ditors by this kind of misconduct on the part of sheriffs officers. As regards the County Courts the position of things is in many respects even worse, and the breach of duty of the officers of some County Court bailiffs is of a gross character in this respect. There are many solicitors who, before advising a client to incur the final expenditure of a judgment summons in a County Court with a view to a committal, are obliged to consider the chances of the warrant getting into the hands of an officer who will accept a bribe, resulting in the creditor being deprived of the only remaining remedy open to him. No doubt, under the earlier statutes regulating the office of sheriff, provision is made for dealing with such offences, but what is needed is a more simple and a more expeditious remedy, which would apply as well to high bailiffs' officers as to sheriffs' officers. In fact such officers should be liable to be dealt with in a summary way before justices. There might also be a concurrent remedy by summons at judges' chambers and before County Court registrars, calling upon the officer, after the lapse of a reasonable time from the delivery to him of the writ or warrant, to prove upon oath the efforts he has made to enforce the process, and the reason for his non-success] At present judgment creditors are at the mercy of a body of men, some of of whom do not hesitate to use their important offices for promoting their own pecuniary interests, duties which in many cases are relegated to them by those who should themselves personally make inquiries, instead of deputing men to do so who have no interest and no inclination to properly perform the duty. ALTHOUGH Order LXII. provides that nothing in the rules under the Judicature Acts shall affect the practice or procedure in divorce or other matrimonial causes, it is unfortunate that there are so many differences of practice in minor matters and in the mode of conducting business in the Divorce Court, on the one hand, and in the High Court of Justice (excluding divorce business) on the other. For instance, Order LVII., r. 2, of the Rules of the Supreme Court, provides, that where any limited time less than six days is allowed for doing any act, Sunday (among other days) shall not be reckoned in the computation of such limited time. On the other hand, as regards divorce business the practice is not to reckon Sunday in the eight days allowed to respondents and co-respondents within which to appear to a citation. Then again, unless Sunday is the last day for appearance to a writ of summons it must of course be reckoned as one of the eight days within which the defendant is allowed to enter an appearance. There should certainly be uniformity in simple matters of practice of this kind. THE forty-second half-yearly general meeting of the members of the Solicitors' Benevolent Association took place at the Law Institution, Chancery-lane, on Wednesday last, Mr. Henry S. Wasbrough, the president of the society in the chair. The halfyearly report is satisfactory; 108 new members have joined the society during the past six months, of whom 91 are annual members. The funds of the society are steadily on the increase, and great credit is due to the secretary of the society (Mr Eiffe) for his management of its affairs. The annual festival takes place on 16th June, at Richmond, Lord Justice Baggallay presiding. TO-DAY we publish the proceedings at the annual general meeting of the members of the Associated Provincial Law Societies, to which association we referred in a recent issue, but which report we were compelled to hold over, owing to pressure on our space. We print also the annual report of the committee of this valuable association. Accompanying the report is a useful list, giving information as to all the existing country law societies prepared by the hon. secretary (Mr. Thomas Marshall, M.A., of Leeds) who is also a member of the Council of the Chief Law Society. We gather from the annual report that the Law Society of Hull is about to be incorporated, making thirteen country law societies which have received certificates of incorporation under the Companies Acts. The observations in the report as to the need for the council of the chief society to have regard to the position of a country law society, when selecting extraordinary members under the Supplemental Charter of 1873, have our fullest approval. The terms of the report, as to "Land Registration," County Courts Jurisdiction,' ," "Professional Remuneration," and Agency in Treasury Prosecutions," will be read with interest by members of the solicitors' profession. 66 99 66 WE have received several letters from country solicitors, who practise in courts of quarter sessions and before courts of petty sessions, calling our attention to an apparent difference of opinion between the view entertained by Mr. H. T. Cole, M.P., the learned recorder of Plymouth, and that taken by Mr. Serjeant Cox, the learned recorder of Portsmouth, in regard to the circumstances under which solicitors can claim to be heard as advocates before courts of quarter sessions. In our issue of the 19th ult., we reported an application by Mr. W. Adams, a solicitor of Plymouth, to the recorder of that borough, to be heard as an advocate. The learned recorder, in his reply to the application, was not as courteous as he might have been, and is reported to have said: so long as a sufficient number of counsel attend, they have a preaudience, and no other person is entitled to appear." But if this is the actual expression used by the learned recorder, it is manifestly inconsistent, for a pre-audience in favour of one class of men implies a restricted right of audience in favour of another class; so that it cannot be said no other person but a barrister is entitled to appear. Mr. Cole directed the would-be advocate not to interrupt the business of the sessions again. When Mr. Ford of Portsmouth applied to the recorder of that borough (Mr. Serjeant Cox) for permission to conduct a defence as an advocate before the court (the application was made in April 1876), the recorder listened atttentively to the arguments urged by the solicitor in support of his alleged right of audience, and having done so, the learned serjeant complimented him upon the manner in which he had pleaded the cause of solicitors, but refused to allow him to act as an advocate, on the ground that there were four or more barristers present, and that the question was one which ought to be dealt with by the Legislature. Our own opinion clearly is that solicitors have a right of audience before courts of quarter sessions, and that right is actually and regularly exercised in the north of England, in Cornwall, at Chichester, and in many other cities and towns in England and Wales; and throughout Ireland solicitors act as advocates before courts of quarter sessions. The matter is one of those inter-professional questions which is very difficult of adjustment. But on public grounds it is not easy to see what can be said in favour of excluding a solicitor from audienec who is instructed to appear on behalf of an accused person before a court of quarter sessions. The remarks made by Mr. Cole, Q.C., upon the subject will be found on page 456 of our issue of the 19th ult., and those of Mr. Serjeant Cox in the LAW TIMES of 15th April, 1876, page 432, and our remarks upon the application to him will be found on page 429 of that number. The application to the Recorder of Portsmouth was made at the express request of the hon. secretary of the Legal Practitioners' Society. 66 AGAIN (for the second time) Sir William Barttelot has brought before the House of Commons the question of the extent to which persons intending to enter into articles of clerkship to solicitors are by certain judges-exempted from passing the The Home Secretary preliminary examination. in his reply to the gallant member appears to have avoided the chief purpose of the inquiry. What was the practice?" asked Sir W. Barttelott. Look at the 11th section of the Solicitors' Act 1877 in effect replied Mr. Cross. The terms of a particular section of an Act of Parliament are one thing, the practice in applying the provisions of the section is often and certainly is so in this case quite another thing. However, Sir William moved for a return on the subject, which was granted by the Government, and when this interesting document is published, we shall again refer to Sir W. Barttelott's interrogation. Treasury Solicitor to say, as he has recently said to a solicitor, that all his agent's charges must be disallowed in the particular case the ground being that he was not consulted before they were incurred. DURING the past week two cases came before the learned judge at the Bow County Court, in which Mr. Edward James Elliott appeared for some of the parties as their solicitor. Upon the first case being called on, Mr. Tijou, the registrar's clerk, informed his Honour that Mr. Elliott was not a solicitor, and that he had used the name of Mr. Foster, solicitor, 83, Gracechurch-street.-His Honour (to Mr. Elliott): What authority have you for using Mr. Foster's name?-Mr. Elliott: His authority. I'm paid by him, and he would have been here this morning to conduct the case but for an important engagement.-Mr. Tijou then told his Honour that he had seen Mr. Foster's clerk, and that he was prepared to swear that Mr. Elliott was not in the employ of Mr. Foster.-His Honour said as Mr. Foster's name had been used without his authority the proceedings were altogether irregular, and he should decline to hear the cases. They would therefore both be struck out, and the defendant's costs of the day allowed. We wish all learned county court judges would deal in this summary way with persons who, by misrepresentation, foist themselves upon the public. Great credit is apparently due to Mr. Tijou, the learned registrar's clerk, for his action in this case. If the facts are correctly reported, Mr. Foster (the solicitor whose name was improperly made use of) has an effectual remedy under the 12th section of the Solicitors Act 1874. ON Tuesday last there was a sitting of the select committee of the House of Commons appointed to consider the Land Titles and Transfer Bill. The Lord Chancellor was examined at some length. We can only hope that before the deliberations of this committee are concluded those numerous solicitors throughout the country, who before all other witnesses are the best able to place valuable testimony before the committee, will be invited to ofler themselves as witnesses. BEYOND doubt when one finds oneself in the middle of the long passages on the first and second floors in that part of the Palace of Justice wherein are situate the chambers of the Chancery registrars, the Chancery taxing masters, and the offices o the Masters in Lunacy, the passages are found not to be light enough, but a very simple remedy is at hand for making them much lighter. At present all the doors on both sides of these passages have wooden panelling. If this panelling—as regards the upper parts of the doors-were taken away and ground glass substituted, it would undoubtedly be found to work a great improvement, and the costs of which would be insignificant. THE learned hon. secretary of the Justices' Clerks Society calls our attention to the fact that the Prosecution of Offences Bill contains a provision that only barristers shall be eligible for the offices proposed to be created by the measure, A like proposal was originally inserted in Lord Selborne's Land Titles and Transfer Bill of 1874; but, by the exertions of certain solicitors (the few among the many) a more equitable view was taken by the learned law lord, and the proposed registrarships were thrown open to barristers and solicitors alike, fitness for the office, and not the accident of the particular branch of the profession to which a man belonged, being made the test. It will surely be the same in regard to the Prosecution of Offences Bill, but if otherwise solicitors will have themselves to blame. LAST DAY OF PROOF. BEAVAN (Samuel), Glescombe-court, Glascombe, Radnor, Esq. May 24; Tatham and Proctor, solicitors. 36, Lincoln's-inn-fields, Middlesex. May 29; V.C. H., at one o'clock. PICKERING (Ann.), Middle-street, Scotswood-road, Newcastle-upon-Tyne. May 9; Thos. Forster, solicitor, Newcastle-upon-Tyne. May 19; V.C. B., at twelve o'clock. APPOINTMENTS UNDER THE JOINT-STOCK WINDING-UP ACTS. MR. DODDS (solicitor), M.P., has recently asked a question in the House of Commons, as to which solicitors are much interested. Some six months ago, we directed attention in these columns to an order of the Lord Chancellor addressed to the CREDITORS UNDER ESTATES IN CHANCERY. County Court Judges, directing them, when they order the prosecution of a bankrupt under the criminal clause of the Bankruptcy Act, to make it part of the order that the trustee should employ the Solicitor of the Treasury. It was to the terms of this order that Mr. Dodds directed the attention of the chief law officer of the Crown, and the reply of the latter showed that the reason for this remarkable direction (which is being used by the Treasury Barrister or rather Solicitor, as an instrument with which to drive solicitors who are employed by him into accepting agency terms), was that the 17th section of the Debtors Act 1869 provides that the costs of such prosecutions are to be borne and paid as in the case of felonies; and that as there are frequently extra costs, it was thought that the Treasury should have control over all the costs as they have to pay the extra costs. The reason appears to us to be highly unsatisfactory. The taxing master at the Crown office and not the Solicitor of the Treasury, is the proper person to determine what are costs and charges which should be allowed to a conntry solicitor and what are not, for it is open to the LIVERPOOL AND LONDON GUARANTEE AND ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY.-Creditors to send in by May 31, their names and addresses, and the particulars of their claims, and the names and addresses of their solicitors (if any), to F. F. Buffen, Wool Exchange, Coleman-street, London, the official liquidators of the said company. June 12, at the chambers of the M. R., at twelve o'clock, is the time appointed for hearing and adjudicating upon such claims. SERVIAN COPPER AND IRON COMPANY (LIMITED).-Petition for winding-up to be heard May 9, before V.C. H. SAUNDERSFOOT AND TENBY COLLIERIES CO. (LIMITED.)-Creditors to send in by May 28, their names and addresses, and the particulars of their claims, and the names and addresses of their solicitors (if any), to A. A. James, 110, Cannon-street, London, the official liquidator of the said company. June 11, at the chambers of the M.R., at eleven o'clock, is the time appointed for hearing and adjudicating upon such claims. WATERLOO CLUB (LIMITED).-Petition for winding-up heard May 9, before V.C. M. CREDITORS UNDER 22 & 23 VICT. c. 35. Last day of Claim, and to whom Parti culars to be sent. ATKINSON (Ann), Helmsley, York, brewer, May 30; Hugh W. Pearson, solicitor, Helmsley. ATKINSON (Naomi R.), 3, Halkin-street, Belgravia, Middlesex, widow. May 31; Wm. and T. F. Allison, solicitors, Louth, Lincolns. BELLAMY (Wm.), Much Fawley, Townhope, Hereford, farmer. June 1; Wm. A. Bellamy, Fawley Court, near Ross. BINGHAM (Elizabeth), Eckington, Derby. June 21; Alderson, Son, and Dust, solicitors, Eckington. Bowis (Robt.), Boston, Lincoln, gentleman. May 16; J. Bassitt, solicitor, Wainfleet and Spilsby. BRIDGES (Thos. C.), The Lodge, Ludlow, Salop, Esq. May : Abbott, Jenkins, and Co., solicitors, 8, New-inn, Middlesex. BLAND (Wm.), Helmsley, York, brewer. May 30; Hugh W. Pearson, solicitor, Helmslev. CARINS (Geo.), Heaton, Beker, Newcastle-upon-Tyne. gentleman. Aug. 1; J. and J. E. Joel, solicitors, 1, Newgate-street, Newcastle-upon-Tyne. CASTELL (Wm. S.), 30, Charlwood-road, Putney. Surrey, gentleman. May 31; Ellis and Ellis, solicitors, 16, Springgardens, Westminster. DUNN (Jno.), Bromley, Kent, upholsterer. May 20; Mrs. DAVIES (Mary). Kington, Hereford. June 12; Bodenham, FOSTER (Mary), Lower Wortley, Leeds, widow. June 1; GARDNER (Jas.), Lyndshall, Hereford, gentleman. June 12; Bodenham, Temple, and Philpin, solicitors, Kington, Hereford. GRAHAM (Benjamin), Moldgreen, Huddersfield, builder and contractor. June 30; Ramsden and Sykes, solicitors, John William-street, Huddersfield. HEARNDEN (Richd.), 2. Hanley-road, late of Hamor Lodge, Hornsey-rise, Middlesex. May 30; A. C. Poole, 14, Wakefield-street, Regent-square, Middlesex. HAYWARD (Thos.), Frittenden, Kent, farmer. May 13; Hinds and Son, solicitors, Goudhurst. HESWOOD (Chas.), Gas-street, St. Ebbe, Oxford, engineer and manager of gas works. June 23; J. Jelf, solicitor, 7, Waterloo-street, Birmingham. HAMILTON (Jas.), 15, Charles-street, Preston, Scotch draper. June 1; Wm. Banks, solicitor, 42, Lune-street, Preston. HAMILTON (Jno.), formerly of Lune-street, Preston, draper and tea dealer, late of Cornwall Farm, Kirkland, farmer, both in Lancaster. June 1; W. Banks, solicitor, 42, Lunestreet, Preston. HODGSON (Elizabeth), Thurmaston, Leicester. May 24; E. Miles, solicitor, 20, Friar-lane, Leicester. HULSE (Dorothy), Burton-on-the-Wolds, Leicester, spinster June 1; Woolley, Son, and Beardsley, solicitors, Lough borough. HODGSKIN (Joanna A.), formerly of 4, Park-villas, Tunbridge Wells, late of 28, Grove Hill-road, Tunbridge Wells, and also of Shirrenden, all in Kent, spinster. June 2; Howard and Co., solicitors, 31, John-street, Bedford-row, Middle sex. HOLLIS (Wm. P.), Charval Farm, Sonning, Berks, farmer. June 30; Blandy and Witherington, solicitors, Friarstreet. Reading. JONES (Benjamin), late of Caeffair-place, Llanelly, Carmarthen, and formerly of Llanidloes, Montgomery, gentleman. June 7: S. Home, solicitor, Vaughan-street, Llanelly. LAWSON (Mary), 1, Church-street, Durham. May 15; Fredk. MOODY (Juliana S.), Chesterfield House, Tunbridge Wells, MACKIN (Jno.), Hornsea, Holderness, East Riding, York, NEWINGTON (Mary Ann), Cliffe. Lewes, Sussex, widow. PEEK (Wm. B.). 58, Broad-street, and 111, White Ladies road, Bristol, wine and spirit merchant. and Co., solicitors, 1, Lion-chambers, Bristol. POTTER (Elizabeth), Hornsea, Holderness, East Riding, York, widow. June 2; Blderidge and Stephenson, solicitors, 3, Cogan-chambers, Bowlalley-lane, Hull. PREDDY (Wm.), St. Weonard's, Hereford, farmer. June 1; J. F. Symonds, solicitor, 15, Bridge-street, Hereford. PAGET (Thos.), Queniborough, Leicester, Esq. June 24: Woolley, Son, and Beardsley, solicitors, Loughborough. PITTOCK (Geo.), Deal, Kent. May 31; J. A. Reeves, 15, Herbert-street, Stockwell, Surrey. RATHBONE (Altred H.), 14, Junction-road, Upper Holloway, Middlesex, and Fenchurch-street and Worship-street, London, solicitor. May 31: T. H. Horwood, solicitor, 31, John-street, Bedford-row, Middlesex. ROBERTSHAW (Samuel), Farnley, Leeds, mineral viewer. RENTON (Jno.), formerly of Wellington-road, New Wortley, SMITH (Rev. Chas. L.), The Rectory, Little Canfield, Essex. SEWELL (Jno. B.), 65, Aldersgate-street, London, Crown Works, Mile End-road, and Wood Glen, Highgate, Middlesex, builder and contractor. May 31; G. E. East, solicitor, 10, Basinghall-street, London. TOMBS (Sophia). Colwall, Hereford, widow. May 27; J. L. Smith, Hawthorne Lodge, Ledbury, Hereford. WILLIAMS (Sarah), Railway hotel, Llanelly, Carmarthen. widow. June 30; H. B. White, solicitor, 41, King-street, Carmarthen. WILLIAMS (Chas.), 63, Beaufort-street, Chelsea, Middlesex, WHITEHEAD (Clara A.), 121, Forest-road, Dalston, Middle- REPORTS OF SALES. Thursday, April 21. By Messrs. C. C. and T. MOORE, at the Mart. Poplar-No. 10, Augusta-street, and No. 15, Upper Grovestreet, term 60 years-sold for £305, Commercial-road East-No. 526, copyhold-sold for £600. Friday, April 25. By MR. ROBERT REID, at the Mart. Maida-hill-No. 40, Bloomfield-road, term 62 years-sold for £800. Regent-street-No. 5, Great Marlborough-street, freehold -sold £1000. for £30:30. Nos. 46, 47, 48, and 48A, Great Marlborough-street, freehold £2920. G6-sold for £100. By Messrs. WINSTANLEY and HORWOOD, at the Mart. Walthamstow-48 plots of freehold land-sold for £1922 Tuesday, April 29. Nos. 24 and 34, Glenarm-road, term 98 years-sold for £620. No. 88, Almack-road, term 95 years-sold for £285. By Messrs. ROGERS and CHAPMAN, at the Mart, South Belgravia-No. 69 and 71, Warwick-street, term 48 years-sold for £1700. Nos. 102, 104, and 122, Warwick-street, term 54 years-sold for £2870. No. 11, Hugh-street, term 47 years-sold for £830. sold for £1720. Clapham-park-Improved ground rents of £91 per annumSouth Belgravia-Ground rents of £36 1s. 6d. per annumsold for £785. Pimlico-Improved ground rents of £69 10s. per annumsold for £1250. LAW STUDENTS' JOURNAL. Inquiries, as to Students' Societies, as to Service under Articles, as to the several Examinations, as to admission on the Roll of the Supreme Court, as to being called to the Bar, and as to taking out and renewal of solicitors' annual Certificates, should be addressed to the Editor (Law Students' Department). ABOUT twelve months ago we pointed out that while at that time a large proportion of medical students were postponed when presenting themselves for examination by the Royal College of Surgeons, the number of articled students who were rejected for the final examination before admission was at that time comparatively small. The order of things in this respect has now been reversed. At the last examination at the Royal College of Surgeons only eleven candidates out of sixty-eight were referred back to their professional studies for six months; while as regard the final examination of the Law Society a few terms back, nearly one-third of the candidates were postponed. THE following lectures and classes will be delivered and held during the ensuing week in the Lecture Hall of the Incorporated Law Society, U.K., Chancery-lane: Conveyancing Class, on Monday, 4.30 to 6 o'clock p.m.; Tuesday, ditto; Wednesday, ditto; Thursday, Conveyancing Lecture, 6 to 7 o'clock p.m. INTERMEDIATE Examinations will be held in the hall of the society, Chancery-lane, London, on the following days in 1879, viz.: Thursday, the 19th June, at ten; Thursday, the 6th Nov., at ten. on ARTICLES of clerkship (whether original or supplemental) dated any day during May must be enrolled at the Petty Bag Office, Chancery-lane, on or before the same day in the month of November next, and when articles are enrolled May they must be entered at the Law Instituand registered on any day during the month of tion on or before the same day in the month of August next. See 6 & 7 Vict. c. 73, ss. 8 and 9, and 23 & 24 Vict. c. 127, s. 7. Failure to comply with these statutory requirements often entails a loss of time upon articled students. By Messrs. E. and H. LUMLEY, at the Mart. Oxford-street-No. 129; term 35 years, but subject to the life interest of a lady aged 72 years-sold for £1820. By Messrs. DEBENHAM, TEWSON, and FARMER, at the Mart. Regent's-park-No. 20, York-terrace, with stabling, term 42 years-sold for £3330. Eleven £10 shares, paid-up, in Langham Hotel Company-tor of the Supreme Court must, six weeks at least sold for £335. -sold for £441. Twenty £10 shares, paid-up, in Charing-cross Hotel Company-sold for £336. 107 shares of £5 each, paid-up, in Brighton Hotel Company Twenty-five shares of £10 each, £6 paid, in Langham Hotel Company-sold for £315. Twenty-two five per cent. preference shares of £10 each, in Brighton Aquarium Company-sold for £176. By Messrs. ROGERS and CHAPMAN, at the Mart. Eccleston-square-No. 3 and 5, Hugh-street, term 22 yearssold for £670. Belgrave-square-Nos. 23 and 26 Lowndes-mews, term 45 years-sold for £2420. for £1680. No. 27, St. George's-road, term 54 years-sold for £1630. term 52 years-sold for £2800. EVERY gentleman applying to be admitted a solici before the first day of the month in which he shall propose to be admitted, cause to be delivered at the Petty Bag Office a notice in writing, signed by himself, containing a statement of his then place of abode and the name or names and place or places of abode of the person or persons with whom he has served as an articled clerk during the continuance of his articles of clerkship, and containing, in addition thereto, a statement of his place or places of abode or service for the last preceding twelve months, and the clerk of the Petty Bag reduces all such notices into an alphabetical list under convenient heads, and, three weeks at least before the first day of the month named in such notices, affixes such list in some conspicuous place in the Petty Bag Office, and also at the time aforesaid furnishes the secretary of the Incorporated Law Society of the United Kingdom with copies of the said list. A NOTICE issued from the Petty Bag Office, in April 1877, requires that no assignment of articles be made, but that further articles be entered into, reciting that the original contract has been put an master, or as the case may be). end to by mutual consent (or by the death of the WHERE articles expire between 10th Jan. and 15th April, candidates may be examined in January; if between 14th April and 22nd May, 21st May and 2nd Nov., in June; and if between candidates may be examined in April; if between 1st Nov. and 11th Jan., in November; or, of course, at any subsequent examination. Fortytwo days' notice at least is necessary for these examinations, the same to be calculated up to the first day of the examination. See No. 23 of the new regulations under the Solicitors Act 1877. THE INNS OF COURT. As the result of the Easter General Examination, the Council of Legal Education have awarded to the following students certificates that they have satisfactorily passed a public examination : the rooms of the Leeds Law Institute, with J. The first prize (given by himself) for the essays on Lewis Robert Abbey-Williams. Philip Foster SHEFFIELD DISTRICT LAW STUDENTS' maintain an action against the editor?" In the support of both sides. A vote of thanks to the WOLVERHAMPTON LAW STUDENTS' SOCIETY. The following students passed a satisfactory LAW STUDENTS DEBATING SOCIETY. THIS Society met as usual at the Law Institution, Chancery-lane, on the 29th ult.; Mr. S. Garrett, M.A., in the chair. The question for debate was, "Is the tendency of modern times towards the obliteration of national distinctions in Europe?" Mr. J. A. Neale, B.A., opened the discussion in the negative, and this side was supported in the debate that ensued by Mr. Ellis and Mr. Napier. Mr. Lloyd Jones maintained the affirmative, and also Mr. Vansommer, who deprecated the fact, and Mr. Garrett, who considered it an unmitigated good. At the conclusion of the debate, the opener replied, and on the question being put to the meeting, the majority of votes were given for the affirmative. LEEDS LAW STUDENTS' SOCIETY. THE last meeting of the third session of the above society was held at 7.00 p.m. on Monday last, in UNITED LAW STUDENTS' SOCIETY. of three. Students' Queries. READING FOR THE INTERMEDIATE-I intend going in for the intermediate examination of January 1881, and see by your TIMES of to-day that you consider most probably, Stephen's Commentaries will be taken that think I might read an old edition of the commentaries year. After finishing Williams on Real Property do you (3rd) until the one is published in March next year, or would you advise me to get a more recent edition now, and the new one in due course? It seems rather hard to have to buy two. ENQUIRER. [We must not be understood to say that Stephen's would not be prudent to buy any edition at present.- HONOURS EXAMINATION.-I have read with much pleasure the new rules made by the Incorporated Law Society for the Honours Examination, which I very cordially welcome, as doubtless it will stimulate students to prosecute their studies with stricter diligence, when they know that their exertions will be rewarded at the finish with such honorary distinction as the new rules provide. So far so good, but unfortunately for your humble correspondent, and all those students who happen to have been reading for degrees and from other causes have delayed entering the ranks of the legal Profession. New rule 6 will shortly step in and check their hitherto successful career; it says that "the Honours Examination shall only be open to candidates who have not completed their twenty-sixth year." Now, I venture to think sir, that already your sympathy is with me, also that of all my fellow students, who will, I think, agree with me, that it is most unfair that those who have completed their twenty-sixth year should be wholly debarred from competing in future for honours-it is really depriving us of the small privilege which we distinction between the two sets of candidates, but I now possess. It may be perfectly right to draw some would suggest that all students should be eligible to compete for honours, and in fact have the same privileges of gaining honorary distinction as other students, except that I would not award to them any prize unless entitled to one of the first three prizes at the head of the first-class list. I always like to see honour given to whom honour is due. I hope this letter will bring forth other opinions, as I am persuaded that the Incorporated Law Society would, if called upon, modify their view upon this rule. PLACITATOR. Suppose I enter for the final and honours examinations respectively held in the same week, (1) would failing to obtain honours prevent my passing the final? or, on the other hand, (2) would the answera given at the honours examination assist the candidate to pass his final? that is to say, if he had not by his answers at the final obtained the requisite marks to pass it. ARTICLED CLERK. (1) Certainly not. (2) We should say not, it would involve a departure from usual practice.-ED. STUD.'S DEPT.] COURT OF APPEAL. Ex parte BROWN; Re YATES. Horton Smith, Q.C., and Alexander Young, for the appellants, contended upon the evidence that the registrar's order was wrong, and also urged that the Court of Bankruptcy had no jurisdiction over third parties who had not submitted to its jurisdiction, but had been brought there against their will. The matter ought to have been dealt with by the ordinary tribunals. E. C. Willis, for the trustee, was not heard. Their LORDSHIPS held that upon the facts proved the registrar had come to a right conclusion, and they dismissed the appeal with costs. JAMES, L.J. added: It may be as well to repeat that where a deed is impugned upon the ground that it is void by reason of the bankruptcy law, and not upon a ground which would have been available against the bankrupt himself, such a course is pre-eminently one which the Court of Bankruptcy should decide itself, and should not leave to the ordinary tribunals. MR. J. T. ABDY, LL.D., will deliver a Gresham Lecture, on Law, in the Gresham College, Basinghall-street, E.C., at six p.m. on the 27th, 28th. 29th, and 30th of May. COUNTY COURTS. SOUTHPORT COUNTY COURT. (Before J. F. COLLIER, Esq., Judge.) CARR AND WIFE . GEO. EVANS (Secretary of the Southport Permanent £50 Money Society). Illegal society-Partnership-Nonsuit. THIS was an action in which Dr. O'Feeley, of Liverpool, instructed by Mr. Jones, Liverpool, ppeared for the plaintiff, who sought to recover ertain money paid to the above society. Threlfall was for the defendant. The case was before the last court, and adjourned to allow the plaintiff to amend particulars. George Evans, the defendant, on being sworn, said: I have been a member of the Southport Permanent £50 Money Society for four years, and at present act as secretary. The objects of the society are to enable the members to save and invest their money on terms mutually advantageous. The members pay subscriptions to the society, and the money paid in is "sold" to the members. There is no interest paid on subscriptions, but the society pays dividends. The profits are divided among the members My explanation of "selling" is this-If I wish to have £5 I should bid for it. This is done by ballot. If I offered 5s. then I should get paid to me £15s., and on that amount I should pay interest at the rate of 5 per cent. The person authorised to collect subscriptions from members of the society and give receipts is either the secretary or the president. Have been secretary of the society since last September. The secretary in March 1876 was John Dimond, and William Vaughan was the president, and they continued in office up to the time I was elected. Subscriptions are received at the monthly meetings of the members. The money is given to the secretary, who pays it in to the treasurer. Six members constitute a committee. The society was not a certified benefit society, and consisted of twentyfive members. Dr. O'Feeley thought on that evidence he was entitled to an adjournment. The society sold the money of the members. The answers given were very material, and he should have to examine the books. Threlfall pointed out that it was an illegal society under the Lottery Act, the Joint Stock Companies Act, and in common law. His HONOUR said if there were more than twenty members it would be an illegal company, but he failed to see how it came under the Lottery Act. They did not sell the shares. A certain number of them met, there was a common fund, and whoever was the highest bidder got the money. There was nothing illegal in that-the money was received by those who would pay the highest interest. Dr. O'Feeley said the way he put the matter was that at the time the female plaintiff was prevailed on to join the society she did not know its nature or how it was conducted. Since then she found that it was not a legal society, and she wished to get her money back. LAW SOCIETIES. SOLICITORS' BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION. THE forty-second half-yearly general meeting of the members of this association, was held on Wednesday, April 30, at the hall of the Incorporated Law Society, Chancery-lane. H. S. Wasbrough, Esq. (of Bristol), chairman of the board, presiding. The secretary (Mr. Eiffe) having read the notice convening the meeting, and the minutes of the last half-yearly meeting, which were confirmed, the forty-second report of the board, as printed and circulated at the meeting, was agreed to be taken as read; the report was as follows: "The board of directors have the pleasure of presenting this their forty-second half-yearly report of the progress and operations of the association during the past six months. Since October last 108 gentlemen have been admitted members of the association, 17 as life, and 91 as annual members; and the total number of members enrolled is now 2554, of whom 947 are life, and 1607 annual members. Forty-three life members are also annual contributors to the association of from one to five guineas each. 66 Hoping you will forgive me for thus roubling you, I remain, my dear Mr. Janson, yours very faithfully, JOHN HOLLAMS.-F. H. Janson, Esq." (Hear, hear.) Mr. Sydney Smith, the deputy-chairman of the adoption of the report, which was accordingly board, said he had great pleasure in seconding the agreed to unanimously. A resolution of thanks to the directors and auditors for their valuable services having been moved by Mr. R. W. Wall, and seconded by Mr. J. W. Proudfoot, was passed unanimously. Mr. Clement Uvedale Price then proposed, and Mr. Wm. Beriah Brook seconded, a vote of thanks to the chairman for presiding, to which the chairman having responded, the meeting terminated. THE usual monthly meeting of the directors was held at the Hall of the Incorporated Law Society, Chancery-lane, on Thursday the 1st inst., the following being present, viz.: Mr. Desborough, The receipts of the association during the past (chairman), and Messrs. Tylee, Carpenter, Burges, Collisson, Parkin, Sawtell, Scadding, Steward, half-year, with the balance of £355 19s. 4d. remaining from the previous account, have Styan, and Boodle (secretary). The report of the amounted, as will be seen by the audited balance directors, to be submitted to the annual general sheet appended hereto, to £2477 2s. 6d.; in- court on the 22nd inst., was considered and cluded in which the board have the pleasure of re-approved: one new member was elected; and Mr. porting bequests to the association from two Boodle, who has been secretary for upwards of solicitors, who were members; one of £500 from twenty-two years, resigned that office, his resignathe late William Spours, Esq., of Charlton Hall, tion being accepted with extreme regret, and the Alnwick; and one of £50 from the late John directors appointed Mr. A. B. Carpenter, of Smale Torr, Esq., of Bedford-row, London. In 3, Elm-court, Temple, to be his successor. have exercised the power confided to them under THE LEGAL PRACTITIONERS' SOCIETY. respect of the first-mentioned bequest, the board the fourth rule, by conferring an honorary life THE fourth annual general meeting of the memmembership upon the executor of the late Mr.bers of this society was held at the Inns of Court Spours, Mr. William John Carr, solicitor, of Aln- Hotel. Lincoln's-inn-fields, London, on Wedneswick. day, 23rd April, W. T. Charley, Esq., M. P., D.C.L. (Common Serjeant of London), in the chair. "A sum of £690 has been distributed in relief; £555 in grants of from £30 to £50, among six 'Members' class: applicants of the primary, or and £435 in grants of from £5 to £20 among Non thirty-six applicants of the secondary, or Members' class. "A sum of £1178 8s. 9d. has been invested in purchase of Three per Cent. Reduced Stock; and at the date of closing the account, a balance of £298 11s. 9d. remained with the Union Bank of London, and £15 in the hands of the secretary. The entire invested fund of the association now consists of £8000 consols; £4237 0s. 6d. Reduced Three Per Cents. ; £8000 Indian Five Per Cents. : £11,000 India Four Per Cents.: £4207 London and North-Western Railway Four Per Cent. Perpetual Debenture Stock; and £250 London and St. Katharine Docks Four Per Cent. Debenture Stock; making a total of £35.694 0s. 6d. stock, and producing annual dividends amounting to £1356 10s. The board regret to have to report the decease of a colleague during the half-year-Mr. George Christopher Roberts, of Hull, in whose place at the board they have elected Mr. Henry John Ware, of York. Mr. CHARLES FORD, the honorary secretary of the society, read a number of letters, mostly from country members of the society, stating the reasons which prevented their attendance; also one from the president (Mr. William Gordon, M.P., solicitor) expressing his great regret at not being able to attend on account of ill-health, and one from Mr. W. Grantham, Q.C., M.P., stating that he was prevented from attending. The annual report was then read by the hon. secretary. This was published in our last issue.] Mrs. Eliza Carr said that previous to her being that the Right Hon. The Lord Justice Sir Richard porated Law Society, U.K., were wholly inade married, she paid £16 into the society through a Mr. Greener at 10s. per month, and the receipts produced are what she received while paying the money. She never saw the rooms of the society, but had seen them since she demanded her money. Had no knowledge as to how the money was dealt with. Never attended the meetings of the society. Did not know the members that constituted it. Had received interest on the money paid in to the amount of 25s. Had never demanded payment of this money herself, but her husband had. By Threlfall.-Mr. and Mrs. Greener were living with her at the time the money was paid in. Mr. Greener was a personal friend of hers, and he persuaded her to join. He brought his interest home one night, and said it was a good thing, and he pursuaded her to join. She gave him 10s. on the following month, and became a member. Never asked for the rules of the society, or troubled about it, thinking it was safe. At that time Mr. Greener was connected with the society, but could not say in what capacity he acted. Was married on Christmas Day 1878. Had received interest for the money, but had not signed any receipt for the money. Had received 10s. and 158. interest, but had not received two 10s. and one 158. Mr. W. Vaughan, president of the society, said the complainant had paid 10s. 4d. for five and onetenth of a share. She was paid a dividend. When a loan was sold the highest bidder got it. The dividends were paid out of the profits arising from the interest given for the money. In answer to Dr. O'Feeley, witness swore that Mr. Greener took a copy of the rules away which was handed to him by the secretary. His HONOUR held that plaintiff was a partner in the society, therefore he ordered a nonsuit, with costs. "The board have great pleasure in announcing Baggallay has kindly consented to preside at the ensuing anniversary festival of the association, which will take place at the Star and Garter Hotel, Richmond, Surrey, on Monday, the 16th June next. They very earnestly hope that there will be a numerous attendance of members at the dinner to support the right honourable president; and that, aided by the kind and hearty co-operation of their brother members generally, the association will gain through the approaching festival a large accession of funds and new members. (Signed on behalf of the board), HENRY S. WASBROUGH, Chairman." "9th April 1879. The CHAIRMAN, in moving the adoption of the report, said that, as compared with the correspond ing periods of previous years, the result of the last half-year's work showed a decided progress, and he thought they had reason to congratulate themselves upon the position of the society, which he hoped would be still further improved by means of the approaching annivery festival, to be held at the Star and Garter, Richmond, on the 16th June next, when he trusted that the members of the association would assemble numerously to cordially support the president. He had great pleasure in reading the following letter, which had just been placed in his hands, from the president of the Incorporated Law Society:"Mincing-lane, April 28, 1879.-My dear Mr. Janson, I fear I must conclude that your attempt societies is not likely to be successful. Much as to effect an amalgamation of the two benevolent I regret this, I am not disposed longer to abstain from sending my contribution to the Solicitors' Benevolent Association, and therefore I venture to request you to hand the enclosed (cheque for £100) to the proper representative of that society. The learned CHAIRMAN, having expressed his regret at the absence of the president of the society, congratulated the meeting upon the fact mentioned in the report, that one of the principal objects which the society had in view had to a great extent been accomplished, viz., the suppression of unqualified practitioners. The vigilance of the society, and of the fourteen law societies affiliated to it, could not be exerted in a worthier cause than in suppressing these "social pests who had been preying, not only upon both branches of the Profession, but upon the public at large. The powers for that purpose, possessed by the Incorquate and unworkable, but the 12th section of the Attorneys and Solicitors Act 1974, which this society carried in opposition to the mistaken action of the promoters of that Act, provided a simple remedy which had been found most efficacious. It was matter of congratulation also that, in the last session of Parliament, an enactment had been carried, the effect of which would be to hold in check unscrupulous money-lenders who induced the unwary to give bills of sale over their furniture and property without explaining to them the nature and effect of those dangerous instruments. The enactment requiring the attestation by a solicitor whose duty it would be to state the nature and effect of the document to the person giving it would, he trusted, have the effect of protecting the unfortunate and impecunious from hastily giving bills of sale, and getting sold up by their creditors. Turning to another subject the chairman said it was impossible to disguise the fact which was openly stated on the report that there was a division of opinion on the council with regard to the important question of allowing solicitors of ten years' standing to become barristers upon being struck off the rolls, and passing the final examination for a call to the Bar. The result of that division was somewhat amusing, all the barristers present voting against the resolution, and all the solicitors in favour of it. (Laughter.) It so happened that Mr. Edwin Low, a well known city solicitor, was in the chair on the occasion, and gave a casting vote in favour of the proposal. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) The consequence was that the details of Mr. Godfrey's Bill were settled by a special committee appointed for that purpose. He feared there was no doubt that that division of opinion upon the council accurately reflected the division of opinion in the Profession upon the same subject, and it appeared to him that it rendered the position of barristers connected with the society hardly tenable. In those circumstances he would throw out a suggestion which occurred to him, namely, that the barristers connected with the society should withdraw from it and form a Bar Association analogous to the Legal Practitioners' Society, and then out of the two societies a joint body might be formed which would act as a kind of court of conciliation to arbitrate on interprofessional questions. Beyond doubt there were a number of burning questions awaiting solution in the discussion of which the exercise of tact and temper would be very necessary. With those introductory remarks he would call upon Mr. Low to move the first resolution. Mr. EDWIN Low then moved the adoption of the report and balance-sheet. With regard to the closing observations of the chairman, he for one would be extremely sorry that the members of the Bar should withdraw from the association. (Applause.) He could see no reason why, because there was a difference of opinion on one question, this schism should take place. He believed the society took a better standing from the fact of the connection of the Bar. (Applause.) And there were so many questions where the interests of the two branches of the Profession were common interests-and indeed he might add they were the interests of the public also-that he believed it would be a positive misfortune if the suggestion of the learned chairman were carried out. It was matter of congratulation that the number of members had been sustained. It must be remembered, however, mere numbers did not fairly represent the position of the society, because the fourteen law societies who were subscribers embraced a very considerable proportion of local professional men. The financial position of the society was also a matter of congratulation, and although the past year had not been one of action, still it would be found that the report touched upon a great many subjects of professional interest and importance, showing that the council had not been idle in the discharge of their duties. (Applause.) It was also satisfactory to see that the law students had supported the association in the way that they had; because just as in educating a people you must begin with the children, so it was through the law students that the training up of a class of barristers and solicitors, who would reflect honour upon the profession to which they belonged, must be effected. Mr. FREDERICK TOMKINS, LL.D., in seconding the motion for the adoption of the report, said it afforded him the greatest satisfaction as a member of the Bar to meet with gentlemen in the other branch of the Profession who were members of this society. He had the honour to be on the council, and having met those gentlemen for discussion from time to time he was prepared to say that by their marked ability they had shown themselves very well qualified for the position of advocates in any of Her Majesty's courts. He was one of those unfortunate barristers who opposed the recommendation referred to by the chairman (laughter), and he wished to say that it was from no feeling on the part of the Bar that gentlemen of the other branch of the Profession would not be qualified or were not in every respect worthy to discharge the duties of advocates, that they had voted against the proposal; it was entirely on public grounds. It was because from the members of the Bar had to be selected Her Majesty's judges in various parts of the Empire that they believed, rightly or wrongly, the special professional training was required which was obtained by barristers, perhaps even during those years when they were waiting for practice at the Bar. He had had the opportunity in other countries, and especially in Canada, of seeing the way in which the American system worked. There gentlemen were first admitted as solicitors, and in their second year they were admitted as members of the Bar proper. But in point of fact all the great legal firms were conducted by two persons, one of whom did the advocacy, the other the office work. Whether that state of things would ever come into practice in England he could not say; but this he knew, that members of the Bar were very tenacious of their ancient privileges (Hear, hear, from Mr. Ford), and suspicious of any modifications whatever even in matters affecting the interests of their own inns. He was on the committee of the Bar of Lincoln's-inn, and proposed some improvements with regard to internal administration, and had occasion to bring the matter under the attention of the benchers. He was received with every courtesy, but when in company with a committee of twenty-three it became his duty to suggest the improvements that they desired he was ashamed to confess that "all men forsook him and fled" (laughter), and he found himself standing up alone advocating the matters which had been previously agreed upon. (Laughter.) He wished to see this question of the admission of solicitors to the bar fairly and fully discussed, and while he would be the last to desire any defection from the ranks of the Legal Practitioners Society, it might be a good thing to get members of the Bar to unite together and out of their body appoint a committee which could act jointly with the council of this society to discuss this and other inter-professional questions. The CHAIRMAN, in explanation of the suggestion which had fallen from him, said that it certainly was in contemplation by the founders of this association to have two distinct societies united by a joint committee, and the only question was one of convenience-whether they should have a body composed of solicitors and barristers sitting together at a common board, or two distinct societies conferring together as representative bodies. The experiment had now been tried for a considerable time by having solicitors and barristers at a common board, and he confessed that it had not been successful in inducing many members of the Bar to join it. The truth was members of the Bar did not care to speak out their mind in the presence of solicitors. (Laughter.) And it appeared absolutely neces sary that they should confer apart, and that the result of their deliberations should be reported to the other branch of the Profession. At the outset he had received a warning to this effect by an eminent judge, who told him that he did not think the scheme of barristers and solicitors sitting round a common table would work well. How ever, the society had certainly succeeded in carrying some important measures through Parliament, and he trusted that it would do so in the future. Mr. CHARLES FORD (the hon. sec.) said that this was a question which could not be properly or conveniently discussed on such short notice. It was rather a matter which should be well considered by the council of the society before being brought before a general meeting; for instance, the suggestion of his excellent friend, the learned Common Serjeant, took him somewhat by surprise; no notice of such a proposal had been given. He was personally strongly opposed to such a plan, and should resist it. If nothing could be done by meeting as at present, nothing could be done by meeting under any other circumstances. What was now taking place at their meeting showed that members of both branches could meet and deliberate on inter-professional questions; and if they could not do so there must be something radically wrong to account for such a discreditable state of things. (Hear, hear.) The CHAIRMAN explained that he did not sug. gest that any resolution should be come to that day. (Hear, hear.) Mr. PERRY GODFREY (Solicitor) said that events were moving so fast they appeared almost to outrun his efforts in the direction of opening the Bar to solicitors, because, instead of the two branches being kept separate and distinct, it would appear that we were travelling fast towards the state of things in Canada, the United States, and other countries, and we appeared to be almost on the eve of an amalgamation of the two branches of the Profession. This was a result which he had never advocated, nor had the hon. secretary of this society. He did not think it would work well in this country. He believed that the senior and junior branches of the Profession should be kept distinct, for after some experience he had seen how well that system worked, and he would certainly prefer briefing a member of the Bar to briefing one of his own profession. But when Government measures were extending the jurisdiction of the County Courts almost to an unlimited degree in which solicitors would have a right of audience co-equal with the Bar-(No, no, from Mr. Ford)and when in connection with the new Bankruptcy Bill the Court of Bankruptcy in which solicitors would have the right of advocacy without being compelled to instruct counsel, was about to be "made part of the High Court of Justice," and to be "attached to the Chancery division thereof" the result would be that solicitors would have the right of audience in one branch of the High Court. (Hear, hear.) These were signs of the times which showed that it was necessary for the Profession to take into consideration the question whether the two branches should be kept separate and distinct in accordance with the suggestion which he had laid before the society, or whether there should be a general amalgamation. He believed that they should be kept separate and distinct, because in law as in every other science men should begin at the bottom and rise to the top. Illustrating the existing state of things by the analogy of other professions he supposed it would be granted that officers who had seen service in the field would be less likely to make mistakes if appointed to high commands than men who had had no such training. Or taking the analogy of the Church how absurd it would be to say to a man who is eligible for a bishopric, "You must cease all preaching and other ministrations for three years before you can be made a bishop. Or, taking the case of the medical profession, a man enters that profession, passes the necessary examinations, and commences practising as a surgeon. Having practised surgery 66 for some time very successfully, and being desirous of rising in his profession, he wishes to become a consulting physician. Would it not be monstrous to say to that man, Before you can rise any higher in your profession you shall give up what you are doing; you shall so far unfit yourself for your future work-never mind what your ability may have been in passing your examinationsthat you shall go away and cease your practice for three years. (Hear, hear.) Such a thing would be ridiculous. He could not refrain in this connection from quoting a few lines of Kinglake in reference to the career of the late Sir William Gordon, of the 15th Lancers, who was wounded in the Crimea, and afterwards left the service. "It seems that upon principles analogous to those adopted by trades' unions, the sacred rights of mediocrity are maintained with a firmness which too often defeats the patient ambition of a highly-gifted soldier." He maintained that, substituting the word "lawyer" for "soldier," that sentence applied with telling force to the legal Profession. (Applause.) The instances of judges who had commenced life as solicitors afforded a strong argument in favour of the proposed reform, for some of the brightest ornaments of the Bench had commenced life as solicitors. With regard to a suggestion which has been thrown out by the chairman, he was satisfied that you could not get a society of barristers to do anything at all. The Inns of Court positively refused even to say anything upon the subject when applied to by the Law Institution. (Hear, hear.) And it was a fact which he knew from private sources that, although in answer to applications influentially supported, the Inns of Court had occasionally relaxed their rules in favour of gentlemen desirous of joining the Bar, they had never done so in the case of a solicitor. The Bill which he (Mr. Godfrey) had drafted and assisted in settling was now in the hands of one of the leading Queen's counsel in the House of Commons, who was being warmly supported by two or three influential members. Having taken up the matter, he intended to see it through to the end, and to procure either that the House of Commons should refuse the measure or should pass it. He would therefore ask the members of the association now present, and solicitors throughout the country, to use any influence they might possess with members of the House to induce them to give it their support. (Applause.) Mr. WILLIAM GRIFFITH (barrister-at-law said it certainly was a curious coincidence that the numbers should have been equally divided when this matter was brought to an issue at the council meeting. He regretted that, as a member of the council, he had not been present on the occasion, for, although a barrister, he was in favour of opening the accesses of one branch of the Profession to the other. He believed that the grounds advanced by Mr. Godfrey were entitled to great consideration, and that talented individuals should be allowed the opportunity of rising from one rank to the other. The Bar, on principles of reciprocity, was, as it were, bound to grant this request, because whereas formerly it was difficult for a barrister to become a solicitor, the Chief Law Society had secured a provision whereby a member of the Bar might speedily enter upon the practice of the other branch of the Profession. Public policy tended to the same conclusion. The objection most usually urged against it was that a solicitor coming to the Bar would bring with him a large clientéle, and that that would be hardly fair to barristers in general. There was some force in that objection, but it was rather a selfish argument; and, if on public grounds, the thing were desirable, such an argument ought not to prevail. He congratulated the society on the good work it had done in the past in purifying the courts of justice from unqualified and unworthy practitioners, and in educating public opinion to a great extent upon the subject of legal reform. He trusted this good work would continue in the future, and that the society would remain an united body of both branches, spreading abroad its influences for good to the advantage not only of the Profession, but of the public at large. (Cheers.) The motion was put to the meeting and carried unanimously. Mr. LEWIS EMANUEL (solicitor), then rose to move the election of the following gentlemen as officers of the society: President for the year, Edwin Low; vice-presidents [twenty-two ir number, these we omit]: hon. treasurer, W. T. Charley, M.P. (Common Serjeant); hon. auditor, Holroyd Chaplin, M.A.; hon. secretary, Charles Ford.-Council: William Gordon, M.P.; W. Digby Seymour, Q.C.; C. A. Jones, solicitor, Carnarvon ; Thos. Rees, solicitor, Cowbridge, Glamorganshire; R. W. Ford, solicitor, Portsmouth; H. Symonds, solicitor, Dorchester; J. King, Bath; Oscar W. Roberts, solicitor, Debenham, Suffolk: J. Merrick Head, solicitor, hon. secretary_Justices Clerks' Society, Reigate, Surrey; Thos. Cousins, clerk to magistrates, Portsmouth; J. T. Jencken, barrister; Eyre Lloyd, barrister; |