To Readers and Correspondents. F. H.-The Attorneys and Solicitors' Bill has passed through A CONSTANT READER.-We do not report Nisi Prius cases. G. M. W. We have already stated the mechanical difculties that prevent the publication of the statutes in the shape of the reports. The law limits a journal to two sheets. If, therefore, the statutes were printed in the shape of the reports they must either form a third sheet, which would be illegal, and subject every copy to a postage of ls. 3d., or we must substitute statutes for reports, a change which, although highly profitable to us, would not, we presume, be pleasing to our readers, who would not like to exchange costly reports, which they cannot otherwise procure at any price, for statutes which they can buy for six or seven shillings. MR. MARSH.-There is a short note of Meddins v. Williams, in the LAW TIMES of Jan. 23, 1858, but it does not appear to have been subsequently reported in full-probably it merely confirmed the previous decisions cited in the L. T.-The case will, we are informed, be reported in due course; but others of more Immediate interest must take precedence. note. Mr. Langley will continue his valuable commentary on the addition just made to Lord St. Leonards' Act. All communications must be authenticated with the name and address of the writer, not necessarily for publication, but as a guarantee for good faith. All anonymous communications are invariably rejected. DIARY OF SALES BY AUCTION DURING Two leasehold dwelling-houses, Whitefriars-street, by Messrs. Twenty-one freehold houses at Wandsworth, by Messrs. WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 15. The estate of Limepots, near Perth, by Messrs. Dowell and Lyon, at their rooms, George-street, Edinburgh. Advertised this day. NOTICE. The FIRST VOLUME of the New Series of the LAW TIMES REPORTS may now be had, price 24s. half-bound. It contains reports of more than four hundred cases decided since the commencement of Michaelmas Term last. Back numbers of the New Series of the Reports are kept on sale, to complete sets. The REPORTS will be uniformly and strongly bound at the office A Portfolio to contain thirty numbers of the Law Times Reports may be had, price 38. 6d. It will be forwarded by post (paid) on transmission of 38. 10d. in postage-stamps-viz., 3s. 6d. for the portfolio and 4d for the postage. It is made leaves within it, and thus it will serve all the purposes of a bound volume, and be a substitute for a weekly cover. for 4s. The volumes of the LAW TIMES for 5s. 6d. COLERIDGE, J. held that the action was maintainable, and directed a verdict for the assignees. A bill of exceptions was tendered, and the case came before the Court of Error, which was divided upon the question; the CHIEF BARON, PLATT and MARTIN, BB. holding the affirmative (that the action was maintainable), and PARKE, B., and WILLIAMS and CROWDER, JJ., asserting the negative. The court being thus equally divided, the case was argued before a fuller bench, and again there was a conflict of opinion. For the affirmative were JERVIS, C. B., ALDERSON and MARTIN, BB.; and MAULE and CRESSWELL, JJ.; for the negative, PARKE, B., and WILLIAMS and CROWDER, JJ. The case was then taken to the House of Lords, who called the judges to their aid. All the Law Lords, viz., CAMPBELL, C., WENSLEYDALE, CHELMSFORD, BROUGHAM and CRANWORTH, were for the negative, and the judges who advised them were divided; POLLOCK, C.B. and CHANNELL, B. being for the affirmative, and WIGHTMAN, WILLIAMS and CROMPTON, JJ. for the negative; which was thus at last finally determined. Upon this seemingly simple, and certainly not very important question, the opinions have been taken of no less than nineteen judges, who were thus divided in their views: For the affirmative, that Jervis Cresswell trover could not be main- the list of grand jurors should be called over at that hour, and he would fine every one not answering in sum of 20. The magistrates of the county of Dorset, among whom are numbered some men of the highest rank and position, being thus snubbed by this new judge, sat quietly in their box until eleven o'clock a.m., when the irate judge entered the court. The usual proclamation having been made, &c., the judge delivered his charge, and, on ending it, said he was glad to find that the cause of the postponement of that day's business arose from a misapprehension. He ought to have added that the misapprehension arose on his side. The magistrates of this, and I believe all the other counties of the kingdom, have hitherto been accustomed to receive the greatest courtesy from the judges, which they have returned in every way in their power; and hitherto it has been pleasing to see the courteous greeting that passed between the judges and the grand jury on their entrance into court. On the 23rd July there was a very large attendance of magistrates, some of them leaving their homes at 4 o'clock a.m., in order that they might be Some of present at the court-house at 9 o'clock. them thus present were not called on the grand jury list, and were obliged to go home again. The grand jury of Dorset is composed of magistrates only. OBSERVER. We have lately witnessed the conduct of Mr. Justice KEATING upon circuit, and we can truly testify, and we are sure every member of the For the negative, that Profession whom business or curiosity may have called into his court, will confirm the assertion, that a more kind, considerate, courteous, patient, and painstaking judge never adorned the bench. And his bearing was the same to all, to the poorest as to the noblest. If he could give offence, the Dorsetshire justices must be indeed "sudden and quick of quarrel" and very hard to please. Parke Williams Crowder Blackburn Law Lords. Cranworth The result is, that a venire de novo is directed, and the whole case may be tried over again, some other points raised, and another seven years consumed in like manner. We adduce it simply as a legal curiosity. No human intelligence could so frame laws as to prevent doubts as to their interpretation, or anticipate the infinite combinations of facts to which they are to be applied. The case will be reported in due course, and the question involved in it will then come to be THE INCOME-TAX AND THE By this time most of our readers have received so that it will close as flat as a book, whatever the quantity of considered. Possibly the delay might be avoided. for direct taxation; and what an instrument for THE "LAW TIMES" REPORTS. The above will be sent to the subscribers by post (paid). THE Law and the Lawyers. THE LAW'S UNCERTAINTY. A REMARKABLE instance of the uncertainties of litigation has been afforded in the case of Billiter V. Assignees of Young, just decided by the House of Lords. It was an action of trover by the assignees of an insolvent to recover the value of goods sold by the defendant under a fi. fa. issued upon a warrant of attorney that was alleged to be a fraudulent preference under sect. 59 of the Insolvent Act; and the question was, whether trover is maintainable where the goods were converted before the vesting order. The action was tried before COLERIDGE, J. at the spring assizes in 1853, and the litigation has continued ever since; that is to say, for a period of seven years. It has been done in the Equity Courts, which are MR. JUSTICE KEATING. THE magistrates seem to have become suddenly Sir,-Having read your excellent article on the On entering their box the magistrates heard that the judge had expressed himself as feeling much offended because the grand jury were not in attendance in the court awaiting his arrival, that he would therefore adjourn business until eleven o'clock, that confiscation it might be made if the Parliament that spends it were to be elected by those who do not pay it. Glancing again at this formidable document, the payer will further comprehend the objection to putting that tax upon him for the purpose of profiting some six hundred proprietors of newspapers, and how much he is indebted to the House of Lords for saving him from this imposition. But to our readers it will also suggest another question;- are they to submit for ever to be taxed upon the precarious earnings of their personal labour at the same rate as realised property? None are more interested in this question than the solicitors; and when contemplating the figures that measure their present liability, and remembering the great probability of its extension to half as much more next year, if the same principle is still to predominate in the Exchequer, would it not be as well for them to see if they cannot, by combined action, do something to procure the fairer adjustment of the tax, as well as prevent its further extension? REGISTRY OF JUDGMENTS. THE Profession will read with great interest the following letter on the Law of Property Amendment Act (23 & 24 Vict. c. 38), which has just become law : Sir,-The first five clauses of the above Act relate to judgments as they affect real property, and as there exists a general desire in the Profession to ascertain how the enactment will work in practice, I venture to offer a few suggestions that I trust may be of some little service. To understand the subject, it is necessary to refer to the 1 & 2 Vict. c. 110, s. 13, which makes a judgment a charge on real property both equitable and legal, and the 19th section provides, that a judgment shall not affect a purchaser, mortgagee, or creditor, as to lands, until registered. The 2 Vict. c. 11, s. 5, provides, that judgments, although duly registered, shall not affect purchasers, without notice, more extensively than they would have done before the 1 & 2 Vict. c. 110, and leaseholds under the old law were not affected until a writ of execution was in the hands of the sheriff. The Law of Property Act (23rd July 1860), sect. 1, Lewis.-On the 20th. The VICE-CHANCELLOR.-The affidavit being filed only six days before that. Leurs.-I wish to draw your Honour's attention to this paragraph, which I apprehend is my defence: "That, on no occasion, when I applied to Mr. Wood or his clerk for the draft order, was the said affidavit asked for, nor was any question asked about it, nor was there any difficulty or objection of any sort made as to the drawing or giving out of the draft order until the affidavit was produced, nor was the subject ever mentioned. The minutes of the order signed by counsel were settled upon the footing of the affidavit being forthcoming at the time the order was passed by the registrar, and likewise the draft order as given out by the registrar. I say, most positively, from the time I bespoke the draft order on the 9th June, until the said 20th June, when I got the draft order, I was not asked by the registrar or his clerk to supply any document, or to do anything in order to enable the registrar to draw such order, nor was any document required for that or any other purpose. On the 25th, 26th, 27th and 28th days of June, I applied every day for the order to be given out, bus eould not get the same, and on two of such occasions I applied to Mr. Wood personally, in addition to his clerk, but he only informed me that he had been unable to attend to it." The VICE-CHANCELLOR.-Does that show a disposition to delay, "that the registrar without making any objection ? " This is the paragraph on which you rest your case, and which says that the registrar, to accommodate you, in order that there might be no delay, proceeded before you brought in the affidavit. You always seemed to me, I know your face very well, and I know you as a respectable practitioner of the court, and you always seemed to me a man of sense; but surely, as a man of sense, you must feel what you have read now is your strongest condemnation. Lewis.—What your Honour has now said makes my case the stronger. If, with the assistance of all the solicitors, and the assistance of the registrar, it has taken twenty-four days to push this order through the office, The VICE-CHANCELLOR.-It has not. You have not brought to mind the first four days, during which you have not given them the means of doing it; and afterwards you read that paragraph, and without giving them the means by a proper affidavit you rest your complaint of delay on that circumstance, which is your strongest condemnation. Lewis.-If your Honour will pardon me, what I say is, that the invariable practice in the registrar's office is this, and I can be contradicted by the registrars if I am not strictly true, that when an affidavit of this sort is required in support of evidence of this character, it is always required when you attend before the registrar to pass the order, and not on bespeaking the draft order, unless it alters the minutes. But here the minutes were drawn on the basis of its being supplied, and it was never asked for in the case. The VICE-CHANCELLOR.-And that is what you call Chancery delay Lewis.-Those are the facts. The VICE-CHANCELLOR.-What do you mean by Chancery delay? You have published a libel on the whole court of which you are an officer. Lewis. I am very sorry if it must be taken so. The VICE-CHANCELLOR.-It must be taken so. You are not content with publishing in the paper you mentioned, but you sent it under cover to different individuals. Lewis. I sent it to all the judges of the court. The VICE-CHANCELLOR.-I wish to tell you what your duty is. If you had any just cause to complain of delay, your duty was first to complain to the registrar, and if he did not give you redress then to complain to me, or to the Lord Chancellor, as the head of the court. You bave no apology for not having done that. Instead of doing that you publish this letter which proceeds on a gross misstatement of twenty-four days' delay. There were not twenty-four days' delay. In a great part the delay is owing to yourself. I have read the affidavit carefully which you have now read, and that seems to me the most complete condemnation of your conduct. I wish you to understand that what are commonly called delays in Chancery must consist of delays in particular cases. I have studied with all my endeavour to prevent delay and expense in any brauch of the court, and particularly in my own. I have never met with any case of a complaint of delay which when stated in court I was not able instantly to redress. Those complaints have been generally as to the Examiners' Office, and it is in the knowlege of the whole bar, and of the professional men who practise in this court, that not one single case of complaint of that kind has been made in this court where it has not been instantly redressed, and redressed with satisfaction to everybody. Therefore, instead of descending to an act so mean in its character as publishing a libel against a person who has no means of defending himself-for you could not expect the registrar to enter into any controversy with you-instead of telling the registrar bimself, that you complain of his conduct-for you never told him that-you behind his back blazon in a public paper this complaint of delay, which, when it is looked at, amounts to nothing, and if it was a just complaint, your conduct is equally indefensible in not applying to the proper quarter; but you have endeavoured to cast discredit on this court, and upon one of the most important officers of this court, by calling public attention to what you call delays in Chancery. And I must say that your conduct I have seen with great regret, for you are entitled to the general character, which I have already given to you, of a diligent and respectable man of business; but you sadly forgot what was due to your own character and to the character of the court of which you are an officer, and you have done great injustice to the registrar in this case. Therefore I hope there will be no more repetition of such conduct, but that you, and others who have cause to complain, will learn from this that the proper quarter to complain is, not to the quarter which can give you no redress -for you could not hope that the editors or readers of any of these journals were the persons who could give you redress, or any person who suffers from delay. I therefore part with the case, hoping that in future if you have any complaint that you will make it to me; at present expressing my opinion that you were wholly unjustified in any such publication, and that the complaint of delay against the particular registrar in this case is one which, in my opinion, is wholly groundless. Lewis-I hope your Honour will allow me to say one or two words in my own defence. I can only say that having been in the Profession twenty years, I have seen respectable men of all grades and ranks in the Profession, when they have had a grievance to complain of, writing not only to professional journals, but invoking the aid of popular clamour against the courts in which they were practitioners. I never did such a thing. The VICE-CHANCELLOR.-What aid do you invoke? Lewis.-I ask my own professional brethren; I ask them to look at those facts and to say, reading my letter, whether or not my complaint was unfounded. You, Sir, sit there to administer justice in high state; we have to meet the clients; we have to repel from day to day what we find The VICE-CHANCELLOR, -How would you like your clients to publish in a paper an account of the dates, and of your conduct as to that affidavit? Lewis.-Will your Honour allow me? The VICE CHANCELLOR.—No, I will not hear any more of it. Lewis.-Your IIonour will not hear what I have to say? The VICE CHANCELLOR.-Yes, I will. Lewis. I wish to say that it was only a short time ago that a client of mine who depended on the carrying out of an order of this court to invest 12,000l., when I wrote and told him that it would probably take a month to get an order through the registrar's office, wrote and told me he would hardly believe what I said. The VICE-CHANCELLOR.-What is the name of the cause, and what is the name of your client? Lewis.-The name of the cause was, I think, Breton v. Newman. The VICE-CHANCELLOR.-What was the name of your client? Lewis.-The name of my client was Harrison. let me understand this. Lewis.-I will at another time; I am rather ex cited just now. I have been addressed in terms which are hardly warranted by the circumstances of the case. I wish to explain the grounds upon which I made these complaints. The VICE-CHANCELLOR.-There is no complaint, but Lewis.-Will you hear what I have to say, as I am called here to defend myself? I must appeal to the common principles of justice to be heard. What I say is this: We have to meet what your Honour does not meet. We have to meet with the suitors of the court, and when we tell them that it takes five or six weeks to get orders through the registrar's office, they say they do not believe us. That is my defence. I rest on that; and I deny that you have any right, sitting there, to deprive me of my rights as a citizen because I have the misfortune to be a solicitor. If I did appeal to public opinion from such conduct I should be justified. Your Honour has not to put up with what we have, namely, the opprobrium of clients, and the pressure which we have put upon us; and when a man ventures as a public man to make these statements, then he is to be treated in this way, and flouted out of coart. The VICE-CHANCELLOR.-Mr. Lewis, as to the opprobrium of your clients, your duty is when your clients complain to state the case to the court. And your duty is now, in the case that you have mentioned, to put in writing, or in any way in which they can be considered, the facts of the case upon which it depends, and if they turn out to be more justifiable grounds of complaint than your complaint in this case of the twenty-four days' delay, which did not occur, there is no difficulty in the world in giving you redress. I believe you have no reason to say that the registrars, and all the other officers of the court with whom I am acquainted, do not bestow the utmost attention to the dispatch and discharge of their duties; but if there should be a failure (and all human beings are liable to fail in the exer their duty) I think it is a great mistake, isso applying to those who can remedy the case complaint, to publish general libels on the cour its officers in the newspapers. Lewis. It is not libel. I decline to appeal t Honour, for you negative the first princes justice. You will not hear a man in bis defence. The VICE-CHANCELLOR.-I will hear you please. Lewis.-Will you hear me now? The VICE CHANCELLOR.-I will hear you or Lewis.-No, I decline. I state what I b be the truth in this case, as an honourable, respectable practitioner, and I know it is i nable. It is attempted to make me the scape the registrar's office. I have sufficient knowledy my own position in the Profession to know a hold a respectable character, and I am not ad of appealing from you to Cæsar. I appeal to Profession. Malins. Will your Honour allow me, as the leaders of this court, to stop this preceding?! behalf of Mr. Lewis I may say that I have ve bim as a practitioner of this court for many and I believe that a more respectable, beren, skilful and straightforward practitioner there i The VICE-CHANCELLOR.-Nobody doubts the Malins. I think it is a misapprehensi writing to that publie journal, I am sure that he nothing more than what was felt to be the dish of a public duty, and if he has been mistake quite sure The VICE CHANCELLOR.-The only misfortes that Mr. Lewis has been mistaken. Malins.-I only think it is due to Mr. Les state what I have done. The VICE-CHANCELLOR,-Something is dat officers of the court who cannot defend themIf the controversy could be carried on in the ca chosen by Mr. Lewis, there would be very litt culty about it. Malins.-I have known Mr. Lewis to be 1 of longer standing than many other practi of the court, and I thought it only right to me much. He is solicitor to a society of which it is ve known I am standing counsel, and theres many years, I have been frequently brough contact with him. Vice-Chancellor Kindersley is the Equity Ve Judge. We understand that H. Wood, Esq., has res his appointment as one of the registrars of the of Chancery. Samuel Warren, Esq., Q.C., one of the master lunacy, has intimated his intention of presentie rifles to the Inns of Court Volunteer Corps competed for by members of the corps. Mr. Butt, Q.C., M.P., was specially retained the Tyrone Constitution, and came over from La. for the defence of John Holden, his fee bet guineas. Before leaving, the learned ge chivalrously handed to the prisoner's wife a being nearly one-half of his not over retainer. Sir Mordaunt Wells, one of the puisne judge become a member of the Legislative Council o in the room of Sir Charles Jackson, who bas res Mr. Le Geyt, the member for Bombay, has giv his seat in the counsil; his successor has not yel appointed. BUSINESS OF THE EQUITY COURTS. - The L Chancellor said that, no doubt, the Bar would beg to know that the state of the business both i Courts of Appeal and the courts below w highest degree satisfactory, which was mainl attributed to the able manner in which the B assisted his Lordship and the other judges i conduct of the business. The court then re the long vacation. IRELAND. THE ORANGEMEN AND THE JUDG Under the head of "More Insults to Catholic e the Freeman's Journal publishes the following dated "Londonderry":-The two Catholic je Chief Justice Monaghan and Baron Hughes, liberately insulted here to-day by the Orangetre 'apprentice boys. During the night a large and blue' flag, with King William in the centre, ** hoisted on Walker's Monument. Under the shadow of this had the two judges to pass in to court. No allusion, however, was made to sult from the bench. The Mayor sent repeated have the flag removed, but no attention was [3] his remonstrances until a body of police were der to haul it down. It remained up until after t o'clock. A strong feeling of indignation has been cited by this outrageous conduct of the Orange par There are some days on which it is customary hibit party flags in Derry, but this is not one of the and the only object of the Orangemen must be been to put a studied insult on Her Majesty's judge after the Enniskillen model." THE “DEVIL'S OWN" AT LANCASTER.—Ât ind dent occurred at Lancaster which appears to bar increased the popular favour which has sin attended the members of the Bar in their per visits to this ancient town. The Lancaster Volter Rifle Corps, a very fine body of men, in their mana arade, preceded by their band of music, passed 1g's Arms Hotel, at which the whole body of r attending these assizes, about sixty or sevirristers, it being their "grand night," were The music attracted these gentlemen to the be found drunk, which must mean found drunk at the time of apprehension, or the word "found" will have no application. If, therefore, the party has gone home without being apprehended, it is conceived that the section will not apply. vs, and there being a number of that most Secondly, he must be found drunk in a street uished regiment of Rifle Volunteers, "The Own," among them, at sight of their brother or public thoroughfare, drunkenness anywhere else ers marching past in a most soldier-like way, not coming within the penalty of the section; loped arms, the whole Bar gave them an thus the section will not apply to drunkenness astie burst of cheering, waving their hand-in a house or building, though such house or fs out of the windows. The men of the building, like a theatre or public garden, be a ter Corps seemed delighted, and after being place of public resort. ed, their officers, headed by Captain Saunders, d to thank the Bar for their cordial and astic greeting, and the band of the Lancaster in return, placed themselves before the hotel, ter playing many lively airs, concluded with save the Queen," at a late hour. This imgood feeling, so instantly reciprocated, apto give everybody pleasure. > BROUGHAM.-The following is extracted e British Quarterly Review: -Without wealth tocratic connection, and in spite of the disade of professional distractions, he rose to an ce in the State which no lawyer but Eldon and eld ever attained in modern times, and he aca weight in public affairs which in 1830 made most a political dictator. He attained this in part by his genius, in part by his natural and boldness, but chiefly by his untiring exin the cause of good government throughout pire. From 1810 to 1830 he was one of the iconoclasts in our history-exposing abuses, cing bad laws, and removing checks on narogress, and, even at that period, in his reforms ation and the law, he proved himself to be a ficient legislator. When he came into power probably, a bad party leader-too dictatorial, le, and uncompromising; and, as a minister, he nted public expectation, although he accomgreat results, and he evinced real and sterling ism. We think him entitled to the highest for having stood as a mediator between the of Lords and the people, in the menacing crisis Reform Bill, and for having braved and withThe unpopularity which he must have known be the inevitable consequence. Since 1835 he ok in reputation as a statesman, on account, , of his isolation from party, and not in conce of any real demerits; and his exertions as a reformer in this period deserve the greatest and commendation. As a lawyer, though ong the lights of the forum, either as a jurist actitioner, he displayed considerable vigour and ; and bis judicial faculties, if not on a par with of Lord Stowell, Lord Mansfield, and Lord icke, are certainly of a very high order. Ilis cal gifts were many and brilliant-command uage, energy in debate, scathing invective, and ul irony; but he wanted art in arranging his ; his speeches fail when studied in the closet; s style was defaced by a heavy verboseness. an of letters he will not rank very high, for are with him was merely an amusement; and gh from this point of view his works are wonand display much capacity of analysis, keen 1 skill, and a mastery over illustration, they not the characteristics of genius and thought will make them live in the English language. 3 a social reformer, a promoter of education, and ough, yet practical improver of our law, that Brougham will obtain the applause of posterity; r these services, we venture to predict that his ry will long survive in England. of riotous or indecent behavour. IAGISTRATE AND PARISH LAWYER. RE DINGS OF NEW STATUTES LATING TO MAGISTRATES' LAW. 1.-WINE LICENCES ACT, 23 VICT. c. 27DRUNKENNESS. Refreshment Houses and Wine Licences 23 Vict. c. 27, besides providing for the sing of houses kept open for refreshment the sale of wine, very materially alters aw as applicable to drunkenness. The 40th on is in these words, "Every person found k in any street or public thoroughfare, and while drunk is guilty of any riotous or innt behaviour, shall, upon summary conviction ich offence before two justices, be liable to a ilty of not more than forty shillings for every 1offence, or may be committed, if the justices agistrate before whom he is convicted think instead of inflicting on him any pecuniary alty, to the house of correction for any time more than seven days." pon this section it will be well to make some ervations; and in the first place it will be ved that it does not apply to every case of lie drunkenness, but to drunkenness under ial circumstances only. Thus the party must The punishment is in the alternative-either a pecuniary penalty not exceeding forty shillings, or a committal to the house of correction for any time not exceeding seven days. It will be observed that the punishment of imprisonment is not in default of the payment of the pecuniary penalty, but is an independent punishment, and the justices may inflict either. Upon The statute itself says nothing as to what is to this a somewhat curious state of things will arise. be done in the event of a fine being imposed and not paid; but by sect. 43, all the provisions of the 11 & 12 Vict. c. 23, relating to the proceedings for the recovery of penalties, and the levying and enforcing of penalties and costs, are to be applied and put in force in relation to the penalties under the present Act. Now, by sect. 19 of the 11 & 12 Vict. c. 43, it is enacted, that where in any statute no mode of raising or levying a penalty imposed upon a summary conviction is stated or provided, it may be levied by distress, but if it appears that the issuing of a warrant of distress will be ruinous to the defendant or his family, or (by the confessions of the defendant or otherwise) that he has no goods whereon to levy the distress, then the justices, instead of issuing such warrant of distress, may commit the defendant to gaol with hard labour, for such time as by law he might be committed in case such warrant of distress had issued and no goods or chattels could be found whereon to levy such penalty and costs; and if we turn to sect. 22, we shall find it provided that in all cases of convictions, where the statute on which the same are founded provides no remedy, in case it shall be returned to a warrant of distress thereon that no sufficient goods of the party can be found, the justice to whom the return is made may by his warrant commit the defendant to gaol for any term not exceeding three calendar months, unless the sum, with the costs of the distress, be sooner paid. This, then, is the course to be adopted in the event of a fine being imposed and not being paid, and it will thus appear that whilst for the offence itself the justices can only commit for seven days, yet if they impose a fine, and such fine is not paid and cannot be levied by distress, the defendant may be imprisoned for three months! The 41st section also contains important provisions relative to drunkenness. It enacts that 'Any person who shall be drunk, riotous, quarrelsome, or disorderly in any shop, house, premises, or place licensed for the sale of beer, wine, or spirituous liquors by retail, to be consumed on the premises, or for refreshment, resort and entertainment under the provisions of this Act, and shall refuse or neglect to quit such shop, house, premises, or place, upon being requested so to do by the manager or occupier, or his agent or servant, or by any constable, shall, on conviction thereof before one justice, be liable to pay a fine not exceeding forty shillings: and all constables are hereby authorised, empowered and required, on demand of such manager, occupier, agent, or servant, to assist in expelling such drunken, riotous, quarrelsome and disorderly persons from such shops, houses, premises and places." lecting upon request to quit such premises. To constitute the offence, therefore, it is necessary, first, that the party offending should be in a house of the description before mentioned; secondly, that he should be drunk, riotous, quarrelsome, or disorderly; thirdly, that he should refuse or neglect to quit such premises upon being requested so to do by the manager or occupier, or his agent or servant, or by any constable. If all these facts exist, then the party may be convicted under the section; and in this case he may be convicted before one justice. Queries on Points of Practice, STOREHOUSES FOR RIFLE CORPS.-Can any of your correspondents inform me whether a house used for the purpose of storing arms and ammunition of a rifle corps, and for dress but a paid servant, who cleans the arms and takes care of ing-rooms for the members of the corps, are liable to any, and what, rates and taxes. No one lives on the premises the house. Is there any difference where only part of a house is rented and used for the above-mentioned purposes? Liverpool, 7th Aug. 1860. C. PARISH POUNDS.-I should be exceedingly obliged to any showing who is the proper party to repair and maintain a common pound. Is it the lord of the manor, or the inhabitants of the parish; and what is the proper course of proceeding to compel repairs? If the inhabitants are liable (as one of your subscribers who will refer me to an authority, there seems ground for contending they are), who is the actual party to be proceeded against, as their representative, and out of what fund must the necessary expenses come? A. B. Mr. Learoyd, of the firm of Messrs. Floyd and Learoyd, of Huddersfield and Holmfirth, was appointed clerk to the magistrates at Holmfirth, vacant by the resignation of Mr. Martin Kidd, who has held resigned in consequence of failing health. the office for a period of twenty-one years, and had THE NEW LAW ON PUBLIC FOUNTAINS. - On Tuesday the new Act of Parliament, which received the Royal assent on Monday, on nuisances removal and diseases prevention, was printed. It contains some provisions respecting the water fountains erected and about to be erected. It is provided that if any person do any damage whereby a well, fountain, or pump is polluted or fouled, he shall upon summary conviction forfeit a sum not exceeding 5. for every vided by the Public Health Act or otherwise for the such offence. All wells, fountains, and pumps prouse of the inhabitants of any place, and not being the property of, or vested in, any person or corporation other than officers of such place, are to be vested in the local authority of the place under the Act, who are from time to time to cause them to be kept in good repair and condition, and free from pollution, as well as those dedicated to, or open to the use of, the inhabitants of such place. England and Wales continue favourable. The numPAUPERISM.-The returns respecting pauperism in ber relieved at Midsummer-785,015-were 6.1 per cent. (50,599) less than at Lady-day. The number of paupers in receipt of relief at the close of the first half of this year was less by 2.24 per cent. than in 1859, and by 5.90 per cent. than in 1858. In the North Midland, North Western and York divisions, comprising the districts in which the principal manufactures are carried on, the decrease was 6.02 per pared with 1858. The recent returns have been least cent. as compared with last year, and 14.98 as comfavourable in the South Midland division, in which the pauperism continues rather to exceed that of last year; and the Welsh and Eastern divisions also cannot give so good an account of themselves as the rest of the country. A few parishes, 286 in all, being under Gilbert's Act, or still under the provisions of the 43rd Elizabeth, are not included in these returns. REAL PROPERTY LAWYER AND CONVEYANCER. NOTES OF NEW DECISIONS. WASTE. A devisee in fee, subject to an equitable devise over, cut down timber some of which was ornamental. The Court of Appeal held him to be dispunishable of legal, but not of equitable waste: (Turner v. Wright, 2 L. T. Rep. N. S. 649.) VOLUNTARY CONVEYANCE.-Stat. 13 Eliz. c. 5, avoids conveyances made to defeat future creWhere B., against whom two actions for ditors. trespass had been brought, several days before the trial executed a conveyance of all his property to his daughter without valuable consideration, the deed was declared to be fraudulent and void under the statute: (Barling v. Bishopp, 2 L. T. Rep. N. S. 651.) This provision applies to all places licensed for the sale of beer, wine, or spirituous liquors by retail to be consumed on the premises, or which are licensed as refreshment houses; and the offence consists in being drunk, riotous, quarrel-pursuance of that Act shall be as effectual for the conveyance some, or disorderly therein, and refusing or neg. By the 7 & 8 Vict. c. 76, the reference to this statute was Queries on Points of Practice. CONVEYANCE BY GRANT AND RELEASE-By the 4 & 5 Vict. c. 21, s. 1, it is declared that a release expressed to be made in of freehold estates as a lease and release by the same parties. recites, that it is desirable to place freehold and copyhold estates on the same footing as leaseholds, and enacts that no judgment shall affect land of whatever tenure, as to a purchaser or mortgagee, notwithstanding notice, until a writ of execution shall have been issued and registered, and such execution must be put in force within three calendar months from the time it was registered. Sect. 2 enacts, that for the purpose of registration a memorandum shall be left with the senior master of the Court of Common Pleas, who is to register the particulars "by the name of the person in whose behalf the judgment was registered.' These provisions are extended to the Palatine Courts, but not to Ireland. Sect. 4 further provides, that no judgment shall have any preference against heirs, executors or administrators, in the administration of their ancestors', testators' or intestates' estates, unless at the death of the testator or intestate five years shall not have elapsed from the date of the registry or re-registry thereof. Sect. 5 explains, that the term "judgment" shall be taken to include registered decrees, orders of courts of bankruptcy and other orders having the operation of a judgment. It would therefore appear that, in future, to affect a purchaser or mortgagee of lands that can be taken in legal execution, it will be necessary to issue a writ of execution, and register such writ, which will remain a charge upon such land for three months. Whether, at the end of three months, such writ may be registered again, is not quite clear, but the words of the Act, that it is intended to protect purchasers "against delay in the execution of the writ," would seem to negative this suggestion. having been indiscreetly made public by others, Our readers will remember the origin of it. Mr. C. LEWIS addressed to us a letter complaining to us of certain delays in the Registrar's office. STUART, V.C. ordered the cause in which they are alleged to have occurred to be placed on the paper for Saturday the 14th, and Mr. LEWIS to be summoned to attend on that day. It appears that the V. C. had looked upon this very cause as a remarkable instance of the celerity and efficiency of the new practice, and therefore he was peculiarly vexed that it should have been selected as the subject of a special complaint. The scene that followed the appearance of Mr. LEWIS will be best read in the report of it, and having perused it, our readers will probably feel with us no little surprise that so much should have grown out of so slight a cause. Surely Mr. complaint of any defects he might in the course LEWIS had an undoubted right to prefer a public of his practice see, or think he sees, in the conduct of the business of public offices, and he is not precluded from doing so by reason of his being the solicitor in the cause in question, or as an officer of the court. As a solicitor it would be his duty to be respectful in tone and temperate in language; but so was Mr. LEWIS, and it is difficult to discover any But since the first section of this Act refers only to substantial ground of complaint, unless it purchasers and mortgagees, and not to creditors; a be designed to deny the right of a solicitor judgment registered under 1 & 2 Vict. c. 110, on which no writ of execution has been issued, will still conducting a cause to complain publicly of give the judgment-creditor preference over other any defects in the law or its administration he creditors as to lands. And as sect. 13 of 1 & 2 Vict. may discover in its progress. The right of Mr. c. 110, made a judgment a charge upon the debtor's LEWIS to prefer his complaint against what he equitable interest, as well as his legal interest in deemed to be a defect in one of the offices, by a lands, a registered judgment will still affect such in- letter to the LAW TIMES, rather than by a private terest. And now by sect. 4 of the new Act, a judg- remonstrance addressed to the judge, is so palment must be registered in order to give it a pre-pable, that it does not need to be enforced by ference against heirs, executors and administrators, argument. If, then, Mr. LEWIS had the right to in the administration of their ancestors', testators' choose his own form for complaining, the mere The necessity, therefore, for registering the judg-question of manner would not justify the severe censure that was sought to be cast upon him. ment is in no case removed, as the register of the writ of execution is to be connected with the register In truth, his conduct was not within the proper of the judgment, and the writ of execution to be cognisance of the court, and it is very much to indexed by the name of the person in whose behalf be regretted that any notice should have been the judgment was registered. taken of it from the judgment-seat. and intestates' estates. The usual search also for judgments in the Common Pleas and the local registers must be continued, and should any judgment be discovered, the particulars must be taken, and a further search made for executions in the name of the person in whose behalf the judgment was registered. A search for executions only in the name of the vendor, by a purchaser, would have been sufficient in many cases, had it been provided that the execution should be registered like the judgment, by the name of the person whose estate is intended to be effected. It is not easy to see why the execution should not have been so registered; but such not being the case, the search for judgments as heretofore must be continued, and a reference made to the execution book in every case of a registered judgment being found. A purchaser of leasehold property should now in all cases search up to the last moment before the payment of the purchase-money, as this Act will enable him to ascertain whether he is affected by a fi. fa., or other writ of execution. It will be observed that the Act is not retrospective. Judgments, therefore, entered up before the 23rd July 1860 are still binding on a purchaser or mortgagee, although no execution be issued; and as many of these judgments will doubtless be re-registered, they will be binding upon future purchasers and mortgagees for many years to come. It would have been unjust to prior creditors to have made the provision act retrospectively, as judgments have been numerously taken instead of mortgages, for economical reasons, and the total amount thus secured by judgments reaches many millions of money; indeed, it would have been but fair had the operation of this provision been deferred to the 1st of January next, that the public might have had due notice, and a reasonable opportunity of becoming familiar with the REGISTRAR'S CHIEF CLERK, Court of Common Pleas. enactment. Serjeant's-inn, 3rd Aug. 1860. V. C. STUART AND MR. LEWIS. Ir was our opinion that it would be the most becoming course for a professional journal, consulting, as it ought, the dignity of the bench and the reputation of the practitioners, to pass in silence a painful scene which occurred a few days ago in V. C. STUART's Court. But other journals having unwisely thought fit to make it public, we are compelled, reluctantly, to do that which we should certainly not have done, had not the mischief been already accomplished. The matter Giving to the judge credit, as we do most entirely, for the most righteous motives, arising from a generous desire to defend the officers of his court, whom he believed to have been unjustly censured, we cannot but wish that their exculpation had been limited to a simple statement of facts by which the assertions of Mr. it in theory, by appearing in court when With these Mr. EDWIN JAMES protested against the postponement, although he was the cause of it, for when Lord PALMERSTON asked the House to waive discussion in committee, to accept the Bills on faith of the draftsmen, and to ameri defects when discovered-a course by which alone consolidation of the law is practicable-Mr. EDWIN JAMES jumped up and declared that he, for one, would not consent to pass the Bills without a full revision of them in committee. After this declaration of war, the Government could not waste the time of the House by any further discussion on measures that never can be carried if the Lawyers are to fight over them in committee; and so the country has lost the betet of them for another year at least, and for this it is indebted to Mr. EDWIN JAMES. If a committee there must be, let it be a sele one; the very notion is absurd of throwing whole criminal law before a mixed mob of 653 gentlemen, to be talked over and altered as the caprice of some, the ignorance of others, and the vanity of all, may dictate. The "whole House" is incompetent to deal with the details of Las Reform, however fitted it may be to pass a jūdžment on its principles. THE JUDGE AND THE SHERIFF. A SCENE IN COURT. LEWIS are to be answered. If, on the other hand, TIE following incident is narrated in the Times: Mr. LEWIS was right in his facts, and his conduct that the complaint should have been made to the GUILDFORD. An extraordinary occurrence took place in this court. About the middle of the day the grand jury, having concluded their business, came into court Blackburn dismissed them, thanking them in the usual form for the assistance they had rendered to the administration of justice. In order to explain what subsequently took place it may be as well to state that it appears that the high sheriff of the county, Mr. Evelyn, had requested the learned judge to pay the compliment to the gentlemen who had attended, but who had not actually served on the grand jury, of thanking them for their attendance, sidered it unnecessary to do so, and it was understood as many of them had come a considerable distance to perform the duty, but the learned judge said he conthat the high sheriff expressed his intention of thanking them himself. with the remainder of the bills, and Mr. Justice When the learned judge had addressed the grand jury he was about to proceed with a trial that was before the court, when the high sheriff rose, and, addressing a number of magistrates who were on the bench, said that he also could not allow the high sheriff to proceed, and he Mr. Justice Blackburn interposed, and said that he must request him to desist. The high sheriff seemed determined to go on, when the learned judge laid his hand on his shoulder, and said he could not permit him to speak, and he must request him to sit down. The high sheriff still persisted, and Mr. Justice Blackburn threatened that if he did not desist he would fine him. This had no effect, the high sheriff would not sit down, and Mr. Justice Blackburn said, "Mr. High Sheriff, I feel myself called upon to fine you 500." His lordship then directed Mr. Avory, the deputy clerk of assize, to record the fine. of inducing the high sheriff to desist, and Mr. JusThe imposition of the fine did not have the effect tice Blackburn then threatened to commit him for contempt of court, and interfering with the administration of justice. The high sheriff then resumed his seat, and the event caused great sensation among the magistrates, I ship of tangible and visible property. who were very numerous in the town, and the bar. It was reported that a correspondence had passed, in which Mr. Justice Blackburn offered to remit the fine, and that Mr. Evelyn, in answer, only sent the judge a cheque for the money. Afterwards Mr. Scarlett and other gentlemen were seen to be in conversation with the Chief Justice in the other court, and the result of this was at last seen by the high sheriff coming into court and reading a written apology, in which he expressed his sorrow for having committed any act which might bear the semblance of a con tempt of the court. Mr. Justice Blackburn stated that he had no personal feeling, but must protect the dignity of the court, and could not allow any improper interruptions to the business of the assize. He then remitted the fine, and the affair terminated. The Times is very severe upon the judge, and somewhat too gentle with the sheriff. It is not usual for judges to compliment grand juries upon the regard shown for the high sheriff by their attendance, because it is their duty to attend; and to recognise an extraordinary assembly in honour of the sheriff would be a public admission that her MAJESTY'S judges were not usually so honoured. Mr. Justice BLACKBURN was, therefore, not called upon, even by courtesy, to depart from the usual practice of simply thanking the grand jury for their services, and so dismissing them. But the conduct of the high sheriff, in taking upon himself to play the part of judge and supply what he thought to be an omission by an harangue to the grand jury at the judge's right hand, was an inexcusable indecorumi. It is the business of the sheriff to keep order in the court, yet here was the sheriff setting an example of disorder, and even of positive disobedience, for he refused to hold his tongue when told by the judge to sit down. Up to this point the judge was entirely in the right, and the sheriff entirely in the wrong. But here the indiscretion began. The infliction of a fine of 5002. on the disobedient sheriff was a hasty and injudicious act, speedily, however, repented of, and the fine remitted. But loss of temper on one side provokes ill-temper on the other, and so here the sheriff answered the judge's intimation of the remission of the fine with a cheque for the 500/. inclosed in an envelope. This was another and a greater indiscretion. It was an insult to the Judge, who is not the receiver of fines; and an insult to a Judge is an insult to the Sovereign, whose commission he bears, and of whom he is the representative. At this stage of it, the Chief Justice interfered, and so satisfied the sheriff of the impropriety of his conduct, that he was induced to read publicly in court a full and frank apology, such as a true gentleman never hesitates to make when he has done wrong. That apology should have been received in the spirit in which it was offered, and there would have been an end of an unpleasant business. But it is said to have been coldly listened to, and that no conciliatory expression fell from the judge's lips. If this be 80, we can only express profound regret. Imperturbable good temper is as necessary a qualification for a judge as good sense— without the preservation of temper, indeed, the dignity of the office cannot be preserved. Yet is there nothing more essential to the administration of justice than the strictest observance, alike by court and judge, of that "dignity" which democratic despotism, so wise in its own interest, never relaxes in its endeavours to destroy. THE AUTUMN LAND MARKET. Ir appears, from the many communications that have come to us, that the hints we threw out last week as to the probable effect of the vast increase of the supplies of gold upon its value, and consequently upon the nominal prices of all other commodities, have excited an unexpected interest among our readers. They see the importance of its bearing upon loans and mortgages, and indeed upon all transactions by which money is invested with a view to its repayment in money. As we then suggested, the change will have but a trifling effect upon purchasers of estates, because the land will still continue to bear the same proportion as before to the value of money, and if land commands a greater number of coins, those coins will procure in exchange fewer commodities, so that the relative values remain as before. But there is one result of the influx of gold which ought also to be taken into calculation. By increasing the sum of wealth, it will certainly cause a greater demand for land. The natural impulse of wealth is to the owner The landowner has the enjoyment of the consciousness of possession, denied to the fundholder or recipient of the mere proceeds of money. Not in England only, but throughout the world, the universal object of ambition is to be the actual owner of land, and hence it is that land yields a less return to the owner than any other investment. Now, as wealth increases, the competitors for the purchase of land, in a country where its area is limited, will be continually increasing, and competition will raise the prices almost up to the point at which the price would cease to yield a return. The solicitors should explain this to their clients, whether advising them to buy or to sell; for, if they think of selling, they ought clearly to understand that there is every prospect of an increased value; but if they want to buy, they should buy at once, for every year's delay will increase alike the rent and nominal prices. The following additional sales are announced : Messrs. WINSTANLEY hold, on Tuesday next, at the Mart, four sales. In the first, instructed by Mr. EDMUNDS, solicitor, of St. Bride's-avenue, Fleet-street, they offer two dwelling-houses and shops in Whitefriars-street, Fleet-street; in the second, twenty-one tenements at Walworth, for the sale of which Mr. EDMUNDS is also the solicitor; in the third and fourth, two reversions of two-sixths of a freehold estate at Dunmow, after the death of a lady now aged seventy-one, for which Mr. J. C. MEYMOTT, of Albion-place, Blackfriars-bridge, is the solicitor. But the most important announcement is of extensive properties in Guildford and Worplesdon, in Surrey, which are to be sold on the 26th Sept., and for the detail of which reference must be made to the advertisement, or to the solicitor for the vendors, Mr. CAPRON, of Guildford. PARLIAMENTARY MEMORANDA OF THE WEEK. HOUSE OF LORDS. Aug. 3.-Young v. Billiter; Wheatcroft v. Hickman; Cox ▼. H.; Eastern Counties and Blackwall Railway Companies v. Marriage; in all, judgment reversed. Fitzmaurice v. Bayley (appeal dismissed). Caledonian Railway Company v. Colt (interlocutors appealed from reversed.) Aikman v. A. (fully heard, consideration adjourned). Clerk v. The Queen (petition that the order of non pros, may be rescinded). Official Assignees, Bankruptcy; return (order, June 14). Conjugal Rights (Scotland) Bill; read third time, passed, and sent to the Commons. time, with amendments, passed, and sent to the Commons. Crown Debts and Judgments Bill (Commons); read third Debtors and Creditors Act Amendment Bill; the like. County Coroners Bill; the like. Aug. 6.-Simpson v. The Westminster Palace Hotel Company (Limited) (fully heard). Court of Queen's Bench Act Amendment; Inclosure (No. 2); Queen's Prison; Criminal Lunatic Asylum; Common Law Procedure (Ireland) Act (1853) Amendment; Copyhold and Inclosure Commissions, &c.; received the royal assent. Statistical Congress; copy of the report of, to the Secretary of State on Judicial Statistics, presented. Aug. 7.-S.C.; appeal dismissed. Chancery Evidence Commission; to enable the Lord Chancellor and judges to carry into effect the recommendations (Lord Chancellor); read first time; second reading, 10th. Tithe Commutation Bill; returned from the Commons, with the amendments agreed to. Laws of Jersey; report of the commissioners to inquire into the civil, municipal and ecclesiastical laws of the island, presented. Admiralty Jurisdiction (India) Bill; read third time and passed. Aug. 9.-Clerk v. The Queen; petition of the relator for not rescinding the non pros. order. (appeal dismissed). Cairncross v. Lorrimer Crown Debts and Judgments Bill (Commons); returned from the Commons with the amendments agreed to, with amendments. Notices. The two reports of the Chancery Evidence Commissioners; to call attention to (Lord St. Leonards); 10th. The same; doubts having been suggested, but not until the beginning of this month, whether effect can be given to the recommendations without the authority of Parliament, legislation is of real urgency (Lord Chancellor); 10th. Sarah Ann Bull; to move for reports of the coroner's inquest and Crown trial at Lewes of George Bull (Earl of Harrington); 13th. HOUSE OF COMMONS. Aug. 6.-Public Charities Bill; withdrawn. Statute Criminal Law Consolidation Bills; withdrawn. Aug. 8.-Crown Debts and Judgments Bill; (see Lords.) Conjugal Rights (Scotland) Bill (Lords); read first time. Aug. 9.-Court of Chancery Bill (Lords) (L. T. Feb. 10); reported with amendments; recommitted for 13th. Attorney's Solicitors, Proctors, &c. Bill (Lords) (L. T. March 17); as amended, considered; further consideration 10th. and petitions of the commissioners' instance, from 1856; further proceedings and results, treasury advances and reimbursements for costs; property of the charities; moneys received by the Accountant-General; suits where costs Notices.-Charities; return of the number of informations Chancery Bill; in committee; restoration of clauses for additional chief clerk to the M.R., and for increase of chief unpaid by defendants (Mr. Alderman Copeland); 17th. clerk's salaries (Mr. Hadfield). HOUSE OF COMMONS. CONSOLIDATION OF THE CRIMINAL LAW. Mr. AYRTON, in the absence of his hon. and learned friend the member for Marylebone, asked the Attorney-General whether it was the intention of her Majesty's Government to proceed with the Bills for the consolidation of the criminal law, sent down from the House of Lords, this session.- -The ATTORNEYGENERAL replied that the Bills had been carefully Statute Law Commission, and by a committee of the considered by the law officers of the Crown, by the other House; and, therefore, it was the intention of to the Ilouse this session. her Majesty's Government, if possible, to submit them He did not think that, under the circumstances, they would require any lengthened further consideration. COMPANIES BILL. Mr. MALINS asked whether it was the intention of the Government to proceed with the Bill this session. Mr. M. GIBSON.-Yes.-Mr. MALINS.-When? head of the Government is about to arrange that it shall be taken at a morning sitting. OFFENCES AGAINST THE PERSON BILL. On the order of the day for going into committee on this Bill, the SOLICITOR-GENERAL rose to move the discharge of the order for going into committee on the group of measures of which this was one. They had been prepared with great care and deliberation; they were in themselves unobjectionable, and would effect considerable improvement in our criminal law. At the same time the period of the session at which these Bills were received from the other House, and the state of public business, rendered it impossible to proceed with them. It would be undesirable to pass one or two of these Bills, and it was quite obvious that to attempt to consider them all in committee would be an inexcusable consumption of valuable time. It was the intention of the Government to bring them forward early in the ensuing session in this House, and it would then be for the House to determine whether they should receive consideration in committee of the whole House or in a select committee. - Mr. E. JAMES expressed his astonishment at the statement of the SolicitorGeneral after the statement yesterday by the Attorney-General of the intention of the Government to proceed with these Bills in the present session. Thousands of pounds had been expended on the Statute Law Commission, and it would be a disappointment to the public to find that the announcement in her Majesty's speech, that the criminal law would be amended, would not be realised.Lord PALMERSTON said that it was with great regret the Government had concurred in the motion which had just been made. He was in hopes until very lately that the House would be induced to take these Bills, trusting to the labours of the Lords' Committee and the Statute Law Commission. But there did not appear to be any inclination to adopt that course. On looking more attentively to the Bills he found that, although generally they were Consolidation Bills, there were alterations in the law proposed which would require separate consideration. It was obvious that at that period of the session Bills of this length could not be got through in a satisfactory manner, and there appeared to be no alternative but to postpone them until the next session of Parliament. Whether they should be referred to a select committee to perform the same functions which had been performed by the Lords' committee, or whether the House would find time to dispose of them in committee of the whole House, remained to be considered, but the Government had no intention of abandoning the principle of consolidation. After a few words from Mr. Deedes, the motion was agreed to. The following Bills were also withdrawn:-Malicious Injuries to Property Bill, Coinage Offences Bill, Accessories and Abettors Bill, Forgery Bill, Larceny, &c., Bill, Criminal Statutes Repeal Bill. SOLICITORS' JOURNAL. NOTES ON NEW DECISIONS. EQUITY PRACTICE.-In Dec. 1834 B. assigned, by way of mortgage, a debt of 5260l. then due to him, to secure 4000l. and interest, with a covenant to pay same. In 1836 the debt of 5260l. was paid off without notice to the mortgagee. In 1847 the debt of 4000l. was assigned in consideration of marriage. In 1835 B. settled his estates in conside |