List of Sheriffs, &c.-Le tures at the Law Society. 375 LECTURES AT THE LAW SOCIETY. The Courses of Lectures at the Law Society, on Conveyancing, Equity, and Common Law, concluded for the present Season, on Friday last, when Mr. Theobald delivered the following address: Having now come to the conclusion of the Course, I have to take my leave of you. I undertook this task, during the temporary illness of Mr. Dodd, with great pleasure; the execution of it has been rendered doubly agreeable by the very kind manner in which you have attended to me. These Lectures were projected experimentally; they were an experiment in doubt, whether the law could be taught in this manner; imperfect as the specimens have been, they have, I trust, removed the doubt, and have incontrovertibly proved, that with better abilities brought to the task, but the same zeal, the Law may be as well adapted to lectures as any other science. And allow me to observe, that studying the law as a science, it derives light and assistance from the other sciences, particularly from the moral sciences. By logic we learn how to divide and arrange its topics, so as to give it the form of a science: without this form, the law would be a wilderness of cases. Metaphysics also, which by persons of narrow education, are supposed to have as little relation to the business of life, as a collection of fictions, should also be studied by the lawyer, as far as his leisure will permit, for the sake of the tone and vigour which this branch of knowledge imparts to the mind, and the light which it throws on the processes of the mind in all its operations. Moral philosophy too should not be neglected by the young lawyer. In our intercourse with society, we are called upon not only to say what the law is, but to discuss the propriety of its provisions: the legislator ought to command only what the philosopher would inculcate by reasonings : the morality of society, therefore, and the principles of public morals, afford an important aid in the discussion of these questions: but, independently of all these considerations, we should recollect that we are not only lawyers, but members of a great and enlightened community, and that a just regard to our own personal improvement imposes on us the obligation of cultivating the law in connection with the moral sciences, while at the same time we cannot fail to have the satisfaction of feeling that with our 2 A 4 376 New Scale of Costs at Common Law. own improvement we advance the character of the profession, in the honor of which we are all so deeply interested. We understand that a short Course of Lectures will be delivered in Easter Term by Mr. Stacey Grimaldi, (who is well known as an able Record Lawyer) on the Public Records of England. MON LAW. The allowance to witnesses for travelling is to be only the sum actually paid, and that not exceeding one shilling per mile, except under special circumstances. No fee to counsel is to be allowed on writs of trial, except trials before the Judge of the Sheriff's Court of London, or of other Courts of Record where attorneys are not allowed to practise, and then one guinea only. The fees to be allowed to counsels' NEW SCALE OF COSTS AT COM- | clerks are not to exceed as under: We are enabled to state from authority, that the following directions have been given by the Judges, for the future taxation of Costs in the Common Law Courts: and that they will take effect in all actions commenced on or after the 15th instant. Directions to Taxing Officers. In all actions of assumpsit, debt or covenant, where the sum recovered or paid into Court and accepted by the plaintiff, in satisfaction of his demand, or agreed to be paid on the settlement of the action, shall not exceed twenty pounds (without costs), the plaintiff's costs shall be taxed according to the reduced scale hereunto annexed. Provided that in case of trial before à Judge in one of the Superior Courts, or Judge of Assize, if the Judge shall certify on the postea that the cause was proper to be tried before him, and not before a Sheriff, or Judge of an inferior Court, the costs shall be taxed upon the usual scale. At the head of every bill of costs, taken to the taxing officer to be taxed, it shall be stated whether the sum recovered, accepted, or agreed to be paid, exceeds the sum of twenty pounds, or not, in the following form: Debt above £20. Debt £20 or under. Three shillings and four pence shall be allowed for drawing the judgment in all cases. The officers of the Court of Exchequer are to allow no incipiturs of judgment upon paper, and are to mark the costs upon the posteas. Every brief sheet is to contain eight folios, at the least, which are to be paid for at the rate of six shillings and eight pence per sheet for drawing, and three shillings and four pence for copying; such parts of the brief only as are really drawn, to be allowed as drawing, the rest to be allowed as copying. Twenty guineas and upwards 2 6 5 0 10 0 The other counsels' clerks on do. Attending as a witness at trials to - 7 6 2 6 10 6 £. s. d. 2 0 · 0 10 40000QOO 0 0 0 10400044 Drawing particulars and copy SCHEDULE II. 3 4 - 0 2 0 Above 50 miles, 4s. Above 100 miles, 6s. Where Fi. Fa., and Warrant thereon. In country, 13s. SCHEDULE III. Where Cause is tried at Nisi Prius, Ingrossing record, fo. (14) Parchment Paid sealing Attending thereon Copy particulars to annex Venire Paid return Attending thereon Distringas Paid return Attending thereon Copy and service Instructions for brief 0 4 0 3 0 *No more to be paid if withdrawn. 8 7 REVIEW. An Examination of the Grounds upon which the Ecclesiastical and Real Property Commissioners, and a Committee of the House of Commons, have proposed the Abolition of the Local Courts of Testamentary Jurisdiction. By Michael J. Quin, of Lincoln's Inn, Esq., Barrister at Law. London: Ridgway. 1834. This is an able pamphlet, written in opand position to that part of the Report of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners in which they recommend the abolition of all the Local Tribunals-in number nearly 400-and the transfer of their jurisdiction to the Metropolitan Courts. Mr. Quin has very diligently sifted the grounds on which the O recommendation rests; and it is no fault of his that he has failed in maintaining a 2 0 cause which appears to us altogether inde4 fensible. In few words, the matter may be summed up as follows: 0 5 0 3 4 6 6 0 In ancient times, as Mr. Quin observes, 4 the bishops constantly resided in their pa9laces, and the earls in their castles; they presided over their several Local Courts, 0 13 4 and the people (who by the way had then no other choice) submitted quietly to their jurisdiction. With the change of times, however, the bishops and the earls with 378 Review: Quin on Local Courts of Testamentary Jurisdiction drew, and left the administration of justice | form. But those who have taken up the subto inferior persons. In the mean while,ject of the local spiritual Courts, which are still the facilities for communicating with the in vigorous existence, propose, in violation of that feeling, to sweep those institutions altometropolis increased; and ultimately the gether away, as if they were unsusceptible of suitors preferred resorting to the Superior any reform which might render them useful to Courts, where they found impartiality in the purposes of justice. Can it be prudent the Judges, uniformity of decision, and thus, on one hand, to rebuild that part of the eminent learning. edifice which has fallen into ruin, and, on the other, to throw down that portion of it which has stood the test of ages? If ancient wisdom be an argument in favour of the one, assuredly it must apply to the other with equal force." We admit this; and it sufficiently proves the inconsistency of those who, on the one hand, contend for a Metropolitan Registry Courts; and on the other, would half aboof Deeds, and Metropolitan Ecclesiastical Mr. Quin would have us retrace our steps, and force upon the provinces inferior Judges and unsettled laws; nay more, not only the country people are to be satisfied amongst themselves with Local Courts, of which they have disapproved ever since they had an opportunity of choosing better, but the vast population of London, having dealings with all parts of the kingdom, must follow their debtors to their local habita-lish the Superior Courts of Common Law, tions: thus, in the majority of instances, falsifying the pretence of "bringing justice home to every man's door." That there should be Courts of Request up to 57., or even 107., is quite another affair; and we believe no reasonable oppo. nent of the Local Court scheme would object to the establishment of such Courts, wherever the inhabitants required them. It may be questionable, however, whether a poor man's Court," as it was called, is really demanded by the class of persons whom it is pretended there is at present no legal relief. Let the experiment, however, of a Small Debt Court be tried; but let us for not overthrow the whole fabric of Westminster Hall to gratify the rage for Law Reform. We must, however, allow Mr. Quin to speak for himself. "The jurisdiction (he says) thus retained by the bishops and clergy has been, since that pe riod, exercised through the instrumentality of a great variety of Courts, which we still find established in every diocese of the kingdom. There are, first, the Diocesan Court; then the Courts of the Archdeacons, of Deans and Chapters, and Prebendaries; and then what are called the Peculiars of the King, of the Archbishops, and of Lords of Manors. It must be admitted that, upon the face of this enumeration, these Courts are open to the objection of multiplicity; that they sometimes clash with each other as to jurisdiction; and that they lead to confusion, inasmuch as it is sometimes extremely difficult for a man to discover to which of these tribunals the cognizance of his cause belongs. But the very subdivisions of jurisdiction which have taken place from time to time, prove beyond all doubt the rooted attachment which the people of this country have always had to local Courts. Acting upon that well-known feeling, the Lord Chancellor has twice introduced bills into Parliament for the restoration of the subverted local civil tribunals in an improved and establish Local ones throughout the Real Property Commissioners contend for kingdom. Both the Ecclesiastical and the the central system, though, as Mr. Quin observes, the one is desirous to add the provincial business to Doctors' Commons, and the other to the Court of Chancery. Our author, consistently, upholds the district plan, both as to civil and ecclesiastical causes; his taste is altogether rural; and he descants eloquently of ancient times, and the feelings of parties who require the personal inspection of "the sacred documents" in question. We believe, however, that in ancient times, a journey from one of the villages to the principal town, where the wills were deposited, was a more inconvenient affair than it now is to London; and the communication by post has become so rapid and well arranged, that nothing can be urged on the score of delay. The great arguments in favor of the metropolitan plan are-uniformity of decision, and facility of searching at one, instead of a multiplicity of offices. We happen practically to know the inconvenience of divers searches in Local Courts, and the doubts and difficulties which frequently arise regarding the peculiar jurisdiction to which the grant of administration belongs. Mr. Quin thinks, that although there are many well-founded objections, they may in a considerable degree be removed: we are for reforming them altogether. He says New Bills in Parliament. times with injury to rights vested in parties, under the probate of the latter tribunal. But this arises, in fact, from the unintelligible been left from the earliest times. It will be by no means difficult for the legislature to remove the evils which that law is constantly producing, and to lay down a clear and rational rule with respect to the localities in which wills may be proved in future. state in which the law of bona notabilia has "It cannot be doubted, that the inferior Courts have sometimes fallen into mistakes on this subject. But it is equally certain that the Prerogative Court of Canterbury, especially, has very frequently assumed to itself, under the pretext of bona notabilia, a power of proving wills to which, in law, it had no right. For instance, in the case of stock, there is no property locally situated any where; it is a mere grant by Parliament of a perpetual annuity, with a power of redemption. The title to this stock follows, therefore, the person of the testator. But on the supposition of stock being bona notabilia out of the dioceses in which testators died, the Prerogative Court of Canterbury has, in many cases, insisted on the exclusive right of granting probates, to the prejudice of the country Courts, as well as of the parties whose rights were thereby affected. “The true course of proceeding would be, to preserve in all cases, as much as possible, the principle of locality, as connected with the usual domicile of the testator or intestate. It is there that his family, or those entitled to any property which he may leave, will generally be found; and there can be no good reason why they should either go themselves to an unreasonable distance, or employ others to act for them at such distance, perhaps above two hundred miles from their residence, in order to establish the validity of an instrument which was executed probably in their presence, and belongs to them as much as the property of which it disposes.' The satisfaction to a few individuals, of a personal examination of the original will, is but of small consequence, compared with the advantages of Central Courts, especially as it is proposed to deposit copies of wills, and indexes, for the purposes of search, in the most convenient towns in various districts of the kingdom. On the subject of securing the grant of administration to the right person, and detecting fraudulent applications, we believe that all reasonable safety may be obtained in the Metropolitan, as well as in the Local Courts; and the expense, we incline to think, whatever it may now be, is capable of being made less in the former than the latter, on account of the multitude of cases; as we find in common law agency, where the London practitioner is enabled to allow one-half the profit to his professional client in the country. 379 In favor of the change, we have the Reports of the Real Property and Ecclesiastical Commissioners, with the evidence of Sir John Nicholl, Sir Herbert Jenner, and Dr. Lushington, besides that of the Chief Justice of the Common Pleas. The testimony of Mr. Maule, the Solicitor of the Treasury, of Mr. Freshfield, the Bank Solicitor, and Duties, shews the defects in the practice Gwynne, the Comptroller of the Legacy of all the Ecclesiastical Courts; but it by no means favors the view of Mr. Quin on the main question. On the whole, for the reasons we have assigned, and on the general preference which we give to Superior over Inferior Courts, we entirely differ from Mr. Quin; though we can recommend his pamphlet as an able publication on his side of the question. NEW BILLS IN PARLIAMENT. ANALYSIS OF THE BILL TO SECURE THE LIBERTY OF THE PRESS. 1. That no ex officio or other information, at the suit of his Majesty's Attorney General, or of his Majesty's coroner and attorney of the Court of King's Bench, whether with or without the leave of the Court, shall be filed on account of any libel after the passing of this act. 2. That no indictment shall be prosecuted for any public libel, upon any allegation merely of the criminal intentions of the publishers thereof, but that it shall be necessary in every such indictment to allege, and to prove at the trial, that the libel therein set forth was published to aid or abet, or to counsel or advise, which a person may now by law be indicted as or procure the commission of some crime, for an accessory before the fact. 3. It shall not be necessary to aver that the crime was committed. 4. None but the party aggrieved to prosecute for a personal libel. 5. No action for written or printed words, unless the same words actionable when spoken. 6. The truth may be given in evidence, to enable the jury to decide whether criminal or not. 7. Notice to retract to be served on publisher, and proof of bona fide retraction a defence. 8. If the author be disclosed, and sufficient proof furnished against him, the publisher not to be prosecuted. 9. If the prosecution fail against the author for want of proof, the publisher to be liable to the costs of that prosecution. |