ASSIGNMENTS OF LIFE POLICIES.

(30 31 Vict. c. 144.)

ONE among the useful Acts of Parliament lately passed is that which, in contravention of the rule of law that rights of action are not transferable so as to enable the transferee to sue in his own. name at law, enables the transferee or assignee of a policy of life assurance to sue in his own name at law for the recovery of the amount, after notice given of the assignment. There is a provision to the effect that assurance companies shall give an acknowledgment in writing of the receipt of a notice of assignment, which will do away with a practice which some offices had of refusing to accept notices of assignments. The Act requires to be carefully studied, and we therefore give it in extenso. It is entitled, "An Act to enable Assignees of Policies of Life Assurance to sue thereon in their own Names," and came in operation on the 20th August, 1867. It recites that it is "expedient to enable assignees of policies of life assurance to sue thereon in their own names."

Assignees of life policies may sue in their own names. By sect. 1, any person or corporation now being or hereafter becoming entitled, by assignment or other derivative title, to a policy of life assurance, and possessing at the time of action brought the right in equity to receive and the right to give an effectual discharge to the assurance company liable under such policy for moneys thereby assured or secured, shall be at lirty to sue at law in the name of such person or corporation to recover such moneys.

Defence or reply on equitable grounds may be pleaded.-By sect. 2, in any action on a policy of life assurance, a defence on equitable grounds, or a reply to such defence on similar grounds, may be respectively pleaded and relied upon in the same manner and to the same extent as in any other personal action.

Notice of assignment is to be given.-By sect. 3, no assignment made after the passing of this Act of a policy of life assurance shall confer on the assignee therein named, his executors, administrators, or assigns, any right to sue for the amount of such policy, or the moneys assured or secured thereby, until a written notice of the date and purport of such assignment shall have been given to the assurance company liable under such policy at their principal place of business for the time being, or in case they have two or more principal places of business, then at some one of such principal places of business, either in England, or Scotland, or Ireland, and the date on which such notice shall be received shall regulate the priority of all claims under any assignment; and a payment bona fide made in respect of any policy by an assurance company before the date on which such notice shall have been received shall be as valid against the assignee giving such notice as if this Act had not been passed.

Principal places of business to be specified on policies.-By sect. 4, every assurance company shall, on every policy issued by them after the 13th of September, 1867, specify their principal place or principal places of business at which notices of assignment may be given in pursuance of this Act.

Assignment may be by endorsement or separate instrument.-By sect. 5, any such assignment may be made either by endorsement on the policy or by a separate instrument in the words or to the effect set forth in the schedule hereto, such endorsement or separate instrument being duly stamped.

Notices of assignment are to be acknowledged.-By sect. 6, every assurance company to whom notice shall have been duly given of the assignment of any policy under which they are liable shall, upon the request in writing of any person by whom any such notice was given or signed, or of his executors or administrators and upon payment in each case of a fee not exceeding five shillings, deliver an acknowledgment in writing under the hand of the manager, secretary, treasurer, or other principal officer of the assurance company, of their receipt of such notice; and every such written acknowledgment, if signed by a person being de jure or de facto the manager, secretary, treasurer, or other principal officer of the assurance company, whose acknowledgment the same purports to be, shall be conclusive evidence as against such assurance company of their having duly received the notice to which such acknowledgment relates.

Interpretation of terms.—In the construction and for the purposes of this Act the expression "policy of life assurance," or "policy," shall mean any instrument by which the payment of moneys, by or out of the funds of an assurance company, on the happening of any contingency depending on the duration of human life, is assured or secured; and the expression "assurance company " shall mean and include every corporation, association, society, or company now or hereafter carrying on the business of assuring lives or survivorships, either alone or in conjunction with any other object or objects.

Act is not to apply to contracts under certain Acts.-By sect. 8, provided always, that this Act shall not apply to any policy of assurance granted or to be granted or to any contract for a payment on death entered into or to be entered into in pursuance of the provisions of the Acts 16 & 16 Victoria chapter 45, and 27 & 28 Victoria chapter 43, or either of those Acts, or to any engagement for payment on death by any friendly society.

Short title.-By sect. 9, For all purposes this Act may be cited as "The Policies of Assurance Act, 1867."

SCHEDULE.

I. A. B. of, &c., in consideration of, &c., do hereby assign to C. D. of, &c., his executors, administrators, and assigns, the [within] policy of assurance granted, &c. [here describe the policy]. In witness, &c.

THE RIGHT HON. FRANCIS BLACKBURNE.

THE Right Hon. Francis Blackburne, ex-Lord Chancellor for Ireland, died on the 17th of September last. He was born in 1782, at Footstown, County Meath, his father being a gentleman of small property in that county. On the mother's side he was descendant of Dr. Ezekiel Hopkins, Bishop of Derry during the famous siege of which historians have found so much to say. He entered Trinity College, Dublin, in 1798, and there achieved considerable distinction, carrying off the gold medal and a scholarship in 1803, besides other honours. In 1805 he was called to the bar, and after seventeen years' practice as a junior, received "silk" in 1822. At this time, when party feeling ran high, the future Lord Chancellor was not disposed to enter the political arena. He was known as a man of moderate though decided opinions, and held himself aloof from those political controversies which had such engrossing attractions for many of his compeers. In 1823 he received from the administration of Lord Wellesley the appointment of judge, to act in the counties of Limerick and Clare, as a contemporary reminds us, in enforcing the Insurrection Act. In 1826 he became third serjeant and a bencher. In 1831, under Earl Grey's administration, he became AttorneyGeneral, the contemporary Solicitors-General being Crampton, afterwards judge of the Queen's Bench, and O'Loghlen, afterwards Sir Michael O'Loghlen, Baron of the Exchequer and Master of the Rolls. In 1834 Sir Robert Peel came into power and the Attorney-General consented to continue in office, a line of conduct which entailed on him much obloquy from those who failed to appreciate his motives. In 1835 he declined to join Lord Melbourne's administration, his reasons being identical with those which actuated Lord Derby and Sir James Graham in declining to associate themselves with that administration. He now remained out of office until 1841, when, under Sir Robert Peel, he again became Attorney-General, and the following year made him Master of the Rolls. He quitted that office and become Chief Justice of the Queen's Bench in 1846 During his tenure of this post he presided over the Commission which tried Smith O'Brien and the other conspirators whose scheme had ended in what is remembered as the cabbage garden fiasco. In 1852, under Lord Derby, he was raised to the Lord Chancellorship. His tenure of office was, however, but of short duration; Lord Derby went out of office at the end of a few months, and with him Lord Chancellor Blackburne retired. He was now 70 years of age; his retirement again was but temporary, for in 1856 the office of Lord Justice of Appeal having been created by the statute of 19 & 20 Vict. c. 92, ex-Chancellor Blackburne was appointed by Lord Palmerston to the place. He continued in the discharge of this

office until the commencement of the present administration, when he again accepted the position and duties of Lord Chancellor, which failing health compelled him to resign a few months ago. Lord Chancellor Blackburne was a judge of whom it might be said that he won his position and distinguished himself more as a judge and lawyer than as a politician, and will long be remembered with regret by all with whom his duties brought him in contact.

CHAMBER JOTTINGS.

APPEAL-Deposit-Return of on settling matter before hearing.— Most of our readers are, we presume, aware that on appeal from a decree made on the hearing of a cause in equity, a deposit of £20 is necessary (B. 2; Leg. Reas. Why, 21, No. XIV). In a late case such a deposit had been made on an appeal by the plaintiffs to the Court of Appeal from a decree of one of the Vice-Chancellors. The appeal was set down before the Lord Chancellor, but before the hearing of the appeal the matter was settled, and it was agreed that neither party should pay any costs, and that the plaintiffs should be entitled to their deposit. The books of practice are silent as to the mode of doing this, and it may therefore be useful to state here that it is necessary to present a petition, with the consent of the opposite party's solicitor thereto, whereon an order is drawn up directing the registrar to return the deposit. The following is the form of such a petition:"1867. B. No. 20. In Chancery. Between A. B. and C. D., plaintiffs, and E. F. and G. H., defendants. To the Right Honourable the Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain. The humble petition of the above-named plaintiffs, A. B. and C. D. Showeth, that by a decree or decretal order made on the hearing of the above-mentioned cause by his honour the V.-C. M. on the day of 1867, it was ordered that the bill of complaint filed by your petitioners in this Honourable Court in the above cause should stand dismissed out of this Honourable Court, with costs to be taxed and paid by your petitioners. That a petition of appeal and re-hearing was preferred unto your lordship by your petitioners in the month of 1867, which petition of appeal was duly set down to be heard before your lordship on the day of 1867, and the sum of £20 was then deposited with the registrar by your petitioners. That your petitioners are now desirous of withdrawing the said appeal. Your petitioners therefore humbly pray your lordship that they may be at liberty to withdraw the said petition of appeal and rehearing. And that the sum of £20 deposited with the registrar on setting down the said petition of appeal may be returned to your petitioners or to Mr. their solicitor. And your petitioners

will ever pray," &c. At the foot of the petition was the following: "We consent to the prayer of the above petition.-Y. and Z., solicitors for the above-named defendants."

AUTHORITY TO EXECUTORS TO SELL-Death of oneEffect of Lord St. Leonards' Act-A testator appointed A. and B. executors of his will (dated in 1863), and authorised them to sell his freehold estates, and directed that they should, out of the proceeds, pay certain legacies therein specified. There was no receipt clause, and no words indicating that the sale might be made by the survivor. In fact, the above statement comprised the whole contents of the will. A. and B. both survived the testator and proved the will, but before any sale was made A. died, leaving B. him surviving. The heir-at-law was unknown, and a sale was made with a view to payment of the legacies, which were larger in amount than the property was worth, and consequently than the purchase money. The purchaser was anxious to have the property, if he could obtain a reasonably good title, and his counsel gave the following opinion thereon :"The will gave to the late A. and B. no estate, but merely a common law authority, or power of sale over such estate exerciseable by them, and there can be no doubt if A. were now alive, a good assurance conferring a legal estate could have been made to the purchaser. But as the power is evidently given to A. and B. nominatim, it is not exercisable by the survivor of them, the will conferring the authority on them jointly, as evidenced by the use of the words. "them" and "they." According, indeed, to the views of the late Mr. Hargrave (note to Co. Litt. 113a), the authority, though even nominatim, being to the parties in their character of executors, is exerciseable by the sole survivor, but this is not generally acquiesced in and cannot therefore be implicitly relied on. If any authorities were requisite for the above conclusion the following (among others) might be referred to. Co. Litt. 113a; Sugden's Pow. 126, 128, 8th ed.; 2 Preston's Abstracts, 250, 253, 254, 263; Lane v. Debenham, 11 Hare, 188; Forbes v. Peacock, 11 Sim, 152; 11 Mees & W. 630. The will clearly intends that the legacies should. be paid out of the proceeds of the sale thereby authorised; this, therefore, constituted a charge of the legacies on the estate. Now the 22 & 23 Vict. c. 35, contains provisions enabling sales to be made by devisees in trust and executors; sect. 14 applies to the case of a charge where the whole charged estate is devised to trustees without any express provision for the raising of the sum charged out of the devised estate, in which case the devisees in trust are to raise the sum charged by sale or mortgage. The 16th section provides for the case of a testator who, having created such a charge as in section 14, has not devised the charged hereditaments in such terms as that his whole interest became vested in any trustees or trustee; it provides that the executors for the time being shall have the like power of