10. The last will of a testator contains the following words:-"I direct that my executors and trustees shall set apart out of my estate the sum of £10,000, and invest the same in Government securities of the colony of Victoria, and pay the income to my son A during his life, and after his death divide the corpus among the children of my son A in such shares and proportions as he may, by writing under his hand, from time to time appoint; and in default of such appointment or so far as no such appointment shall extend equally." The will does not contain any further provisions as to the distribution of the £10,000. A has four children, B, C, D, and E, and no more. On the marriage of B, A executes an indenture of a settlement by which he directs the trustees of the testator's will, after his (A's) death, to pay to B £5,000, part of the £10,000. Afterwards A, by his last will, directs the trustees of the said testator's will to divide the residue of the £10,000 equally between C and D. B, C, D, and E all survive A. How ought the trustees of the will of the original testator to apply the corpus of the £10,000 after A's death? Give the reasons for your answer.

11. A, to secure £100 and interest advanced to him by B, gives B a power of attorney authorizing B at any time to take possession of A's stock in trade as a grocer, and to sell the same and apply the proceeds in payment of what might be due to him. This power of attorney is not registered as a bill of sale. Six months after the execution of the power of attorney, B takes possession of the stock in trade comprised in it, and one month afterwards A's estate is sequestrated for the

benefit of his creditors. Whereupon A's trustee in insolvency lays claim to the stock in trade taken possession of by B. Is he entitled? Give the reasons for your answer.

12. Give a short statement of the rule of law known as the rule against perpetuities.

THE LAW OF OBLIGATIONS.

Mr. Cussen.

Wherever possible, give the reasons for your answer.

1. Distinguish between agreements which are (a) Unenforceable, (b) Voidable, (c) Void. Illustrate your answer by examples.

2. A sent by post a letter to B offering to buy B's piano for £50, stating in the letter that the offer must be accepted within two months. B wrote an answer accepting the offer, but died before it was posted. His executor afterwards, but within the period of two months, forwarded the answer to A and claimed delivery of the piano. Can he enforce his claim if A refuses to deliver?

3. In what circumstances, in the case of a contract under seal, does the absence of consideration become of importance?

4. Xowed Y £50. M, a friend of X, came with X to Y and said "Give X a receipt in full for the

sum of £50 that he owes you, and I will pay
you." Y at once gave the receipt, but M refused
to pay
the money, relying on the Fourth Section
of the Statute of Frauds. Is this an answer?

5. State shortly how the power of a married woman to contract has been affected by the Married Women's Property Acts.

6. State shortly the more important classes of cases in which mistake operates to invalidate the formation of contracts.

7. Discuss and illustrate the maxim " In pari delicto potior est conditio defendentis."

8. Distinguish, by illustration, the difference between Assignability and Negotiability.

9. A, who was in the employ of B as manager of a warehouse, was promised by C a commission, the consideration for which was partly the performance of some work for C, and partly the use of A's influence with B to obtain the acceptance of an offer which Chad made to B to supply certain stock in trade for the warehouse. The work was performed, and the influence used did not, in fact, prejudice B. Has C any defence to an action by A for the commission?

10. In what cases is a person liable where he purports to contract as agent for a named principal?

11. In the absence of agreement to the contrary, what are the more important rights of partners inter

se?

12. State shortly (a) the modes in which a Bill of Exchange may be negotiated; (b) the requisites of a valid indorsement of such a bill.

THE LAW OF WRONGS.

Mr. Woinarski.

1. What are the points of difference between a right of action upon contract and one upon tort? When will the same state of facts afford grounds for an action ex delicto or ex contractu? Give some instances where special damage must be laid and proved in order to maintain an action ex delicto.

2. (a) Give some instances of actions for torts which have been held maintainable against a corporation aggregate.

(b) A published a libel charging a municipal corporation with bribery and corrupt practices. The libel is untrue in fact. Can the municipal corporation succeed in an action for libel against A Give the reasons for your answer.

3. What must a plaintiff prove in order to succeed in an action for malicious prosecution?

4. A resides upon, and is the owner in fee of a piece of land, upon which there is an open unfenced stone quarry. There is no right-of-way over the land; but people habitually pass and repass over

a

it, without any interference from A. B, stranger, C, a doctor summoned by A to attend on A's sick wife, and D, a friend coming to visit A, cross the land after dark, and fall into the quarry, and are injured. Can any, and which, of them succeed in an action against A ? Give the reasons for your answer.

5. A, B, and C, the directors of a trading company, issued a circular to the shareholders of the company, inviting them to subscribe to debenture stock to be issued. The circular stated that the money raised by such subscription would be used to complete the company's buildings, to buy vans and horses, and to develop the company's trade. The real object of the directors in floating the debentures was to use the money, and the money was in fact used, to pay off certain pressing liabilities of the company. D, a shareholder, on the faith of the statements in the circular, took up £1,500 worth of the debenture stock. The company soon afterwards became unable to pay its debts, and was compulsorily wound up, and D lost his £1,500.

(a) What action, if any, can D maintain against A, B, and C?

(b) In the event of D's death before action brought,

(c)

could D's executor or administrator sue?

Would the fact that D had the means of knowing, though he did not in fact know, the real object of the directors in floating the debentures, affect his legal position?

(d) If A and B only were sued, could they successfully object to the non-joinder of C in the action? Give the reasons for your answer.