, J. C. Wil-placed upon it. Your committee have no hesitation ford, G. Snowball, W. Bell, E. Hutchinson, F. H. in expressing their decided opinion that Sunderland Wilcox, W. Moore, T. Steel, R. K. A. Ellis, S. Hall, ought to be represented upon the commission. and R. Simey. The following report of the committee was read :- report on the new Bankruptcy Bill introduced into with the Liverpool Law Association on the subjects ing business of the country urgently demands the justice if each of the paisne judges were appointed of business at chambers, the following changes be 5. That a provision should be made for holding a recommended: Nov., number of days 30. Nov., to end 21st Dec., number of days 29. Jan., number of days 16. Your committee have also to remind the society of the example set by the president during the past year in inviting the members of the society to a country excursion and friendly meeting; to refer to the extent of his hospitality would be out of place opinion that such meetings are calculated to promote here. It is enough to record your committee's good feeling amongst the Profession, and to enbe attributed, and from them it is anticipated that but be beneficial. To the president, also, the recent courage a friendly interchange of ideas which cannot institution of evening meetings of the society is to successful, and it is proposed to continue them. much good may arise. They have hitherto been found correct, and are now laid before you. They society. show a cash balance of 15s. 6d. to the credit of the The treasurer's accounts have been examined and Since the last annual meeting four members have Moore, jun., W. W. Robson, and G. S. Lawson. joined the society, viz. :-Messrs. Collin_Smart, A. None have left it. J. Messrs. Fell and Ritson now retire from the committee by rotation, both being eligible for re-election. received and adopted, and that it be printed, toAnd it was thereupon unanimously resolved: (1) "That the report now read to this meeting be gether with a list of the members, and that a copy be sent to every member of the profession in Sunder land." And it was also resolved on the motion of Mr. T. Mr. J. S. Robinson be nominated by this society to Thompson, seconded by Mr. Kidson: (2.) “That report." the Lord Chancellor for appointment as a member of the royal commission referred to in the aforegoing the meeting and approved, and were signed by the chairman. The treasurer's accounts were then submitted to motion of Mr. Moore, seconded by Mr. Kidson: (3.) Alcock, (4.) "That Mr. Wm. Moore be elected vice- be members of the committee in the place of Messrs. elected. ARTICLED CLERKS' SOCIETY. in the chair, it was moved by Mr. H. E. Stenning, SOLICITORS' BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION. — The the chair this year at the anniversary festival of this Right Hon. the Lord Chief Justice Bovill will take association, to be held in June next. PROMOTIONS & APPOINTMENTS Prothonotary of the Court of Common Pleas at [N.B.-Announcements of appointments, being in the nature of advertisements, are charged 2s. 6d. cach, for which postage-stamps should be inclosed.] had applied in the usual manner for an order to revive Lancaster, at Preston, as follows, viz. :-Causes for the suit; but an objection was taken in the registrar's office that the suit could not be revived for costs only, trial at Manchester, on Monday the 4th of March and the order was consequently refused-W. W. Cooper and daily thereafter, until Thursday the 7th of appeared in support of the motion. Order as asked. March inclusive, between the hours of ten o'clock THE COLONIAL AND GENERAL GAS COMPANY (LIMITED) in the forenoon, and one o'clock in the afternoon; This was a motion on behalf of Don Sebastian Servet y and causes for trial at Liverpool, on Monday the 18th Brugasolas and Don Eladis Nollay Orriol, both of Murcia, in of March, and daily thereafter until Thursday the the kingdom of Spain, to discharge an order made on the 21st of March inclusive, between the above-men21st Jan, in chambers, and that a contract made by the tioned hours. official liquidators of this company to sell to these gentleCauses entered provisionally, as above-mentioned, will be formally entered and put on men certain gasworks and a concession might be carried into effect.-Bacon, Q. C. and Eddis in support of the the lists at Manchester and Liverpool, by the motion; Greene, QC. and Locock Webb opposed it; and Prothonotary and Associate in the order of their Karslake, Q. C. and Graham Hastings for the liquidators, provisional entry, and before causes entered at Manchester and Liverpool respectively. The entry of causes at Manchester and Liverpool respectively will commence at the Assize Courts, Manchester, and St. George's-hall, Liverpool, immediately after the opening of the commissions, and will close at nine o'clock in the evening on the commission day. The court will sit at ten o'clock in the forenoon, at Manchester and Liverpool respectively, on the Monday next following the commission day. WHITEHALL, Feb. 2.—The Queen has been pleased to direct letters patent to be passed under the Great Seal, granting the dignity of a baronet of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland unto Sir James Emerson Tennent, of Tempo Manor, in the chapelry of Tempo, in the county of Fermanagh, knight, and the heirs male of his body lawfully begotten. The Queen has been pleased to appoint the Right Hon. Robert Monsey, Baron Cranworth; the Right Hon. Sir Richard Monckton, Baron Houghton; the Right Hon. Sir Hugh M'Calmont Cairns, knight, a judge of the Court of Appeal in Chancery; the Right Hon. Stephen Lushington, Doctor of Civil Law, Judge of the High Court of Admiralty; the Right Hon. Sir William Erle, knight; Sir George William Wilshere Bramwell, knight, one of the Barons of the Court of Exchequer: Sir Robert Joseph Phillimore, knight, Doctor of Civil Law, Her Majesty's Advocate-General; Sir Roundell Palmer, knight; Travers Twiss, Doctor of Civil Law; Wm. George Granville Venables Vernon Harcourt, Esq., one of Her Majesty's Counsel; Thomas Baring, Esq.; William Henry Gregory, Esq., and William A list of causes for trial at Manchester and LiverEdward Forster, Esq., to be Her Majesty's Com-pool respectively, each day (except the first) will be missioners to inquire into and consider the character, exhibited in the corridor of the court and in the working, and effect of the laws of the realm library. available for the enforcement of neutrality during By order of the Judges, the existence of hostilities between other States with whom Her Majesty is at peace; and to inquire and report whether any and what changes ought to be made in such laws, for the purpose of giving them increased efficiency, and bringing them into full conformity with international obligations. The Queen has also been pleased to appoint Francis Phipps Onslow, Esq., barrister-at-law, to be Secretary to the Commission. Mr. George Cox, gentleman, of the firm of Cox and Sons, 14, Sise-lane, in the city of London, has been appointed by the Lord Chief Justice of the Court of Common Pleas a Commissioner for taking the acknowledgments of married women within the cities of London and Westminster, and the county of Middlesex. Mr. Cox was certificated in Michaelmas Term 1824, and is a member of the Incorporated Law Society, and a London Commissioner to administer oaths in Chancery, and in each of the three Common Law Courts. Mr. William C. Simmons, of Redditch, Worcestershire, has been appointed by the Lord Chancellor a Commissioner to administer oaths in the High Court of Chancery in England. Mr. William Wallis, of Newark-upon-Trent, Notts, has been appointed by the Lord Chancellor a Commissioner to administer oaths in the High Court of Chancery in England. Mr. Henry Thurstan Holland, of the Northern Circuit, has been appointed legal adviser to the Colonial-office. The office, which has been created by the present Government, precludes the holder of it from practising at the Bar. The salary is 12007. per annum. Mr. Holland was called to the Bar by the Inner Temple in 1849. Mr. C. S. A. Abbott, of the Foreign-office, precis writer to Lord Stanley, has been placed in attendance on the sittings of the commission appointed to consider the neutrality laws. Mr. Abbott has been employed for several years in the United States' department of the office. Mr. Charles Cecil Trevor, barrister, is appointed assistant-secretary for harbours and foreshores in connection with the Board of Trade, and Mr. Felix Hargrave Hamel, late clerk in the solicitor's office, Customs, has been appointed law clerk in connection with the Harbour Department. The trial of special jury causes will commence at EDMUND R. HARRIS, AND Equity Courts. ROLLS COURT. Reported by H. R. YOUNG, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. Re THE COMPANIES WINDING-UP ACTS 1848 AND 1849, sentative. Summons dismissed with costs, including those of the credi- Thursday, Feb. 7. WOOD v. WOOD.-This was a special case, filed for the purpose of obtaining the opinion of the court upon the construction of the will of the testator in the case, the father of the V. C. Sir W. Page Wood, who was one of the trustees of the will. The question was this: The testator had given certain specific bequests to his eldest son in the early part of his will. He bequeathed the residue of his property amongst his sons living at his death other than his son Frederic, who, he said, had been provided for. Frederic was the testator's eldest son, and the point to be determined was whether the exception in the residuary gifts of Frederic by name meant, not simply Frederic who had predeceased the testator, but the eldest son for the time being.Selwyn, Q. C., Baggallay, Q. C., Southgate, Q. C., and B. B. Rogers, appeared in the case.-Lord ROMILLY was of opinion that the words of the exception did not mean the eldest son for the time being. The Lord Chancellor has appointed Joseph Willis Ruddock, Robert Carr Fluker, and Henry Richardson, Esqrs., magistrates for the borough of Berwick-creased. The defendant's counsel characterised the transupon-Tweed. The Lord Chief Justice of Her Majesty's Court of Common Pleas at Westminster has appointed Henry Hill, of No. 123, Cannon-street, in the city of London, gentleman, to be a Perpetual Commissioner for taking the acknowledgment of deeds by married women in and for the city of London, also in and for the county of Middlesex, and city and liberties of Westminster. THE COURTS & COURT PAPERS. LANCASHIRE SPRING ASSIZES, 1867. The commissions for holding these assizes will be opened at Lancaster on Tuesday, the 5th of March, at Manchester on Saturday the 9th of March; and at Liverpool on Saturday the 23rd of March. The entry of causes at Lancaster will commence immediately after the opening of the commissions on Tuesday the 5th of March, and will close at nine o'clock on the following morning. Causes for trial at Manchester and at Liverpool, can be entered provisionally at the office of the HEFFER V. MARTYN.-This was a suit by a purchaser of V. C. STUART'S COURT. KENT v. HOWARD.-This was an ex parte application for immediately in the rear of No. 16, New-street, Covent FARRALL V. DAVENPORT.-This was a motion for an Order that the contract be confirmed, and the order of 21st Jan. discharged. Re SCINDE, PUNJAUB, AND DELHI BANK CORPORATION (LIMITED); AND Re THE COMPANIES ACT 1862.-This was a petition praying that an agreement of the 29th Jan. inst. might be approved and confirmed by the courtGreene, Q. C. appeared in support of the petition; 4. G. Marten, for the directors, offered no opposition. Order that the agreement be confirmed. V. C. WOOD'S COURT. BUSINESS OF THE WEEK. Thursday, Jan. 31. SCOTT v. STANFORD.-This was a motion on behalf of J. R. Scott, the clerk and registrar of the London Coal Market, to restrain the publication in a work called "Mineral Statistics of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland for the year 1865," of the returns of coal, culm, and cinders imported into London, published by the plaintiff under the authority of the corporation of London, and in which he claimed a copyright.-Giffard, Q C. and Andrew Thomson appeared for the motion;-The Attorney-General and Wickens contra. Part heard. V. C, MALINS' COURT. BUSINESS OF THE WEEK. Thursday, Jan. 31. Edward Cardwell was one. BARING. HARRIS.-The VICE-CHANCELLOR gave judgment in this case, which was argued on the 12th Dec. last. The bill was filled for a declaration that the plaintiffs were entitled to a lien or charge upon a certain ship Edward Cardwell, in respect of certain bills accepted by the plaintiffs in favour of the defendants George Wright and Co., at the request of Peter Mitchell, of New Brunswick, the owner of the ship. The plaintiffs, Messrs. Baring Brothers, had opened a credit in favour of Wright and Co. to the amount of 5000l. on the security of ships to be consigned by Mitchell to Wright and Co., of which the quently to this arrangement mortgaged the ship to the Wright and Co. had subseMarine Investment Company.-The VICE-CHANCELLOR Said that the question depended upon the construction of two letters by which the plaintiffs had agreed to open the credit, and the Edward Cardwell did not appear to have been mentioned in either of those letters. His opinion was that these letters failed to constitute a lien upon any ship whatever, and that Wright and Co. had a power of mortgaging. The result was that the plaintiffs had failed to establish a lien, and that the bill must be dismissed with costs.-Baily, Q. C., Cotton, Q. C., Glasse, Q. C., Druce, Q. C., and Bardswell appeared in the case. BURKE v. ARCHER-This was a motion for a receiver pendente lite, and Freeling asked for leave to substitute service upon the defendant's attorney, the defendant being resident at New York-The application was granted. RAWLINS v. BYLES-Freeling asked that this bill might be dismissed for want of prosecution.-Burdon appeared for other parties, and the usual undertaking for expedition was given. DEERE v. CLARENCE HOTEL COMPANY.-Baily, Q. C. and Gill moved that the defendants might be restrained from keeping the plaintiff's name upon the register of shareholders.-W. Barber, for the defendants, asked that the case might stand over till the first motion day after term, and it was agreed to stop certain proceedings in the Court of Q. B. SPEIGHT v. FOSTER.-Glasse, Q. C. asked that all proceedings under the decree in this suit might be stayed pending a petition of appeal which was about to be presented.-North, for the defendant, asked that the costs might be taxed, and that his costs might be paid. The decree had been made on the 20th Dec. dismissing the bill with costs, and there had been ample time to present a petition of appeal -The VICE-CHANCELLOR made an order to stay all proceedings pendente lite, the plaintiff undertaking to prosecute the suit without delay, and deposit 1007. in the London and Westminster Bank as security for costs, the applicant to pay the costs of the application. costs in order that a fine of 10007., imposed on the company for the abatement of the nuisance created by their works, might, in conformity with the rule of the court, be reduced to the amount of such costs. Rule nisi. REG. v. MANCHESTER, SHEFFIELD, AND LINCOLNSHIRE RAILWAY COMPANY.-J. A. Russell (Edwards with him) showed cause; and Mellish, Q. C. and Littler supported a rule to set aside an inquisition to assess compensation for land taken by the company belonging to Lord Sefton, on the ground that the under-sheriff, whose deputy tried the case, was interested. Cur, adv. vult. Re HENRY WICKENS.-H. T. Cole, Q. C. showed cause; and Gibbons supported a rule for an attachment herein. Referred to the master. REG. v. INHABITANTS OF LAZENBY.-J. A. Russell moved for a rule calling on the defendants to pay the costs of a mandamus to elect churchwardens. Rule nisi. Re AN ATTORNEY. – Barnard 'moved for a rule calling on an attorney to answer the matter of an affidavit. Rule nisi HILL AND WIFE . THE GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY.-Coleridge, Q. C. (Powell, Q. C. with him), showed cause against a rule to strike the plaintiff's attorney off the rolls on the ground of having entered into a corrupt agreement with the plaintiffs to share in the amount of damages that might be recovered.-Huddleston, Q. C. (H. James with him) supported the rule. Rule discharged. DENNISON v. HARDING.-Herschell showed cause, and Quain, Q. C. supported a rule for an attachment against the keeper of a lunatic asylum for refusing to allow service of a writ of summons on a lunatic in his asylum. Rule discharged REG. . BENNETT.-D. D. Keane, Q. C on the part of Mr. Liversage an attorney, moved for a criminal information against Mr. Bennett for burning, an effigy of the plaintiff in the presence of a mob at Winterton. Rule nisi. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS. Reported by W. GRAHAM and M. W. MCKELLAR, Esqrs., Barristers-at-Law. BUSINESS OF THE WEEK. HILARY TERM 1867. Thursday, Jan. 31. HARVEY . LAWRENCE-BOVILL, C. J. stated that he had spoken to Byles, J., and that he was of opinion that 384 should be allowed, and that any question of fact should be referred to an arbitrator-Lopez and Prideaux, Q. C., at the suggestion of the Court, agreed that the rule should be discharged on the first point, and be made absolute to reduce the damages by 194 Settled. Re A MARRIED WOMAN.-Ledgard applied for leave to dispense with the concurrence of a husband to the execotion of a deed by a married woman. The affidavits stated that the husband had been residing apart from his wife in Australia for seven years, by mutual consent, and that he had not during that time contributed to her support. Leave grunted. Re A MARRIED WOMAN.-Murphy made a similar appliLeave granted. Re AN ATTORNEY. - Mellor moved to enlarge a rule, calling on an attorney to show cause why he should not answer affidavits or be struck off the rolls.- Philbrick consented. Rule enlarged. cation. SHRIMPTON . THE SIDMOUTH RAILWAY AND HARBOUR COMPANY.-Phillips moved for rules calling on three shareholders to show cause why writs of sei. fa. should not issue against them. Rules nisi. MAVEROJARNI v. HUGHES-Crompton moved for a rule to strike out a plea setting out a composition-deed, on the ground that the deed was bad. He stated that there was a case of Jarchow v. Hughes in the special paper, in which the question of the validity of the same deed was raised on demurrer. Rule nisi returnable at chambers after the decision is given in that case. Re W. A. KILBY (an Attorney).- Purcell showed cause against a rule calling on an attorney to show cause why an attachment should not issue against him for disobedience to an order to exhibit accounts and furnish his bill of costs -Philbrick in support of the rule. Rule absolute; the attachment not to issue if the attorney furnish accounts to the satisfaction of the master, and pays the costs of this rule within a week. JOHNSON r. THE PENINSULAR WEST INDIAN AND SOUTHERN BANK (LIMITED).-Clarke showed cause against a rule to set aside the judgment signed by the plaintiff, on the ground that an order was made to wind-up the bank before the judgment was signed.-Murphy in support of the rule. Rule absolute without costs. BELL AND OTHERS v. SMITH-MIntyre showed cause against a rule calling on the plaintiff to show cause why the plaintiff should not withdraw from possession.—Joyce in support of the rule. Referred to chambers. BINGHAM T. CURLING.-Mellor moved to set aside the execution and all further proceedings, on the ground that the statutable majority of the defendant's creditors had assented to a composition-deed. Rule nisi returnable next term. MELANIDIS. ISHMAEL PASHA.-W. Williams moved to enlarge the rule in this case. Rule enlarged. MEAD. STEPHENS-Quain, Q. C. moved for a rule calling on the plaintiff and the messenger of the Court of Bankruptcy at Liverpool to show cause why they should not pay over to the sheriff money received by the messenger as a deposit. Rule nisi. Re AN ARBITRATION BETWEEN LUCAS AND ROUND.-Brett, Q. C. and New showed cause against a rule calling on Mr. Lucas to show cause why the award of an arbitrator appointed by him should not be set aside, on the ground that there was no proper appointment of the sole arbitrator, and no notice of the appointment-Sir G Honyman, Q. C. and Watkin Williams in support of the rule Rule discharged with costs; Mr. Round to have the option of naming an arbitrator and re-opening the reference. MOORE v. WATSON.- Griffits moved for a rule calling on the plaintiff to show cause why the taxation of costs should not be set aside, and why he should not refund money paid as the costs of a reference. The cause was referred to the master, under the compulsory powers of the Common Law Procedure Act, and by the order of reference the costs of the cause were to abide the event, and the costs of the reference to be in the discretion of the master. The master awarded to the plaintiff a sum less than 201., and ordered the defendant to pay the costs of the reference.— Griffits now contended that the County Court Act deprived the plaintiff of any costs, and that he was not entitled to the costs of the reference.-Thesiger showed cause in the first instance.-The COURT were of opinion that the words of the County Court Act were imperative, and that the plaintiff was not entitled to any costs. Rule absolute. WILKINSON. THE WILTSHIRE IRON COMPANY (LIMITED). -Harrison showed cause against a rule to set aside a rule ruling the sheriff to return a writ of fi. fa-Cole, Q. C. supported the rule. Rule absolute. Monday, Feb. 4. JAMES U. THE GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY.-The arguments in this case were concluded.- The Court were of opinion that, as the judge who tried the cause was not dissatisfied with the verdict, there should be no new trial on the ground that the verdict was against evidence, and that as the jury had found that there was no contributory negligence on the part of the plaintiff, the accident must have been the result of negligence on the part of the defendants, or of inevitable accident. That there was some evidence of negligence on the part of the defendants in not having whistled or taken some other means of warning persous crossing the line, and that the rule should therefore be discharged. Rule discharged. BAGALAY V. HAWLEY.-This was an action to recover the sum of 40% which the plaintiff had paid to the defendant as the price of a boiler. It appeared that the defendant sold the plaintiff the boiler in question, which he had bought at an auction, and which was fixed on the pre mises of a colliery company, and it was arranged that the plaintiff, who paid for the boiler at the time of the sale. should take it away in the course of a fortuight When the plaintiff went to remove the boiler, the servants of the colliery company refused to let him have it. A verdict having been found for the plaintiff for 401. Holker obtained a rule to enter a nonsuit or a verdict for the defendant, on the ground that there was no evidence that the defendant warranted that the plaintiff should have peaceable delivery of the boiler.-Temple, Q. C. and Crompton now showed cause; Holker in support. Cur. adv. rult. Wednesday, Feb. 6. THORBURN r. BARNES-Pursuant to leave reserved by Blackburn, J. at the trial at Liverpool, Brett, Q. C. obtained a rule nisi to set aside the verdict for the defendant, and enter it for the plaintiff for 10221. 168. 8d. The action was upon a cotton contract by a seller for non-acceptance. The defence depended upon one of the rules of the Liverpool Cotton Brokers' Association, and an award made in the matter which the plaintiff alleged was void -Quain, Q. C. and R. G. Williams showed cause, and Brett, Q.C. and C. Russell supported the rule.-The COURT held that, although the award would doubtless be upset ou motion, the plaintiff could not avail himself of its badness upon the pleadings Rule discharged. CONTRACT CORPORATION r. BATEMAN, AND NATIONAL DISCOUNT COMPANY CONTRACT CORPORATION.-In these cases, which have several times been postponed, the Court of Chancery has prohibited any further proceedings. YEOMAN r. ELLISON.-This was an appeal from a County Court decision for the defendant T. Jones, Q. C. appeared for the appellant, the plaintiff, and no one was instructed for the respondent By a memorandum of agreement Ellison agreed to purchase a public-house for 15007. By the last clause it was agreed that, inasmuch as it was intended that Ellison should have immediate possession, he should be, until payment of the money, in the position of a weekly tenant at 807. a-week. The question for the court was, whether this last clause gave the plaintiff, who represented the vendor of the public-house, a right of dis tress. Cur, ade, rult. GERARD V. LEWIS-This was a demurrer to a plea.Mellish, Q. C. (with him Robins) for plaintiff; and Macnamara for defendant. The declaration alleged that the defendant had assigned by deed all his debts to the plaintiff, and given him authority to sue for their payment in his name. Upon action brought against one of the debtors, Hulman. an order was obtained to hold him to bail not to leave the kingdom, and the declaration alleged that the defendant obtained his discharge from bail, whereby the plaintiff lost his debt. By the second plea the defendant asserted that the said Hulman was held to bail for a much larger sum than that due from him to the defendant, therefore he discharged him from bail -The COURT held this plea bad, as no answer to the declaration. Judgment for plaintiff. COURT OF EXCHEQUER. Reported by H LEIGH and E. LUMLEY, Esqrs., Barristers-at-Law. BUSINESS OF THE WEEK. HILARY TERM 1867. Wednesday, Jan. 30. SPIERT. DE GUISE-H. James showed cause: Oppenheim supported the rule. Rule absolute. LATHAM r. LAFONE-Quain, Q. C. and Crompton showed cause; Brett, Q. C. and Holker supported the rule.-This was an application for payment out of court to the defendant of a sum of money which had been paid in by the defendant under an order of Martin, B. as a condition of his release from custody under a ca, sa., on the ground that he had executed a deed under the B. A. 1861. The deed in question was a mere letter of licence, by which the executing and assenting creditors agreed to give time.-The COURT held that the deed was not within the Act. Rule discharged. EAVESTAFF V. BAXENDALE. Rule enlarged till next term. WILLIAMS T. THE SIDMOUTH RAILWAY COMPANY.-H. Matthews showed cause, and Kemplay supported the rule.that the garnishees, who were bankers, should pay the This was an application to rescind an order of Pigott, B. money into court, or execution should issue. The money had been paid in. The application had been at chambers to attach certain moneys paid into the bank as being the moneys of the company. It appeared from the affidavits that the company had got into some difficulties, and the time for the exercise of their powers having expired, it became necessary to apply for a new Bill giving them powers and authorising them to deviate from the original line proposed. For the purpose of providing the expenses incidental to this new Bill it was resolved that the shareholders should pay up the amount remaining due upon their shares under the provisions of the Companies Act 1862, and that certain gentlemen should be entrusted with the application of the funds so raised to the purposes above mentioned. These gentlemen paid the money so obtained into the bank, and the plaintiff was now endea vouring to enforce his judgment against the hauk as garnishees. It was contended on the one side that the company could not thus withdraw the money from being available to satisfy an execution; and on the other, that there were no debts due from the bank to the company, but only to the persons who had paid the money in-The COURT were of opinion that they could not decide the matter in this form, and the best course would be that a writ should issue under the garnishee clauses of the CL. P. A., and that a special case might, if necessary, be then stated. The rule to be enlarged, and the costs to be costs in the cause. Rule enlarged PLATT V. HIGGINS.--This was a case in which a rule for a new trial had been made absolute some terms back, the counsel on one side not being present. Leave to appeal was given, and a rule had since been obtained to remould the original rule, on the ground that it was ambiguously worded, and it was doubtful whether, as it stood, it really was a rule granted on the ground of misdirection, or that the verdict was against the evidence, in which latter case the court of error would have no jurisdiction-Grove, Q.C. and Aston appeared to support the rule. E. James, Q.C. and Macrory showed cause, objecting that the rule had been really originally granted to them on both grounds, and the proposed alteration would deprive them of the new trial on the latter ground if the coart of error were against them -The COURT, after some consideration, thought that the only way of meeting the difficulty was, that cause be shown in this court against the rule as originally granted. Judgment accordingly. ATKINSON V. NURSE-L. Kelly moved that money paid into court under the Summary Procedure on Bills of Exchange Act should be paid out to the defendant's assignees, the defendant having since become bankrupt. Judgment was ultimately signed for want of a plea. Rule refused STAFFORDSHIRE JOINT-STOCK BANK (LIMITED) v. HULSE AND OTHERS-This was an application to rescind an order of Channell, B. Rule refused. PIERCY . THE BRISTOL AND NORTH SOMERSET RAILWAY COMPANY.-Holl showed cause, and Littler supported the Rule absolute. Re HORREX-Cohen showed cause, and R. G. Williams Rule discharged supported the rule. GUARDIANS OF ROCHFORD UNION . BROWN. rule. Rule absolute. Re AN ATTORNEY.-Littler moved for a rule nisi or an attachment for nonpayment of money in pursuance of a rule of court. Thursday, Jan. 31. Rule nisi. DUNWOOD P. DUNN-Kemp moved to enlarge Huddleston's rule for a new trial herein to next term. Enlarged to next term. PIERCY AND ANOTHER THE BRISTOL AND NORTH SOMERSET RAILWAY. Milward, Q. C. and C. Russell on the part of the (Limited)," liquidator of the Financial Corporation showed against a rule obtained by Littler on the part of the plaintiffs for a sci. fa. against that corporation as shareholders in the defendants' company. This case differed from Re Baillie's case in the same action the other day in this court: (see Business of the Week for the Ex 254) The Finance Corporation is being wound-up in Chancery, and under sect. 87 of the Companies Act. 25& 26 Vict. c. 87, no suit or other proceeding can be taken against them except by leave of the court This was a proceeding analogous to a suit. Another objection was, that the corporation were not shareholders. The names of two individuals G. W. H. and J. G, appear on the register as "for the company," but sect. 8 of the Companies Clauses Act, the persons whose names are on the register shall be deemed shareholders." Littler, contra, in support of his rule.-KELLY, C. B:-We must send you to Chancery. Both objections are of an equitable nature. Rule discharged without costs. SAME. SAME (Re COULTHURST). — M. Loyd for the Rule absolute. shareholder. Re AN ATTORNEY.-Pearce showed cause against a rule to strike an attorney off the rolls of the court. To go to the Master. CHAMBERLAIN 2. EVANS-Murphy showed cause against Waddy's rule to set aside the judgment and all proceed ings herein. The writ was originally issued for s costs, and defendant sent a post-office order for the amount (51. 138. 9.), and the plaintiff's attorney sent back a recep for 27, which the defendant, being an illiterate man, did not read; and on the next day the attorney signed judg ments and signed execution, which defendant paid out, amounting to sl. odd. The execution was in Sept. 1864, and no steps had been taken until now. - KELLY, C. B. said the proceedings must be set aside, being of the most oppressive character; the money must be returned and a stet processus to issue in the action on payment to plaintiff of all costs. It is a case of cruelty and oppression which reflects great discredit on an attorney. Rule absolute. HORNVILLE V. GRIFFITHS-In this case, tried before the Recorder of London, B. Rigby, for plaintiff, showed cause against, and Philbrick supported a rule to enter a nonsuit, on the ground that the defendant was not liable for the driver's negligence, and the driver was not defendant's servant, Rule discharged with costs. VAUGHAN . THE GOVERNOR AND COMPANY OF COPTER MINERS IN ENGLAND-Grore, Q. C. and Michael showed cause against a rule to rescind an order of Channel, R to enter a suggestion on the roll to change the venue from Glamorgan to Carmarthen-Gifford, Q. C., Bowen, and It Ollivant, contra, for defendants, supported the rule was an action by plaintiff for injury to his reversion by the smoke from the defendants' copper-works, and the suggestion was that an impartial trial could not be had in Glamorganshire, the great proportion of special jurymen in that county being more or less interested in smelting works.-The Cornr said that, without the slightest refleetion on the jurors summoned, they thought there should be no shadow of suspicion of bias, and that they ought not to interfere with Channell, B 's order. Rule discharged, and order confirmed for trial in Carmarthenshire. Costs to be costs in the cause. ROFFEY V. PROVEZENDA AND OTHERS-C. Russell, for plaintiff, showed cause; and Hawkins, Q. C. and Day supported a rule to set aside an order of a judge for leave to proceed as though personal service had been effected in the case of one of the defendants, named Sotto Mayor, a lunatic. The COURT suggested that the parties should agree to strike out the lunatic's name, and that there should be no plea in abatement. To go before the judge. BEEVOR V. SAVAGE AND ANOTHER-Hayes, Serjt. showed cause, and Archibald supported a rule to vary a judge's order herein. The question was, whether a deed registered under the 192nd section of B. A. 1861 did or not come within the exception in sect. 7 of the Bills of Sale Act, 17 & 18 Vict. c. 36. The deed was of three parts, viz., the debtor, the surety, and the creditors, and recited a proposal of the debtor to pay a composition to be secured by a covenant of the surety and promissory notes of the debtor and surety, and there was an assignment by the debtor of all his effects to the surety as a consideration for becoming surety. It was contended, contra, that it should be registered as a bill of sale. [He was stopped-Archibald contra: This was not an assignment for benefit of creditors, but to the surety.-KELLY, C. B.: It seems to us to be not an arguable question. Registration under the Bills of Sale Act was to prevent frauds by secret conveyances. Rule discharged with costs. ABBOTT V. THE SOUTH-EASTERN PORTUGAL RAILWAY.— Murphy, for plaintiff, showed cause, and H. James supported the latter's rule herein. Rule absolute to stay all proceedings. No costs on either side as to any of the proceedings in the action. CODDINGTON AND OTHERS . PALEOLOGO AND ANOTHERThe Court delivered judgment in this case, which was argued in Michaelmas Term last. Their Lordships differed in opinion. KELLY, C.B. and PIGOTT, B. thought the plaintiffs were entitled to judgment, and that the rule should be discharged; whilst MARTIN and BRAMWELL, BB. were of the contrary opinion.-(See Reports of the week ) The rule therefore drops, and plaintiff's retain their verdict. WALKER AND ANOTHER v. PREHN AND OTHERS—A. Wills showed cause against the rule to extend the time for the return of a commission from Alexandria by three weeks from the present time.-Baylis contra. Rule absolute. FORSTER V. MACKRETH (resumed). - Hayes, Serjt, and M. Howard, for defendant, cited Allen v. Stee', 1 East. 435; Austin v. Bunyard, 34 L. J 217, Q. B.; Whistler v. Foster, 14 C. B., N. S., 248; 8 L. T. Rep. N. S. 817; Hazeland v. Young, 5 Q. B. 833; Yates v. Dalton, 28 L. J. Ex.; Byles on Bills.-Gates contra. Cur, adv. vult. The Term here came to an end, and the Court was adjourned by the senior usher to Easter Term in the usual form. EXCHEQUER CHAMBER. Reported by M. W. MCKELLAR, Esq. Barrister-at-Law. BUSINESS OF THE WEEK. HILARY TERM 1867. ERRORS FROM THE COMMON PLEAS Monday, Feb. 4. (Before KELLY, C. B., CHANNELL, B., MELLOR J., PIGOTT, B., and LUSH, J.) Manisty, Q. C. informed the Court that the first case on the list, Earl Shrewsbury v. Keightley, was to stand over to abide the event of the two cases next in order, judgments in which have not yet been delivered. KIDSTONE V. THE EMPIRE MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY. -This was a question of the liability of the underwriters to a shipowner on a policy of insurance of the chartered freight of the ship Sebastopol, which put into Rio on her Voyage home from the Chinchas. It was there found that the expense of repairing her would be greater than the value of the ship; the master therefore forwarded the cargo by another ship, the Caprice, the freight of the Voyage from Rio amounting to about half the chartered freight. The Court below held the underwriters responsible upon the suing and labouring clause in the policy (1 L. R. C.P. 585).—Mellish, Q. C. (with him Cohen) argued for the insurance company, and at the conclusion of his speech, the Court expressed their desire to investigate the American authorities cited for the defendants before they heard the other side. They therefore adjourned the further hearing. -E. James, Q. C. and Honyman, Q. C. appeared for the plaintiff. Part heard. KAY. WHEELER-The Court below held that the defendant, a shipowner, was responsible for damage done by rats to the coffee of a merchant which was part of the ship's cargo, notwithstanding that the defendant proved he had adopted all possible precautions against rats. The bill of lading contained the usual exceptions from the liability of the owner as to accidents, fire, perils of the sea, &c.-Watkin Williams argued for the defendant, and Honyman, Q. C. appeared for the plaintiff, but was stopped by the Court. Judgment confirmed. GRAVES v. ASHFORD.-This case was brought to this court by the defendant in order to test whether the case of Gambart v. Ball in the Court of Exchequer can be sustained. It was there held that photographic copies of prints are included in the imitations forbidden by the copywright Acts-Coleridge, Q. C. and Rew for defendant; Collier, Q. C. and Prentice, Q. C. for plaintiff. Part heard. Tuesday, Feb. 5. (Before the Judges present yesterday, and BRAMWELL, B.) GRAVES C. ASHFORD. Coleridge, Q. C. continued his argument for the defendant against the ruling of the Court below, and the decision of the Court of Exchequer. The other side was not heard; and it was held that photographs are within the mischief which the Copyright Acts were intended to prevent, and are included in the words of the Act. Judgment confirmed. The COURT rose soon after twelve o'clock, in order that the Judges might attend the opening of Parliament. NISI PRIUS. Reported by JonX KINGHORN and JOHN SHORTt, Esqra, COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH. KALINSKI V. RIMES.-Action to recover 247. for work done HOCKEY V. JENNINGS.-Action for damages resulting from defendant's negligence Plea, not guilty.-Laurence for plaintiff; Gough for defendant. Jury discharged. KNIGHT v. GILBERT.-Action for goods sold and delivered and money due. Plea, never indebted.-Barnard for plaintiff; Watkin Williams for defendant. Verdict for defendant. (Before SHEE, J. and a Special Jury.) KEARNS. STORKS.-Action for false imprisonment. Pleas, 1, not guilty and justification.-Coleridge, Q. C., Seymour, Q. C., and Nasmyth for plaintiff; The SolicitorGeneral, Prentice, Q, C., and Hannen for defendant. Part heard. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS. WILLIAMS v. FAIRBAIRN.-An action on a promissory note. The plea was one of bankruptcy.-Hodgson for the plaintiff; Salter for the defendant. Verdict for the plaintiff, with leare to defendant to move on a question as to the form of the plea. WINYARD AND WIFE & MARKS-This was an action for false imprisonment of the female plaintiff, on a charge of stealing. Plea, not guilty by statute.-Salter and Bosanquet for plaintiff; Price, Q. C. and Day for defendant. Verdict for defendant. Thursday, Jan. 31. VICKERS v. DEAR-This was an action on a promissory note which defendant made in the name of his father. Plea, that he did not make the note.-Francis for plaintiff; Day for defendant. Verdict for plaintiff. SMITH v. MILES.-An action on a promissory notePleas, that defendant did not make it, and that it was indorsed without consideration -Harrison for plaintiff ; Keane, QC. and Merewether for defendant. Verdict for defendant. Friday, Feb. 1. (Before BOVILL, C. J. and Common Juries.) PARSONS AND WIFE v. HARMER -This was an action for an assault, alleged to have been committed on the female plaintiff.-Bridge for plaintiff; Gibbons for defendant. Verdict for defendant. BURROWS v. Woop.-This was an action for detinue of a lease. Plea, traversed the detinue.-Wood and Houston for plaintiff; H. James and Atkinson for defendant. Verdict for defendant. (Before BYLES, J. and Common Juries.) KEYSER V. PROSSER-An action for breach of an agreement to exchange for wine purchased by plaintiff from defendant, other and better wine; also money counts. Pleas traverses.-Grifits and F. Turner for plaintiff; Keane, Q. C. and Joyce for defendant. Verdict for plaintiff for 851. 12s. 3d. O'FLANAGAN . METROPOLITAN RAILWAY COMPANY.-An action for false imprisonment.-Seymour, Q. C. and Brandt for plaintiff; Parry, Serjt, and Griffits for defendant., Verdict for plaintiff, damages 51., with leave to defendants to move on certain points of law. NEWSON . SHARP.-An action on a bond.-M. Chambers, Q. C. and Joyce for defendant; Parry, Serjt., and Patchett for defendant. Verdict by consent for plaintiff for 2001, on terms agreed upon. Saturday, Feb. 2. (Before BOVILL, C. J. and Common Juries.) ROYSTON v. JOHNSON.-An action to recover for 100% calls paid on shares transferred by plaintiff to defendant.Bullen, for plaintiff; Philbrick for defendant. Plaintiff was nonsuited on failure of proof to transfer. PENNINGTON V. SIMPSON AND OTHERS.— An action for injuries sustained by plaintiff (an infant) from the fall of a door connected with a hoarding of defendants'. Pleas not guilty; and that plaintiff was a trespasser.-Laxton and E. Thomas for plaintiff; M. Lloyd for defendants. Verdict for defendants. (Before BYLES, J. and Common Juries.) PEAROK C. BELL-An action for breach of a contract to let a room for the purposes of a public concert.-Joyce and Rigby for plaintiff; Daly and Shee for defendant. Dowdeswell, Q. C. for defendant.-The case was not concluded. (Before BYLES, J. and a Common Jury.) BEARDMORE v. CLITHEROW.- An action for breach of contract to repair.-Parry, Serjt., and Beasley, for plaintiff; Pollock, Q. C. and Harrington, for defendant. Verdict for defendant, with leave to move. The Courts rose early owing to the opening of Parliament. COURT OF ADMIRALTY. Reported by HENRY F. PURCELL, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. BUSINESS OF THE WEEK. HILARY TERM, 1867. Monday, Feb. 4. THE SIR WILLIAM WALLACE.-Damage,.-This was a suit instituted by the owners of the Helena and Anne of Rotterdam, for damages suffered in a collision with the Sir William Wallace about forty miles off the Lizard on the 4th Dec. last. The Sir William Wallace was on her voyage from Sydney to London with a general cargo. The Helena and Anne had on board a general cargo and troops for Batavia.-The COURT decided that the Sir Willam Wallace was solely to blame.-Brett, Q. C. and Clarkson for plaintiffs; Dr. Deane, Q. C. and Butt for defendants. appeals 15 Appeals 16 Ditto Saturday Verdict for plaintiff for 51. MCDONALD V. LAURIE.-This was an action for wrongMonday ............................. 18 Ditto Tuesday ful dismissal.—Shaw for plaiutiff; J. O. Grights for defenDitto ......... 19 dant. Wednesday Ditto Verdict for defendant. Thursday Monday, Feb. 4. (Before KEATING, J. and Special Juries) LONDON AND MEDITERRANEAN BANK v. SMITH.-An action for money paid to the use of defendant, for interest and commission. Plea, never indebted-Price, Q. C. and Sharpe for plaintiff; no one appeared for defendant. Verdict for plaintiff for the amount claimed. MOFFAT GREAT WESTERN COMPANY-An action to recover the value of a horse killed by the alleged negligence of the defendants' servants. Pleas, not guilty, a denial of the delivery, and that the animal was vicious M. Chambers, Q C. and M. Lloyd for plaintiff; Price, Q. C., H. James, and Digby for defendant. Verdict for plaintiff for 231. (Before BYLES, J. and Common Juries.) LEWIS . FROST.-An action for a trespass and assault. Francis for plaintiff; Cole, Q C. for defendant, Verdict for plaintiff as to the trespass, damages 178. 6d. ; and as to the assault, damages d SANDFORD V. BEATTIE.-An action to recover the price of certain photographic mounts, and other such thingsGriffits, for p'aintiff; Cole, Q. C. for defendant. Verdict for defendant. Tuesday, Feb. 5. (Before BOVILL, C. J. and a Special Jury.) 20 ......... HUGHES v. LONDON GENERAL OMNIBUS COMPANY.-An Monday action to recover damages for injuries sustained by plain- Tuesday............ 26 Ditto tiff.-Kenealey and Thomas for plaintiff; Giffard, Q. C. and | Wednesday ...... 27 Ditto Friday Saturday Monday... Tuesday Thursday......... 14 The Second Seal Motions and causes Motions and causes 8 Petitions and causes 9 Short causes and causes Short causes, adjourned summonses, and general paper General paper Ditto Wednesday Ditto 28 The MIDLAND CIRCUIT. (Before Mr. Justice SMITа and Mr. Justice LUSH) Warwick...................................................... Derby Feb. 18... Thursday, Feb. 28 Nottingham and Town... York and City Leeds Tuesday............ 26 Fourth Seal. Motions general paper Petitions and general paper and LEGAL NEWS. ESTIMATE FOR THE NEW LAW COURTS-The cubical contents of the building at 1s. per foot cube give 1,253,626., exclusive of figure sculpture and figure painting. One shilling per foot is taken on the ground that the Foreign Office is being built at 1s. 04d. per foot, and that the stone fronts there bear a larger proportion to the whole mass than would be the case at the Law Courts. The contract for Glasgow University, a less expensively finished The Fifth Seal Motions and general building, however, are cheaper there than in gives 74d. per foot cube; both materials Short causes, adjourned summonses, and general paper 4 General paper 5 Ditto Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday ............ 11 Friday............ 15 Petitions and causes Saturday... 16 Short causes and causes Monday............ 18 Causes Thursday......... 21 The Third Seal. Motions and causes Friday ....... 22 Petitions and causes Saturday ......... 23 Short causes and causes Tuesday ....... 26 Ditto ......... 28 The Fourth Seal. Friday March 1 Petitions and causes 2 Short causes and causes 25 Causes Monday.. Wednesday ...... 27 Ditto Thursday causes Saturday Monday. 4 Causes Tuesday 5 Ditto Wednesday Thursday Thursday ......... 9 Short causes, adjourned summonses, and general paper General paper 12 Ditto 13 Ditto 14 The Sixth Seal. Motions and general paper Friday........... 15 Petitions and general paper Saturday ......... 16 Short causes, adjourned summonses, and general paper Monday............ 18 General paper and Tuesday..... 19 Ditto Ditto Wednesday...... 20 London.-The Builder. MISS FRAY, the well-known litigant, is at present on a visit to her native county of Montgomery, and has favoured the editor of a local paper with a long letter in reference to her numerous suits in the courts of law. Nothing daunted by her late rebuff at the hands of the Lord Chief Justice, Miss Fray is preparing for the immediate prosecution of further claims for the restitution of her "family property," the defendant in the pending suits being Major Drow, of Newtown. Miss Fray is also meditating an action against two of the officials of Newtown |