Neale, J. 516 Neech, R. jun. 220 Noake, W. 240 Phipps, W. 516 Playle, M. M. 152, 220 Pollard, G. 436 Pollard, J. 240 Pope, J. L. 516 Popplewell, H. 124 QUITTER, J. 240 RAINS, W. 260 PACKWOOD, L. P. 476 Ramsey, G. R. 280 Paice, G. 436 Parker, T. 84 Parkin, T. 388 Parkinson, J. 48, 516 Parry, B. J. 280 Partis, J. 64 Partridge, G. 388 Pearce, J. 200 Rawsthorne, J. 455 Roe, T. 388 Rogers, C. B. 220 SAFFERY, C. 64 Silverlock, H. W. 360 Simmonds, J. 16 Rees, H. 180 200 Robbins, W. 536 Simmons, G. jun. 436 Smith, W. A. 280 Smith, W. S. 388 Smith, W. H. 64 Snodgrass, A. 455, 536 Sockett, S. 408, 436 TAYLER, C. 320 Terry, W. 516 Skidmore, T. R. sen. 104 Thomas, J. 388, 455 Slapleton, H, 104 Slow, J. 260 Smallwood, T. 476 Smith, B. 436 Thomas, T. 220 Thompson, P. 408 Smith, W, 280, 388, 476, Todd, T. 496 516 Toller, T. S. 476 WACE, T. 16 Watkins, H. F. 104, 260 Watson, A. 516 Watson, E. W. 200 Watson, H. 220 Wells, J. 124 Wheeldon, J. 220 Whiteman, J. 152 Williams, T. 455 Williams, W. 280, 455 Wood, W. 436 Woodcock, F. M. 200 Wooderson, J. S. 220 Woodgate, W. 16 Woods, H. N. 408, 436 LONDON:-Printed by HENRY MORRELL Cox, of 74, Great Queen-street, in the Parish of St. Giles in the Fields, in the County of Middlesex, Printer, at his Printing Office, an appeal from the Vice-Chancellor action at law, in the mean time, as he should be ad- it was discovered that the term commenced twelve Primrose, the grantor of the annuity, were left to and there was nothing shewn to satisfy the coming on upon the equity reserved, or, as the plain- The bill was therefore dismissed with costs. SMITH V. BARNABY. executrix died in 1821. In 1843, John Barnaby took out letters of administration to her and to the un- administered estate of the testator. Among the questions which then arose was that which became the subject of this appeal, viz. Whom did the testator intend by the words "personal representative? The appellants, as the personal representatives of the next of kin of the testator at his death, contended that they, such next of kin, alone answered the de- scription. Other parties, who were the testator's next of kin at the deaths of the tenants for life men- tioned in the will, contended that they properly an- swered the description. Barnaby insisted that the testator's executrix was his only "personal repre- sentative;" and he, as representing her, claimed to be entitled to the property in question. The Vice- Chancellor was of that opinion, and decided accord- ingly adding, that if this part of the will was to be held void for uncertainty, which was the purport of some of the arguments before his Honour, still this property would belong to the executrix as the sole Lee and Barber supported the appeal, and cited Pyot v. Pyot, 1 Ves. sen. 336; Marsh v. Marsh, 1 Bro. C. C. 293; Jones v. Bellamy. 8 Ves. 31; Bry- den v. Hewlett, 2 M. & K. 90; Butler v. Bushnell, 5 Bing. N. S.; Sturt v. Platell, 7 Scott, 432. Tinney, for the respondent, was not called on. The LORD CHANCELLOR (after reading and com- menting upon the language of the will).-I think the Willcocks, for the plaintiffs, read the Lord Chan- cellor's judgment, and stated the fact of the tenants The MASTER of the ROLLS.-Have you failed or Willcocks.-We have recovered; but in such a manner as that we are obliged to come to this Court. The LORD CHANCELLOR.-There is no cause to The result is all I have to do with. If the action bring such action as he should be advised. But why am I to hear a comment on an action at law? application here by petition; if it was tried properly could not be tried properly, there was room for an I have nothing to do with the trial, but have only to the kind suggested, his Lordship dismissed the ap- Practice-Supplemental bill-Petition-Action at law In a case where a cause comes to a hearing, and the Court is of opinion that before equitable relief, if any, can be given, the plaintiff must establish his right at all, and for that purpose retains the bill for a time, with liberty to the plaintiff to bring such action as he may be advised, the Court takes no notice of the proceedings at law, but only of the result of them, and is bound by that absolutely; and upon the facts as proved at the hearing, together with the result of It may happen, however, that from the nature of the the trial at law, founds its decision. proceedings at law adopted by the plaintiff, the real question cannot be tried; and in such case, the plain- tiff ought to come to the Court for assistance to have the question properly tried, either by a direction founded on the decree, or after a re-hearing; and If a plaintiff, whose action at law has substantially such application must be by petition, or motion. failed, neglects or omits to take that course, he will not be permitted, when the case comes on upon the equity reserved, to strengthen it by the introduction into it of new matter occurring after the original hearing; but he will be confined, and strictly, to the facts as there proved, together with the result of the In a case where an action at law had substantially Willcock. It was necessary to have a revivor of the suit; but the facts now stated have occurred since, and are properly brought before the Court by The MASTER of the ROLLS.-Have you any case ? Willcock.-No. Gifford, on the same side. Marlborough, 3 Myl. & Cr. 417; Milner v. Lord 379; Morris v. Ellis, 13 Sim. 1; Marquis of Wa- Harwood, 17 Ves. 144; Usborne v. Baker, 2 Madd. terford v. Knight, 3 Cl. & F. 270; Pinkus v. Peters, 5 Beav. 253; Brown v. Newall, 2 Myl. & Cr. 558; there must be a petition, or The MASTER of the ROLLS.-Suppose the case of annuity granted to Mr. Dudgeon, and assigned by him to Mr. Smith. The annuity was granted in 1817, C. P. Cooper and Cook, for another annuitant, who Mistake-Particulars of sale-Description-Contract ment was entered up against the grantor in 1822. Where by mistake a leasehold property had been de-effect, there being outstanding terms. In March, 1839, ill-advised course to pursue. They ought to have missed with costs. with the matter, because by reason of the terms there was no right of entry; 2 Stark. Evid. 210; 3 & 4 Wm. 4, c. 27, ss. 2, 34; 2 Duke's Ch. Pract. 766, 1st ed.; Adam's Ej. 32; and, if there was any misconduct of the parties, there was a remedy by motion or petition. Bayley v. Morris, 4 Ves. 788. Kindersley, Parry, Turner, Loratt, Kennion, and Corry, for other parties.-The case of Hodson v. Ball, 1 Phill. 177, was cited to shew that the leave of the Court must be obtained before filing a bill of revivor and supplement, that had not been done here. brings forward all the circumstances. My present Saturday, July 17. In cases where it is necessary to have recourse to com. In this case, which is mentioned suprà pp. 70 and Rogers now applied for an order to commit Mr. Thomas David Taylor, a solicitor, who had been ordered to deliver up papers, &c. to his clients, the executors of a deceased testator, but had not complied with the order. On the 23rd of March, 1847, the order to deliver was made, which was merely the common order for taxation, and delivery of books, &c. without limiting any time. This order not being attended to, application was made on the 22nd of April for an order for delivery within a week, which was granted, but was not obeyed. The present motion was therefore made for an order of committal for disobedience. The MASTER of the ROLLS.--One step is wanting in the process. The first thing is the general order; then comes the order for delivery in a given time; thirdly, the four-day order; and lastly, the order to commit. You want, therefore, the four-day order, which, however, you may take now. Besides, there must be an affidavit of non-delivery. GARDLER v. GARDLER. The MASTER of the ROLLS.-I am very much surprised in this case, as I was before in that of Hope v. Hope (Rolls, 12th March, 1847), at the misconception which prevails as to the nature of proceedings of this kind. In that case I was told over and over again, that an action at law in such cases was brought for the purpose of informing and satisfying the conscience of the Court, but the Court has nothing to do with the proceedings at law, except to take the re. sult of the action as it appears. When a cause comes on for hearing, and it turns out that the plaintiff, before he can obtain equitable relief, if he be entitled to any at all, establishes his legal right, the practice is for this Court to retain the bill for a certain specified time, commonly a year, to give the plaintiff an opportunity of establishing his legal right if he can; and sometimes it may happen that, though the Court does not think the claimant entitled to the equity claimed by the bill, yet it may give directions at the hearing to facilitate the proceedings at law, and raay prevent obstructions being set up to defeat the fair trial of the legal right, but subject to that extent of interference or relief. The plaintiff is in such cases, as in an ordinary case at law, bound to establish his right at law. This Court has nothing to do with the proceedings at law, which must be conducted according to the rules of law till they result in judgment, also pronounced according to the rules of law; and if there be anything wrong in the conclusion arrived at, the judges alone can set it right. This Court never gives directions for a new trial in such a case; but yet it does not abandon all notice of the proceedings as they go on. It may happen that proceedings of such a nature may be adopted, that the real question at issue between the parties cannot be tried; but in such a case application ought to be made to this Court immediately on such a difficulty occurring, either to take a direction to meet it, founded on the decree already made, or to have a re-hearing with a view to obtain a decree to affect the same object. In such a case, and under such circumstances, the Court might give some directions for the purpose of having a fair trial; so far it might perhaps go. Now let us advert to the case where every thing has been regularly conducted. The Court retains the bill, giving leave to take proceedings at law in a given time, and directing that if they be not so taken, the bill shall be dismissed with costs. Well, suppose the proceedings cannot be concluded within the time, and that there may, for instance, be a motion for a new trial pending at the end of the time, all that the plaintiff has to do in that case is to come here and move to extend the time. But suppose the proceedings to have been taken at law, and to have been con Winstanley applied for an order to take the bill pro cluded in the time, this Court is bound by the result, confesso against defendant, who had not answered. and what it does is to take the facts as they are The attachment, for want of an answer, was issued proved at the hearing, and the result of the trial on the 7th and executed on the 10th of June last, and together, and upon the merits thereby disclosed, to notice of motion to take the bill pro confesso was left determine what, if any, relief the plaintiff is entitled to, for him on the 23rd of June, more than three weeks -for it is by no means of course to grant relief. Well, before the day on which the motion was to be made. a decree was made here, which indeed is not now For some reason or other, however, the plaintiff mine but the Lord Chancellor's, and it gave liberty thought fit to serve the defendant personally with to the plaintiff to take such proceedings at law as he notice of motion for the same day as before, but withshould be advised, with a direction that the outstand-out any reference to the former service; and as the ing terms and the statute were not to be set up second notice was served on the 26th of June, and the against him; and having in a certain time had a trial motion was to be made on this day (the 17th of July), at law he was to be at liberty to come before the the time was too short by one day, under the 76th Court again, and, upon the result of the action and Order. The question whether the second was a waiver the equity reserved, as it is called, to ask such relief, of the first, however hard it might be on the plaintiff. if any, as the Court might think him entitled to. The MASTER of the ROLLS.-The question is, Now this comes on, not in that shape at all,-nothing whether you have not waived the first service by the was said as to the equity reserved,-indeed it was personal service. Service by leaving notice at a place hardly contended that the plaintiff had a right to any is good service; and if you thought fit to serve a relief on the equity reserved,-it was rather insisted fresh notice, the point is, does not that supersede the that as there was one united right and a judgment former? If you had merely informed the defendant against one, it should be considered a judgment against of your intention to move on the day stated in your the others. But it is a supplemental bill, stating mat- first notice, and in pursuance thereof, you would have ters which happened since the decree, with the view of been safe; but you substituted personal service for the eking out an equity to support the plaintiff in asking former service and as therefore you did not rely on relief, to which he is not otherwise entitled. I have the first service, though good enough if you had, the pointed out the analogy of a demurrer before the defendant might very naturally suppose you were disdecision, in which a supplemental bill is filed, and satisfied with it, and so thought fit to serve him again, it is not denied that in such case a supplemental bill and being too late, he was not bound to notice it, for is improper. Now what is the rule in this case? in such cases strict practice must prevail. Besides, Simply that the facts proved at the hearing, together it is not safe to take an order in such circumstances. with the result of the trial, are to guide the Court in It must be refused. determining the question of relief. What right, then, is there to add more without the leave of the Court? Here the complaint is, that the trial was not so conducted as to enable the question which the Court intended to be tried at all. Well, then, if there is any regular practice at all in this Court, the plaintiff ought to have come here at the earliest moment, and stated the difficulty; but instead of that, he files a supplemental bill, which is partly a bill of revivor, and July 20 and 21. HAWKS v. HOWARD. the note a bill at seven days was drawn by a country bank on a bank in town in favour of the outgoing "trustees, and it was sent to one of them to indorse, who, having indorsed it, sent it for the same purpose to C. D. the other trustee, a solicitor, who had been instructed to invest the proceeds of it, when paid, in stock, in the names of the new trustees. C. D. delivered the bill to the registered officer of a bank with which he had dealings, desiring him "to take charge of it," and saying that he should want to purchase some stock." The officer noticing that the bill was payable seven days after sight, C. D. desired him to place it to a private account which he kept with the bank, in addition to several others connected with trust matters. The bill was paid and the money was, as the bill had been, passed to the credit of C. D.'s private account. The same day C. D. drew for the amount to invest in the trusts of this settlement, but the bank refused to part with it unless C. D. made good certain liabilities in respect of bills discounted for him, but not due at the time the bill in question was delivered, but some of which had become due since and were dishonoured. In a suit by the trustees and cestui que trusts of the settlement against C. D. and the officer of the bank to recover the trust-fund, C. D. by his answer, stated that he told the officer that the bill was in payment of trust-money, and that it was to be invested in certain names which he should send him; but the officer denied he heard anything about a trust, or had received special directions; he had only been told to take charge of the bill, and C. D. said he should want some stock. There was no other evidence. The bank was held not liable to make good the trust-fund. This was a suit to recover trust-money under these circumstances. On the 15th of June, 1838, George Hawks made a promissory note for 4,000l. in favour of his brother Edward Hawks, payable in four years after the 1st of July then next; and on the 17th of August, 1838, this note was made the subject of a settlement, entered into in contemplation of marriage for the benefit of E. Hawks, his then intended wife, and the children of the marriage. About the time the note was to become due, it was arranged that the then trustees of the settlement (who were the Rev. Henry Charles Knightley and John Henry Howard, a solicitor) should retire, and the said G. Hawks and Ralph Walters should be the new trustees. The note having become due, a bill for 4,000l. in payment thereof was drawn by Lambton and Co. of Newcastle, on Barclay and Co. of London, payable seven days after sight, in favour of Knightley and Howard; and on the 6th of August, 1842, Walters, who was the solicitor of G. Hawks, sent the bill to Knightley, directing him by letter to indorse and send it to Howard, whom be also instructed by letter of the same date to indorse it, and to invest the proceeds when paid in stock in the names of G. Hawks and Walters himself. The bill came into Howard's hands on the 16th of August, and the same day he delivered it to Mr. Riddler, the registered public officer of the Cheltenham and Gloucestershire bank (with which he bad previously had dealings, and had opened a private account and four other accounts respecting matters of trust), and said to him, "You may as well take charge of this for me,-I shall want to purchase some stock." Riddler seeing the bill drawn at seven days, and remarking the fact, Howard said, "Place it to my account," and, at Riddler's suggestion, indorsed it. The same day it was passed through the bank books, and credited to Howard as cash. On the 27th of August Barclay and Co. paid the bill; and the 28th being a Sunday, the payment of the money was duly noted by the Cheltenham bank on the 29th of August. On the same 29th of August the deed appointing G. Hawks and R. Walters new trustees of the settlement was executed, and on the same day also Howard sent his clerk to the bank to inform Riddler of the names of the trustees, and to desire him to invest the 4,000l. less 31. expenses, in their names. Riddler refused, unless certain bills, which the bank had discounted, and which were not due on the 16th of August, but some of which became due, and were dishonoured between the 16th and 29th. This requisition was not complied with, and the bank retained the money. Subsequently other bills of Howard's became due, and were dishonoured; and in September 1842 his liabilities amounted to several thousands. In this state of things, the trustees and cestui que trusts filed their bill for recovery of the trust-fund, not merely against Howard, from whom they had little or no hope of getting any thing, but also against Riddler, in the hope of fixing him with notice of the trust or otherwise following the money into his hands. Howard, by his answer, stated that he had told Riddler the money was trust-money, and that he wished it to be invested in the names of gentlemen which he would send to him afterwards; and that, in answer to Riddler's inquiry as to who Knightley, the joint payee of the bill, was, he said, he was his co-trustee; whereupon Riddler replied, he only inquired if he was the gentleman who formerly resided in Cheltenham, and that he used to see him at the Club, but did not know he was a reverend. Riddler, by his answer, on the other hand, denied that Howard said anything about a trust, or gave him any special directions as to the appropriation of the fund; but he admitted that Howard told him to take charge of the bill, by which he understood he was to get it cashed in the usual way; and he also admitted that Howard said he should want some stock, but did not mention any names. In that state of things the cause came on to be heard. Turner and Goodeve, for the plaintiffs, endeavoured tice of the trust, or at least of some trust; or, if that could not be maintained, that he took it with special directions as to its appropriation: and lastly, that, as nothing was actually due to the bank by Howard at the time, the time for payment of the bills not having arrived, there was no consideration given for to make out that Riddler took the bill with full no Reform, framed, proposed, and supported by the Profession, would redound greatly to their honour, and, we believe, no less to their profit, for every day's experience assures us more and more that the interests of the public and of the lawyers are identical, and that whatever benefits the former will in the long run be found advantageous to the latter. This should be the mission of the Metropolitan and Provincial Legal Association. THIRD REPORT OF HER MAJESTY'S COMMISSIONERS possession, forfeit such goods and incur the penalties of the 16th class. ployed nor authorised as in Article 3 of this section is mentioned, shall conceal such goods or stores as in the said Article are specified, marked as therein mentioned, or any timber, thick stuff, or plank marked as in the last preceding Article is described, shall, unless he shall upon his trial produce such certificate or certificates as in the said last preceding Article is or are mentioned, forfeit such goods and incur the penalties of the 16th class. 5. Whosoever, not being a contractor, nor em the bill by the bank, and their retention of it, there- FOR REVISING AND CONSOLIDATING THE CRIMI- persons whomsoever, or shall willingly or knowingly fore, was not sustainable. Kindersley and Smythe, for Howard, admitted his liability. Roupell, Campbell, and Jackson, for the bank, insisted that there was not a tittle of evidence to support the plaintiffs' case, since Howard's answer could not be read against his co-defendant. The MASTER of the ROLLS.-This is a most lamentable case, and one in which the plaintiffs have been more scandalously used could scarcely be found; but the question was, by whom were they so used-whether by Howard, or by him and Riddler together? [Here his Lordship stated the facts.] Howard, it is admitted, is answerable; and the question is, whether Riddler is so too. It is alleged that Riddler took the bill with full notice of the trust, or of some trust, or that it was intended to be invested in some trust; and it is further alleged by the plaintiffs, that Riddler, having notice of a trust, must have the knowledge imputed to him that it was a trust for them; or, if he cannot be fixed with knowledge of a trust, they next allege that the bill was given to him with specific directions for appropriation to a particular purpose, and they insist, therefore, that Howard would be entitled to relief, and to have the money so appropriated as intended, and, consequently, that they are entitled to the same relief. And lastly, as no consideration passed from the bank on receipt of the bill, they are answerable for the amount of it. The plaintiffs undoubtedly are placed in great difficulty in establishing their case, if true, and they have drawn my attention to Howard's answer in support of it. They are clearly entitled to read everything in that against Howard himself, but not against Riddler his co-defendant. Not that the answer of one defendant may not sometimes be used against another so as to produce some influence on a judge's mind, but as evidence on which to found a decree it certainly cannot. The plaintiffs being reduced to the necessity of resorting to Riddler's answer as the only evidence they could get, could not, on that answer merely sustain their claim, or get a decree against him; but they insisted that that, together with the other circumstances of the case, raised a presumption in their favour sufficient to lead me to grant them an opportunity of an inquiry elsewhere. Now, is there a semblance of a case against Riddler? I have had quite a dramatic representation made to me, but nothing-not even a conjecture-implicating Riddler. Several allegations indeed are made, but what are they? Riddler was a banker, and Howard his customer, and he had five different accounts, and therefore the direction to place the bill to his private account pointed to something special. Then Howard, having met Riddler, gave him the bill, and told him he should want to purchase some stock, but gave no names, nor mentioned when or how he should want it. I can find no evidence that Howard told Riddler it was trust-money. My opinion is, that the state of things on the 16th of August determined the matter, and there is no ground for allowing a trial. Howard, of course, must be charged, but the bill must be dismissed with costs as against the bank. THE LEGISLATOR. Summary. NOT a rumour of contemplated legislation has been stirring during the week. Mr. CHARLES BULLER has delivered a long and interesting speech to his constituents, in which he touched upon the subject of Law Reform, and observed that the County Courts were but the beginning of a long series of measures required to adapt the law to the wants and intelligence of the time; but he gave no promise that the Government contemplated doing anything in this direction. Should it so prove, an opportunity will be afforded to the lawyers of taking the initiative in Law Reform, and thus preventing the confusion and mischief that have resulted from the labour of unprofessional, and therefore inexperienced amateurs, in this branch of legislation. A series of measures of real Law NAL LAW. (Continued from page 518.) Offences relating to the public property, revenue, and funds. SECTION II. OFFENCES RELATING TO VESSELS OF WAR, PUBLIC STORES, AND THEIR PLACES OF DEPOSIT. Art. 1. Whosoever, either within this realm, or in any of the islands, countries, forts, or places thereunto belonging, shall maliciously set on fire, or burn, or otherwise destroy any of her Majesty's ships or vessels of war, whether the said ships or vessels of war be on float or building or begun to be built in any of her Majesty's dock yards, or building or repairing by contract in any private yards, for the use of her Majesty, or any of her Majesty's arsenals, magazines, dock-yards, rope-yards, victualling offices or any of the buildings erected therein or belonging thereto, or any timber or materials there placed for building, repairing, or fitting out of ships or vessels, or any of her Majesty's military, naval, or victualling stores, or other ammunition of war, or any place or places where any such military, naval, or victualling stores, or other ammunition of war, is, are, or shall be kept, placed, or deposited, shall suffer death. 2. Whosoever shall steal or embezzle any of her Majesty's ammunition, sails, cordage, or naval or military stores, shall incur the penalties of the 5th class. 3. Whosoever shall make any stores of war, or naval stores, with the marks usually used to, and marked upon, her Majesty's warlike and naval or ordnance stores, that is to say, any cordage of three inches and upwards, wrought with a white thread laid the contrary way,or any smaller cordage, to wit, from three inches downwards, with a twine in lieu of a white thread laid to the contrary way as aforesaid, or any cordage wrought with one or more worsted threads, or any canvas, wrought or unwrought, with a blue streak in the middle, or any other stores, with the broad arrow by stamp, brand or otherwise (not being a contractor with her Majesty's principal officers or commissioners of the navy, ordnance, or victualling, for her Majesty's use, or employed by such contractor for that purpose as aforesaid), or shall make any public stores whatsoever under the care, superintendance, or control of any officer or person in the service of her Majesty, or employed in any public department or office, either marked with the marks, or any of them before specified, or with the broad arrow and the letters B. O., or with the crown and the broad arrow, or with her Majesty's arms, or with the letters G. R., W. R., or V. R. to denote the property of her Majesty therein, or shall use any such marks (not being authorised by the proper officer or officers, person or persons in her Majesty's service in that behalf so to do), shall forfeit such goods, and shall incur the penalties of the 16th class. 4. Whosoever, not being a contractor, nor employed nor authorised as in the last preceding Article is mentioned, in whose custody, possession, or keeping such goods or stores, marked as in the said Article is mentioned, or any timber, thick stuff, or plank, marked with the broad arrow by stamp, blue streak in a serpentine form, or bewper, otherbrand, or otherwise, or any canvas marked with a wise called buntin, wrought with one or more streaks of raised tape (such canvas or bewper not being charged to be new, or not more than one-third worn), shall be found, shall, unless he shall upon his trial stores as are warlike, naval or ordnance stores, a produce, with respect to such of the said goods or certificate under the hand of three or more of her Majesty's principal officers or commissioners of the navy, ordnance, or victualling, and, with respect to such of the said goods or stores as are public stores officer or person in her Majesty's service, or employed under the care, superintendence, or control of any in any public department or office, a certificate or certificates under the hand or hands of the proper officer or officers, person or persons in her Majesty's service, authorised to grant the same, expressing the tively as he shall then be indicted for, and the occanumbers, quantities, or weight of such goods respecsion and reason of such goods coming to his hands or 6. Whosoever, not being a contractor nor employed as in Article 3 of this section is mentioned, shall willingly or knowingly sell or deliver, or cause or procure to be sold or delivered to any person or receive or have in his custody, possession, or keeping, any stores of war, or naval, ordnance, or victualling stores, or any goods whatsoever, marked as in the said article, is mentioned with respect to the warlike, naval, or ordnance stores therein 'specified, or any canvas marked either with a blue streak in the middle or with a blue streak in a serpentine form, or any bewper otherwise called buntin, wrought with one or more streaks of raised tape, or any cordage wrought with one or more worsted threads (the said stores of war, or naval, ordnance, or victualling stores or goods above mentioned, or any of them, being in a raw or unconverted state, or being new, or not more than one-third worn), or shall conceal such stores or goods, or any of them marked as aforesaid, shall be deemed to be a receiver of stolen goods, knowing them to have been stolen, and shall, unless he shall upon his trial produce a certificate under the hands of three or more of her Majesty's principal officers or commissioners of the navy, ordnance, or victualling, expressing the numbers, quantities, or weights of such stores or goods as he shall then be indicted for, and the occasion and reason of such stores or goods coming to his hands or possession, incur the penalties of the 9th class. 7. Whosoever, not being authorised as in Article 3 of this section is mentioned, shall willingly or knowingly receive or have in his custody, possession, or keeping, or shall conceal any public stores, under the care, superintendence, or control of any officer, orperson in her Majesty's service, or employed in any public department or office, as in the said Article is mentioned, so marked as therein specified (the said stores, or any of them being in a raw or unconverted state, or being new or not more than one-third worn), shall be deemed to be a receiver of stolen goods, knowing them to have been stolen, and shall, unless he shall upon his trial produce a certificate or certificates under the hand or hands of the proper officer or officers, person or persons, in her Majesty's service, authorised to grant the same, of such and the like nature as the certificate in the last preceding Article mentioned, incur the penalties of the 9th class. 8. Nothing in Articles 3, 4, 5, or 6, of this section contained, shall extend or be construed to extend, to exempt from the operation of any of those Articles any person being a contractor, or employed as in the said Article 3 is mentioned, except only so far as concerns stores or goods marked as in the said Articles is mentioned with respect to the warlike, naval, ordnance or victualling-stores therein specified, which shall be bonâ fide provided, made up, or manufactured by such person, or by his order, and which shall not have been before delivered into her Majesty's store, unless, having been so delivered, they shall have been sold or returned to such persons by the commissioners of her Majesty's Navy, ordnance, or victualling,, respectively. 9. The penalties of Articles 4, 5, and 6 of this section, so far as relates to the warlike, naval, ordnance or victualling stores therein specified or referred to, shall not be incurred by any person who shall have bought any such stores of her Majesty's commissioners of the navy, ordnance or victualling who shall produce a certificate or certificates, under the hand and seal of three or more of the said com. missioners, that he bought such goods or stores from them at any time before he sold or delivered the or a certificate from such person or persons as shall same, or before the same were found in his custody, appear to have bought the said stores from them the said commissioners, that the stores so sold or delivered by him, or so found in his custody, were the stores or part of the stores so bought of the said certificates the quantity of such stores shall be excommissioners as aforesaid, in which certificate or . pressed, and the time when and where bought of the said commissioners. 10. Neither shall any thing within this section contained be construed to hinder any the principal commander of any of her Majesty's ships at sea, to officers and commissioners of the navy, or any chief lend any of her Majesty's stores to any merchantship or vessel in distress or otherwise, as might heretofore lawfully be done, in case such goods so lent be restored with all possible conveniency; and said stores from time to time, have such certificate as provided such person or persons so borrowing the aforesaid, which the said principal officers and com missioners of the navy, or commander-in-chief are hereby required to give to the party or parties that shall so borrow the same. 11. Neither shall the penalties of Articles 4, 5, and 7 of this section, so far as relates to any public stores under the care, superintendence, or control of any officer or person in her Majesty's service, or employed in any public department or office, as in Article 3 of this section is mentioned, so marked as therein specified, be incurred by any person who upon his trial shall produce a certificate or certificates under the hand or hands of the proper officer or officers, person or persons in her Majesty's service authorised to grant the same, of such and the like nature as the certificates mentioned in Article 9 of this section. 12. Whosoever shall make, sign, or give any false certificate, bill of parcels or other instrument purporting the identity or the sale, loan or disposal of any goods or stores, as goods or stores so purchased or borrowed of the said commissioners or other officer or person in her Majesty's service respectively, as in the last three preceding Articles is mentioned, or shall utter or publish any such false certificate, bill of parcels, or other instrument purporting as aforesaid, knowing the same to be false, shall incur the penal. ties of the 16th class. 13. Whoever shall wilfully and fraudulently destroy, beat out, take out, cut out, deface, obliterate or erase, wholly or in part, any of the marks in Articles 3, 4, or 6 of this section mentioned with respect to the warlike, naval, ordnance or victualling stores therein specified, or any other mark denoting the property of her Majesty in or to any warlike or naval, ordnance or victualling stores, or any of the marks in the said Article 3 mentioned with respect to any public stores under the care, superintendence, or control of any officer or person in her Majesty's service, or employed in any public department or office, or shall cause, procure, employ or direct any other person or persons so to do, for the purpose of concealing the property of her Majesty in such stores respectively, shall incur the penalties of the 9th class. 14. Whosoever, having been convicted of any offence contrary to any of the Articles 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 12, and 13 of this section, for which he shall not have been transported beyond the seas, shall be guilty of a second offence contrary to any of those Articles, which would not otherwise, as the first offence, subject him to transportation, shall incur the penalties of the 9th class. person who shall have received or retained such goods (To be continued.) which the Barrister is exposed, are chiefly to be checked by the tests to which Mr. Creasy has adverted-an effective legal education, both moral and intellectual. If the lawyer suffers under these disadvantages, how much more the Solicitor. Sir G. Stephen, throughout the whole of his evidence, insists with energy on the inferior state of morals, capacity, and attainment, which, under the existing system, prevails in his branch of the Profession. Many of these defects are not solely to be ascribed to erroneous or deficient instruction, but are attributable to the external circumstances in which the Profession at large REPORT FROM THE SELECT COMMITTEE may be said to be engaged; such as the classes from ON LEGAL EDUCATION. which, in general, their numbers are supplied; (Continued from page 539.) the motives which usually guide the selection of Such are the effects of the present system; such the profession, on the part of candidates and paits influence on the judicial office and character. It rents; the conduct of the public in their behalf, may naturally be concluded it is not without analogous both in reference to employment and remuneraeffects on those from whom the judge is selected-on tion; all of which may sensibly influence the Mr. Starkie and Mr. Empson both character and conduct of both body and individuals. the barrister. ascribe to the preference of the solicitor the success "The tradesman," says he, "with a very extensive in the outset of their course for many young lawyers. business, arising from book-debts; merchants for the But solicitors themselves, from the want already same reason, but with a higher class of business; gennoticed, of education of a high order, are little com- tlemen of small but independent fortunes, contribute ; petent to judge of the education and intellectual but perhaps the largest class are those who come qualifications of others. "There is a great deal of from a much lower stock, introduced at the age of very useful knowledge," says Mr. Empsom, "in the ten, twelve, or thirteen, as soon as they can write, Profession, of which the attorneys are not the best into an attorney's office, and employed as copying judges, and of which the mere fact of a person being clerks. You may say with respect to a man of that a successful Nisi Prius Advocate is not the best cri- sort that he is suckled and cradled as an attorney. terion. There have been many distinguished Nisi The candidates sent forward so overstock the Profes. Prius Advocates, who would have been infinitely sion, more perhaps from the difficulty of advancing better lawyers, and have made much better judges, if in others than predilection for this, that the bulk of they had had a more comprehensive study of the law the Law List for this year is nearly double of what it from the beginning, and not merely have picked up was fifteen or twenty years ago. Not more than what was necessary for them in practice; for every one-third of these, when admitted, are earning such body acquainted with the Profession knows that the an income by their profession as will enable them to little instruments necessary for the daily practice and maintain their families in respectability, and accordwarfare of the Courts is a very different thing from ing to their station in life." The result of this is the substantial knowledge of the law." This en- natural. There is the probability, or, at least the couragement, almost exclusively given to the practi- possibility of a number of individuals becoming memcal and mechanical, has had the effect of discourag-bers of the Profession who are not qualified to reflect ing, as profitless, the higher and doctrinal depart- honour on it. It creates direct inducement to propaments of the Profession, and produced two striking gate and encourage litigation; it tends to introduce evils: it has deprived the study of law of its scientific courses and practice by no means creditable; the character, and gradually thrown out of the race, by habit of discounting doubtful bills, buying up bad the experience of how little such attainments are ap- debts ; " making terms with tradesmen, for instance, preciated, those very intelligences who were most that they will take all their bad and doubtful debts at capable of bringing back the Profession to its original the end of the year, and allow them either ten, or 15. Whosoever shall forge any certificate to be purposes and character. The consequence has been, fifteen, or twenty per cent. for them, and make the given under the authority of an Act passed in the that in this country we have, generally speaking, but most of them; concocting public companies and second year of the reign of King William IV. inti- few examples of that important class of thinkers and speculations of a very doubtful and uncertain tuled,An Act to Amend the Laws relating to the writers who, in other countries, standing on the character; urging their clients over whom they Business of the Civil Departments of the Navy, and summits of the profession, and disengaged from the may have influence to try a disputed question of to make other Regulations for more Effectually turmoil and labour of its daily technical duties, have, law, in preference to arbitration, with the offer Carrying on the Du ies of the said Departments," by with disposition and capacity, leisure also, and op- that they will undertake to carry them through for the commissioners for executing the office of Lord portunity to keep the profession up to the intellectual nothing, and look for their costs to their opponents, High Admiral, or any of them, or by any superin- height to which it should be its proudest boast to a fertile source of litigation; besides many others, tendent, of the purchase or sale of any naval or vic-aspire. Abroad publicists and professors form a and still less legitimate modes of creating business tualling stores, sball incur the penalties of the 13th class apart, occupying the most honourable posts in even than those." These are among a portion of the their profession, and in the service of the State. evils which necessarily grow out of the immense numHere such a class is comparatively unknown, and in- ber on one side, and of the very inferior moral and individual examples are rare; and yet few countries tellectual education on the other, of the candidates who have, from the principles and forms of its govern- from time to time are admitted into the Profession. ment and constitution, graater need of such a body And when we take further into considesation the very Were such a body in existence, it is delicate and important, and complicated relations in scarcely possible that our legislation would have pre- which solicitors must stand in reference to the sented the many offences against the first principles public and their clients, these evils become greatly of logical and legal arrangement, nor been exposed enhanced. "It is hardly possible to mention any to the numerous incongruities of manner and matter topic," we again quote Sir George Stephen, with which so many of our Acts of Parliament abound. subject upon which, sooner or later, a solicitor in Nor is its absence the only defficiency which the large practice may not find himself deeply engaged. public has to regret. From the concentration of all It is quite impossible to define, within a narrow comintellectual effort within the narrow limits of our pass, the nature of a solicitor's business; it extends ordinary Courts, there are few who devote themselves to any thing, it extends to every thing; the fact is, to studies which, though possibly of less profit to the that we are, as professional men, entrusted to a very individual, are of serious import to the public. In- great extent with the confidence of gentlemen; we are ternational Law, Commercial Law, are only touched entrusted to a very great extent with the most saon incidentally, in the course of other studies, or just cred matters connected with the families of gentlemen. as much of the leading forms of procedure (with little It often happens that the protection of their honour or no reference to principle) is caught up in the pro and their character, and of course, of their property, is gress of a controverted question as will be sufficient left to our zeal and our integrity; and where we are to bear a man of average courage and capacity brought into this confidential and habitual intercourse through; and whilst in other countries the passage with men of every class in society, the highest as well from one department to another of the profession is as the lowest, I think that it is most important comparatively easy, from the circumstance of the that the Profession should be so educated as to be lawyer having mastered the great scientific principles qualified for carrying on that intercourse as gentlemen on which all equally rest, amongst us, where such themselves; but I apprehend that that qualification application to first principles, that is, to law, as a cannot be attained except by educating them as genscience, is comparatively unknown, the transition tlemen, with much greater attention to their general from one to another is a matter of empiricism, and endowments and information than is at present the the success with which it is accomplished almost ex- case." The variety and extent of information, as well clusively ascribable to mere dexterity or chance. as perfect propriety of conduct and character necessary for such duties are obvious, but both require very considerable additions when the solicitor comes in contact, in a country like this, with the public generally. The diversity of subjects to which any respectable solicitor must in the course even of a single day attend to, many, too, demanding much more than a superficial knowledge, needs not to be insisted on. The example furnished by Sir George Stephen, from his own experience, may, without exaggeration, be considered as common to most of the more eminent members, at least, of his Profession. It can scarcely be doubted, under present circumstances, and from class. SECTION III. OFFENCES BY OFFICERS OF THE CUSTOMS OR EXCISE. ART. 1. If any embezzlement, waste, spoil, or destruction shall be made of or in any goods or merchandise which shall be warehoused in warehouses, under the authority of an Act passed in the session of Parliament holden in the eighth and ninth years of her present Majesty's reign, intituled "An Act for the Warehousing of Goods," by or through any wilful misconduct of any officer or officers of customs or excise, every such officer shall incur the penalties of the 16th class. 2. Whosoever, being a collector, receiver, or other -person intrusted with the collection, receipt, custody, or management of any part of the revenue of excise, shall neglect or omit to keep and render such separate and distinct accounts, and in such manner and form as shall from time to time be directed by the Commissioners of Excise, or shall knowingly render or fur nish false accounts of or relating to any duty, or penalty, or sum of money collected, had, or received, or to be collected, had, or received by him, or intrusted to his care or custody, or of any balance of money in his hands, or under his control and management, shall, upon conviction, be incapable of holding or enjoying any office under the Crown, and shall incur the penalties of the 16th class. than ours. 3. Whosoever, being an officer of excise, shall deliver out, or suffer to be delivered out, any paper prepared or provided or appointed by the Commissioners of Excise to be used for permits, in blank or before such permit shall be filled up and issued agreeably to, The lawyer is thus restricted in his utility and and in conformity with, a request note; or shall comprehensiveness, and even in the very walks where knowingly give or grant any permit to any person not he is most successful, he is far below the standard to entitled to receive the same, or shall knowingly give which, under a better system of early legal study, or grant any false or untrue permit, or shall make any he would probably have attained. It may be doubted, false or untrue entry in the counterpart of any permit too, whether his moral as well as intellectual powers given or granted by him, or shall knowingly or wil- are not injuriously affected by this narrowing, and in lingly receive or take any goods or commodities into however high a position the Bar may now stand the stock of any person brought in with any false, or in many particulars, whether it might not stand untrue, or fraudulent permit, or shall knowingly or under an improved educational system in a much willingly grant any permit for the removal of any bigher. The abuses in cross-examination, in adgoods or commodities out of or from the stock of any dresses to juries, in the drawing up of affidavits, to 66 or any |