Committee Register Book, Returns of District not admit of extract, and the description of the All the Books and Forms required for the Polling, as Poll Books, Check-Clerks' Books, &c. will be ready in the course of the week. NECROLOGY SIR JOHN EARDLEY WILMOT, BART. Died, at Hobart Town, on the 3rd of February, Sir John Eardley Eardley Wilmot, bart. late Lieut. Governor of Van Diemen's Land. Sir Eardley Wilmot represented a branch of the Derbyshire family of Wilmot of Osmaston, and was a descendant from the ancient house of Eardley of Audeley, in Staffordshire. Sir Eardley Wilmot was born in 1783, and was twice married: first, to Elizabeth, daughter of C. H. secondly, in 1819, to Elizabeth, eldest daughter of Parry, esq. a celebrated physician at Bath; and, Sir Robert Chester, of Bush Hall, in Hertfordshire. In politics, Sir Eardley Wilmot was of the moderate Tory party, and was returned by the Liberal interest for the county of Warwick. Early in 1843 Sir Eardley Wilmot received the appointment of Lieut. Governor of Van Diemen's Land, and was superseded in his appointment by Charles Joseph Latrobe, esq. who arrived on the 13th of October, 1846, as admiEardley's death is stated to have been a complete nistrator of the government. The cause of Sir exhaustion of the frame-a decay of nature. melancholy event, subduing all private and party animosity, has called forth the usual demonstrations of regret. We believe it was his expressed wish, previously to his decease, that his remains should be conveyed to England, to be placed in the family "resting-place."-Hobart Town Paper. Familiar Exercises between an Attorney and his Articled Clerk, &c. By FRANCIS HOBLER, Jun. Attorney-at-law. Third edition. 1847. Benning and Co. THAT this little volume should have reached a third edition is the best proof of the practical character of its teachings. But Mr. HOBLER is a practical disquisition, he presents to his pupils so much of the law as they will require to master, leaving them to pursue the perusal of the text at their leisure. The questions on the sections selected from the Institutes are very clearly put, and the volume will be a useful assistant in law studies. JOURNAL OF PROPERTY. THE MONEY MARKET. Sat. Mon. Tues. Wed. Thurs. a reasonably clear prima facie case, final relief after full hearing of both sides. In Chancery the plaintiff asks for an injunction; under the criminal law the prosecutor asks for a commitment for trial; each on a prima facie case. Chancery does ↑ not allow the injunction to issue on a mere affidavit; the magistrate does not allow the warrant to issue on a mere affidavit. The Court of Chancery and the magistrate hear the one-sided case, exercise their best discretion, and decide what shall be done till trial. The magistrate may say, "There is no OF LEGISLATORS, MAGISTRATES, AND LAWYERS. man, and therefore, instead of indulging in learned sufficient case shewn; I will not commit at all:" or he may say, "There is a sufficient prima facie case shewn; I will commit, but I will take bail." In some cases he says, "I will commit, and will not take bail." Suppose the prisoner should be acquitted after committal; he will have undergone a hardship, but not an injustice; for no man has a right to say, "I will not be confined till conviction; I will remain at large till tried and found guilty." We must all submit to evils inseparable from the due administration of justice. All that the supposed delinquent has a right to insist on is, that a warrant shall not issue against him, without discretion exercised by an impartial person; and that, before being fully committed, he shall be heard to state his case. The principle is precisely the same in the case of arrest for debt; there ought to be interlocutory relief and final relief; the first founded on high probability, the second on legal certainty-certainty established by trial and judgment. It is true, that the high probability may at last turn out to have been not a reality; but this is a partial evil, which will arise once, perhaps, in a hundred cases, if the precautions suggested in Mr. Warburton's bill are taken, and the benefit of speedy and cheap interference will be felt in the remaining ninety-nine. If your principle be conceded, that, because there is a possibility of error, no steps shall be taken against the debtor, until he has had all that time allowed him, which you must allow to a person who says, "I have a good defence, and you must give me time to get my witnesses together." You protect the knavish debtor from the honest creditor in ninety-nine cases; but you should inflict a temporary inconvenience on an honest debtor in the hundredth case. The ninety-nine debtors use the time to confess judgments in favour of favourite creditors, and too often in favour of persons who are not creditors at all, but only pretend to be. Mr. Warburton's Bill takes these precautions, to prevent mistake : 1st. Arrest is not to take place, except after an inquiry by a Commissioner of the Court of Bankruptcy. In how many cases have Commissioners erred about a petitioning creditor's debt, as to which, however, the inquiry is ex parte ? Let a return be called for. 2nd. Arrest is not to take place, unless the plaintiff's case is clear. It is the plaintiff's fault, if his case is not clear. A doubtful case ought to be decided in the proper court. 3rd. The arrested debtor is to be brought up at once, to shew that he ought not to have been arrested; and on shewing that, the Cominissioner is to discharge him. 4th. He may give bail, or deposit the amount demanded. 5th. He may sign a declaration of insolvency. None of these precautions, except the power of giving bail, existed when arrest was abused. If, notwithstanding these proposed precautions, the legislating classes will persist in indulging a sham sentimentality about imprisonment for debt, which they do not exhibit about imprisonment for poaching, the sooner they tell to creditors of the middling and lower classes the real truth, that they are an outlawed class, the better it will be. Truth is respectable: not so hypocrisy. GENERAL ELECTION. THE Fifth Edition of Cox's Practice of Elections and of Registrations, incorporating the Reform and Registration Acts, and containing all the appeals decided to the present time, with full instructions to agents of candidates and returning officers for the management of an election, and precedents of the Books, Papers, Oaths, Returns, &c. required by both, will be ready on Thursday next. The Books and Forms required for the first stages of an election, viz. Canvass Books, AMOUNT OF DIVIDENDS DECLARED. GILSTRAP, William, esq. eldest son of Joseph Gilstrap, esq. Bates, J. grocer, div. next week. Johnson, London.Bird, J. timber merchant, div. next week. Bell, London.Cartlitch, J. victualler, div. next week. Johnson, London, -Coker, J. timber dealer, div. next week. Bell, London. BLOOD, T. esq. justice of the peace, on the 26th ult. at Ross, J. C. merchant, div. next weck. Bell, London. Roxton, Clare, of fever, taken at the Corofin Relief Rooms. GASCOIGNE, Mr. W. solicitor, on the 27th ult. at Clifton, near York, aged 40. Thursday, May 27. Duckham and Co. warehousemen, joint and sep. div. next week. Johnson, London.-Best, C. printer, div. next week. HowLET, Mr. H. S. surgeon, eldest son of Mr. Howlet, of Johnson, London.-Dore, M. grocer, div. next week. John Bartlett's-buildings, solicitor, on the 15th of April, at SAUSMAREZ, Havilland, the infant son of the late J. de NOTICES OF NEW LAW BOOKS. The Statutes and Orders relating to Practice and As it is a work requiring only care and diligence, son, London.-Heard, D. sen. smack owner, last exam. De Wilde, F. A. ironmonger, fin. div. next week. Belcher, London.-Gilbert, M. innkeeper, fin. div. next week. Bel cher, London.-Knight, H. brewer, last exam. sine die. Knight, W. wine merchant, last exam. July 7.-Oxford, E. milliner, div. next week. Whitmore, London.-Simpson, J. carrier, assignees, June 29.-Stace, R. A. upholsterer, an nulled. Stewart, C. builder, last exam. July 9.-Temperley, N. coal merchant, last exam. June 29. Saturday, May 29. Fleck, J. baker, last exam. passed.-Hood, J. L. rope manufacturer, div. next week. Belcher, London.- Waters, S. baker, assignees, July 3.-Wood, D. warehouseman, assignees, June 29. DIVIDENDS. Bankrupts' Estates. Official Assignees are given, to whom apply for the Bourquin, F. H. watch maker, first, 2s. 6d. Cannan, London.-Charles, H. commission agent, first, 63d. Hob son, Manchester.-Davies, E. miller, first, 1s. 42d. Morgan, Liverpool.-Dent, M. (widow) bookseller, first, 58. 74d. Hope, Leeds.-Heppell, T. timber merchant, second, 1s. Wakley, Newcastle. Huntley, R. E. wine-merchant, first, turer, first, sd. Cannan, London.-Latham, S. M. baker, 3s. 9d. Baker, Newcastle.-Humbey, J. C. boot manufac second, 3s. 4d. Whitmore, London.-Miller, W. agent, first, 2s. 6d. Hobson, Manchester.-Parnall, W. clothier, first, 2s. Cannan, London.-Pettigrew, R. jun. tailor, third, 28. 3d. Whitmore, London.-Prichard, J. butcher, first, 9d. Whitmore, London.-Roberts, T. linen draper, second, 8d. Whitmore, London.-Senior, W. hosier, first, 7d. on new Hope, Leeds.-Wilkinson, J. fruiterer, 4s. 6d. Morgan, proofs. Hope, Leeds. Walton, J. tailor, first, 4s. 6d. Liverpool. peared by the affidavits that Mr. Weymouth had been admitted in Easter Term, 1846, and had neglected to procure a stamped certificate up to the present time. Ever since he had been admitted, he had been acting as clerk to his father, an attorney practising at Kingbridge, Devon. When the new County Courts Act came into operation, Kingsbridge was selected as one of the places in which a district court should be held, and Mr. T. Weymouth was anxious to practise in that court for his father, he being unable to do so from other important engagements. It was, however, sworn, that the judge of the district court had refused to hear any one address the Court or assist a suitor in any way, unless he were a barrister or a solicitor duly authorised to practice. This decision did not become known to Mr. Weymouth until too late for him to give his notices pursuant to the rule of Hilary Term 1846, so as to enable him to apply at the end of the present Term for his stamped certificate to practise; and it was now sworn that it would injure him in his profession of an attorney if he were prevented from practising in the County Court of Kingsbridge until after next Michaelmas Term. It was also sworn that he had never, either directly or indirectly, practised in his own name or on his own account. Under these circumstances it was submitted that the Court would dispense with the usual notices and allow him to take out his stamped certificate at BUSINESS OF THE WEEK. (Before WIGHTMAN, J.) MUNDEN. THE DUKE OF BRUNSWICK.-Lush applied to the Court for a rule to set aside the final judgment signed herein upon a plea to the jurisdiction, the proper judgment against the defendant being respondeat ouster. Rule nisi. Re R. E. SMITH and ANOTHER, gents.-Vowles moved for a rule calling upon these parties to pay a sum of money received by them as attorneys for their client. Rule nisi. Re THE BOROUGH OF ALDBOROUGH.-Schomberg moved for a mandamus in order to the election of two bailiffs for Rule nisi. Commissioner to whom the fiat belonged, for his last examination, and was asked if he had any further statement to make; he made some answer which was not considered by the Commissioner to be satisfactory, and he was carried back to prison. Imperial Parliament. PUBLIC BUSINESS TRANSACTED. BILLS READ A FIRST TIME. Insolvent Debtors. Wednesday, June 9. Thursday, June 10. Lunatic Asylums, No. 2-" for the amendment of the Laws relating to the provision and regulation of Lunatic Asslums for Counties and Boroughs in England." Tithes Commutation" to explain the Acts for the Commu tation of Tithes in England and Wales, and to continue the Officers appointed under the said Acts for a time to be limited." Joint Stock Companies" to amend an Act for the registration, incorporation, and regulation of Joint Stock Compa. nies." Representative Peers, Scotland. Held, that there ought to have been a record of such statement before the Commissioner, and that there Threatening Letters, &c. not being such, the bankrupt, upon being brought up on habeas corpus, was entitled to be discharged. This bankrupt, William Martin, was brought up from Newgate on a writ of habeas corpus, granted by the Chief Judge in his capacity of Vice Chancellor. He had been committed to Newgate upon a warrant from the Commissioners of the Subdivision Court, in consequence of his unsatisfactory answers to questions relating to the loss of a sum of money. His examination had, in the first instance, been taken by Mr. Commissioner Shepherd, to whom the fiat belonged. After the commitment by the Subdivision Court, and upon the day appointed for his last examination, the bankrupt was brought up before Mr. Prisoners' Removal, Ireland. Commissioner Shepherd, and was asked whether he had any thing to add to his former statements. made some reply, but was told by the Commissioner that that did not alter the case, and he was taken Seduction and Prostitution Suppression. back to Newgate. The warrant set out the questions and answers as taken by the Subdivision Court, but no reference was made to the examination of the bankrupt before the Commissioner in the first instance, nor to what took place on his coming up for his last examination. He Swanston and Sturgeon now moved for the discharge of the prisoner. He could not have been recommitted but upon a fresh warrant setting forth the subsequent examination; that was considered to be unsatisfac. tory, so that the whole cause of imprisonment should appear upon the return to the writ of habeas corpus. He could not have been re-committed by a single Commissioner, and therefore his present imprisonment was illegal. They cited Coombe's case, 2 Rose, 396; and Brown's case, 2 Rose, 400. The 1 & 2 Wm. 4. c. 56, 5 & 6 Wm. 4. c. 29, and the 6 Geo. 4. c. 16, were also referred to. Bacon and Duncan, contrà, contended that the bankthis borough, judgment of ouster having been pronounced rupt was still in prison under the original warrant, against a party holding the office. and the Commissioner had no power to re-examine the bankrupt, or to discharge him. They referred to Mr. Justice Erle's decision upon this same case, as reported in the LAW TIMES (ante, p. 107.) Friday, June 4. REG. v. THE MAYOR OF GREAT YARMOUTH and ANOTHER. Prentice moved for a certiorari to remove an appointment of overseers for the parish of Great Yarmouth, made by the mayor and one other justice. A meeting had been duly held for the appointment of overseers, at which the mayor proposed four gentlemen for the office, and subsequently, against the consent of the majority of the magistrates present, these persons were appointed, the appointment being signed by the mayor and one other magistrate. Four other persons had been appointed by the major part of the justices, but those appointed by the mayor and justice had acted and were proceeding to make a rate. The question was, whether the mayor had, as chief officer of a borough under 43 Eliz. c. 2, s. 8, to make this appointment. Rex v. Butler, 1 W. Bla. 650. Application granted. Saturday, June 5. Re the late SHERIFF of LANCASHIRE.-Crompton moved for a rule calling upon the late Sheriff of Lancashire to repay the sum of 11. 2s. 6d. poundage improperly taken. Rule nisi. GRAVATT v. HALL, SAME V. PEEL, SAME v. MARSLAND and ANOTHER, and COLLINS and ANOTHER V. GRAVATT. -Creasy moved for a rule to set off the costs in one action against those in the others. Swann shewed cause in the first instance. herein. Jones, contrà. Cur. adv. vult. JOHNSON D. LATHAM.-Sir F. Thesiger and Welsby shewed cause against a rule for setting aside the award To be sent back to a legal arbitrator. REG. v. THE JUSTICES OF MIDDLESEX.-Bodkin and Boothby shewed cause against the rule herein for entering continuances and hearing an appeal against an order for the maintenance of a pauper lunatic. Pushley, contrà. which was unknown. Rule nisi. Ex parte WILLIAM ABLETT.-Welsby moved to enlarge the time for shewing cause in this case until next 'Term. Rule enlarged. Monday, June 7. Cook v. GELL.-Ogle shewed cause against a rule for setting aside a demurrer as frivolous. Newton, contrà. Rule discharged. RUSSELL V. JOY.-Lush shewed cause against a rule for setting aside the distringas herein, there being a variance in the form of action as stated in the writ of summons. Heaton, contrà. Rule absolute. COURT OF REVIEW. Wednesday, May 26. Re MARTIN. Committal-Subdivision Court. Semble, that where a Subdivision Court has committed a bankrupt for not giving satisfactory answers concerning his property, and he submits to be, and is, examined by the Commissioner to whom the fiat belongs, such Commissioner has power to discharge the bankrupt out of custody. A bankrupt was committed by a Subdivision Court for not giving satisfactory answers to questions relating to his property: he afterwards appeared before the Friday, June 4. Tuesday, June 8, Wednesday, June 9. The CHIEF JUDGE, without hearing reply, said Thursday, June 10. that it was not, in his opinion, necessary that the Port Natal Collection of Duties further examination of the bankrupt should be satis-Huggens' College Incorporation factory to the three Commissioners who formed the Subdivision Court which committed him, or to any Subdivision Court, but that upon his submission to be examined by the Commissioner to whose particular jurisdiction the fiat belonged, and being examined to his satisfaction, the bankrupt would be entitled to his discharge by such Commissioner. If this view of the Court were correct, and being a view in favour of freedom, it was the view which, in a case of ambiguity, if ambiguity there were, ought probably to be taken,-then he doubted the legality of the warrant in this case, as it was a commitment until such time of the Commissioners of the Court of Bankruptcy, and as the bankrupt submitted himself to "us, or to any full answer make to our or their satisfaction." was not, however, necessary to decide this, and he avoided deciding it. He decided merely that the bankrupt, having appeared before Mr. Commissioner Shepherd, and having submitted to be examined upon that subject, for not answering satisfactorily upon which he had been committed, Mr. Shepherd, being the commissioner to whom the fiat originally belonged, he being willing to receive, and sitting there to receive such further information as the bankrupt was willing to give, there ought to have been a record made of such examination; and that not having been done, the bankrupt was entitled to his discharge. That view of the case was supported by the authority of Lord Eldon in the cases cited, and was sanctioned also by reason and good sense. A FRACTION of the Bankruptcy Bill, with additions and amendments, is to be passed into a law this session. The day for the dissolution of Parliament is now extended to the 12th of July. In the meanwhile, boroughs are looking out for useful candidates, and aspirants are looking out for cheap boroughs. It is said that lawyers seeking Parliamentary honours, are more numerous than ever was known. But, withal, there is no prospect of the representation of the Profession. Half-adozen seats could be had, but they will not make the effort necessary. Their last hope, Mr. FRESHFIELD, we understand, has declined the invitation from Falmouth. Bristol and South Wales Junction Railway way. Dundee and Perth Railway, Alteration, Extension, &c. Edinburgh and Bathgate Railway, Deviation London and North Western Railway, Coventry & Nuneaton Branches Ditto, Atherstone, &c. Branch Ditto, Newport Pagnell Branch Monday, June 7. Wednesday, June 9. Manchester and Birmingham, &c. Junction Railway Thursday, June 10. SESSIONAL PRINTED PAPERS. Par. No. 129(18.) Local Acts-Reports of the Admiralty, Part 18] 164(60-2). Railway Bills, Manchester and Leeds Company 364(62). Railway Bills, Groups Nos. 33, 37, 38, and 39- 164(64). 164(65). 164(67). 164(68). 39 of Commissioners Groups Nos. 35 and 36-Report Groups Nos. 45 and 46-Report Report from Select Committee, CONTINUANCE BILLS.-Bills have been intro- FEES OF ECCLESIASTICAL AND ADMIRALTY Fees in Courts of Law and Equity, to include within THE MAGISTRATE. Summary. rights of the Court of Aldermen, or privileges of the citizens of London, dependent on the ancient custom of the City, may be annihilated. "We are further of opinion that the Bill in question cannot be passed without the consent of the Mayor and Aldermen. Should the Mayor and Aldermen come to the resolution to withhold their consent to the proposed Bill, we recommend them to express their dissent through the Recorder in the Common Council, which was the mode adopted by the Court of Aldermen in February, 1723. "C. E. LAW, Recorder. NOTHING has occurred requiring comment, Juvenile Offenders (amended by Select Com- Lunatic Asylums, as amended by the Lords Public General Acts-Cap. 23, 24, 25, 26, and 27 411. Harbours of Refuge-Papers 466. Moneys in the Exchequer Account 474. Public Works, Ireland-Amended Return 408. Customs, East India-Accounts 461. Harwich Railways-Report of Commissioners 462. Provisions, Ireland-Account 467. Salt, East India-Papers 469. Light Gold-Returns 471. Lunacy-Report of Commissioners Parkhurst Prison-Reports THE PRIVILEGES OF THE COURTS OF Questions on the case proposed by order of the on: 1. Whether the alteration of the qualification of a Common Councilman, proposed by the Bill in question, can be legally made? 2. If such alteration can be made, whether it must not be made under the charter of 15 Edward III. and if so, in what manner and by whom should it be made, in order to render the same valid and effectual? "3. Whether a meeting of the Lord Mayor, Alder. men, and Commons, in Common Council assembled (legally and properly constituted), have the power to pass an act of Common Council for making such alteration? "4. Whether there must not be a Court of Aldermen composed of thirteen members (the whole having been summoned) present at a meeting of the Common Council, to make a good assembly of that body? 66 Court of Aldermen composed of thirteen members present at a meeting of the Common Council, to make a good assembly of that body; but the mayor and aldermen, as such, have, in our opinion, a nega tive voice in passing acts of Common Council, that negative being exercised in a Court of Aldermen. "7. We are of opinion that a majority of the Commons (who are the delegates of the commonalty for certain purposes) is not necessary to be present to constitute a good Common Council meeting, provided the whole of the Common Council are duly sum "What number of aldermen are necessary to be 5. Whether the assent of a majority of the alder-assembled and present with the commoners to con men so present is not legally necessary? stitute such Court?" "6. If a court of aldermen need not be present,— whether, at all events, the assent of a majority of the aldermen who do attend is not necessary; in other words, whether the aldermen, as such, have any ne gative voice in passing acts of Common Council? HOUSE OF COMMONS, SECONDARY PUNISHMENTS. MONDAY, June 7.-Sir FITZROY KELLY said that he understood it to be the intention of the go. vernment to substitute for transportation some system of imprisonment and compulsory labour, either here or abroad, and exile. Now sentences of transportation might be passed upon offenders for seven, ten, fourteen, fifteen, twenty, or twenty-one years, or for life; and he wished to know if the government intended to substitute some fixed and specific period of imprisonment, compulsory labour and exile, having reference to the graduated scale of sentences of transportation, or whether the period of punishment was to have reference to the circumstances of each case?-Sir GEORGE GREY, as we understood, said he had before stated that it was the intention of the government that the minimum and maximum of the term should have respect to the term of transportation, but that it should be in the power of the convict, by his own good conduct, to shorten the term of his punishment.-Sir FITZROY KELLY wished a further explanation from the right honourable the Home Secretary respecting the intenAnd generally to advise the Court of Aldermen tions of the Government. He understood the right whether it may not be desirable for that Court to honourable gentleman to have fixed a maximum and come to certain resolutions as to their views and a minimum period of punishment; but he was not opinions relative to the passing of the Bill; and as to yet informed what the maximum and minimum what are the proper means of staying the progress of, were to be of each period, having reference to the and defeating the said Bill, if counsel should be of several periods of transportation to which an offender opinion that the measure proposed is a legal measure, might now be sentenced. Was there, for example, a or a measure that ought not to be passed with refedefined maximum and minimum period to be substi-rence to the rights and privileges of the householders, tuted for a twenty years' term of transportation?-citizens of the city of London." Sir G. GREY repeated his former statements, observing that his meaning was, that there was to be a maximum and minimum between which a prisoner might become entitled to a ticket of leave or a pardon. CUSTODY OF OFFENDERS BILL. 8. Or, if the majority of the commons need not attend, whether the assent of a majority of those who do attend will be sufficient? OPINION. "We are of opinion that a Court of Common Council will be dissolved if all the aldermen present, or all except one, withdraw themselves therefrom after the Court is formed. "7. With reference to the Common Council, whe"Independent of the practice which has prevailed ther a majority of the Commons (the whole being in the city of London for nearly two centuries, of summoned) is not necessary to be present to con- holding Courts of Common Council without a majostitute a good Common Council meeting, and whe-rity of the aldermen, we might have felt ourselves. ther a majority of such number present must not bound by the modern decisions reported in 1 Barn. assent? and Cress. 492; 4 T. R. 810; 6 T. R. 268; and 4 East, 294, to say that the presence of a majority of the aldermen is requisite to form a Common Council. we cannot say that Courts may not continue to be As, however, such a practice has so long prevailed, held, provided aldermen be present; and finding no express declaration of any precise number as re quisite to give authority to a Court, we are of opinion, with reference to the practice, that the smallest number beyond one may be sufficient. THURSDAY, June 10.-On the question of the committal of the Prisons and Custody of Offenders Bills, the speakers were Mr. Newdegate, Mr. Milnes, Mr. W. Miles, Sir R. Inglis, Sir J. Graham, Mr. C. "It is not necessary for the present purpose to anBuller, Sir F. Kelly, and Lord J. Russell. On a swer the intermediate queries, the subjects of which division, the proposition of the Government was may be yet further considered. But we are prepared The great practical interest of Kinning's affirmed by a majority of 48; the numbers being 124 to advise the Court of Aldermen that it is not only case, has induced us to give a very full report to 76. desirable, but essentially necessary for that Court to of it. Its length is justified by its importance, MIDDLE TEMPLE.-On Thursday a grand dinner record their opinion in relation to the proposed Bill. although it compels a double number, and, was given to the members of the Bar and the students If this Bill be allowed to pass in the manner pro-withal, the exclusion of numerous other reof this hon. Society, upon the occasion of Mr. Cock-posed, without the concurrence and against the conburn's (the celebrated Parliamentary counsel) being sent of the Court of Aldermen, the Common Council ports, leading articles, and intelligence that appointed to the office of Reader of the Middle will be equally competent to pass any other Act in the were in type; and the abbreviation of every Temple. same manner by which any of the most important other department of the paper. The COUNTY COURTS POCKET BOOK for 1947 (to be continued annually), containing Lists of the Courts. Districts, Officers, and At every sort of action, a Synopsis of the Practice of the County The Publisher begs to state that the following specialitioners, and Suitors of information required by the Officers, Prac NOTICE. Forms have been added to the list since last week:- Order for Commitment of Defendant for refusing to be sworn, or to make disclosure. (Sec. 99.) Warrant of Commitment thereupon. Order for Commitment of Defendant for not answering to Notice by Clerk to Defendant of Plaint withdrawn. Order for time to Plaintiff to proceed upon terms. 81.) (Sec. Order for time to Defendant to prepare his Defence, on terms. (Sec. 81.) Affidavit in Debt on Application for a Summons into another district. The like in Tort and other forms of action. And also an extremely useful Form, for which he is indebted to one of the clerks, who has found it of great service in his own offices. It may be termed INSTRUCTIONS FOR PLAINT. It is somewhat after the fashion of the old præcipe, and The following is the list of those Forms, Books, &c. No. on a sheet. 28a. Execution against an Executor on a Devastavit..... 304. Warrant to give Possession of Tenement on Judgment 51. Order for Time to Plaintiff or Defendant (sec. 81) 52. Order for Apportionment of Costs (sec. 88) 53. Order of Commitment of Defendant (sec. 91). 54. Order for Reference to Arbitration (sec. 77) 56. Jury Lists (per quire, 3s.) 57. Notice of Days for holding Courts, 2s. per quire. 2 2 4 4 torneys enrolled in each Court; Time Tables, Fee Tables calculated COMMENTS ON COUNTY COURTS PRACTICE. A QUESTION of extreme importance, as affecting both in the Queen's Bench and in the Common It will be remembered that the Small Debts Act In the recent case, Re Thomas Kenning, a ComRules-missioner of the Court of Bankruptcy had, under this section, ordered payment of the debt by instalments, and in default of payment of either of the instalments, that the defendant should be committed to prison for forty days. The defendant neglected to pay one of the instalments, and was committed accordingly. He now moved for his discharge, on this ground-that the Judge or Commissioner has no power to commit for nonpayment of an instalment, without a previous summons to the defendant to shew cause why he should not be committed, and a formal rehearing and order. 58. Receipts by Clerks to parties paying money, 200 in a vol. 5s. vol. 58. 61. Order of Commitment after Examination... 62. Order of Commitment for refusal to be sworn or to make disclosure... 78. Warrant of Commitment thereupon 63. Account for Fees in Clerk's Office, 300 in a vol. 5s. 64. Account for Fees in Court, 300 in a vol. 5s. 2 2 2 65. Order for issuing Summons where Defendant resides in another Lord DENMAN and ERLE, J. held the commitment District 66. Warrant of Execution to accompany Execution into another district (sec. 104) 2 2 67. The like to accompany Warrant of Commitment into another district (sec. 101) 2 68. Cause Lists, for Posting in the Courts, &c. 4s. per quire. 79. Warrant of Commitment thereon (sec. 99) 72. Affidavit in Debt on Application for a Summons out of the District.. 73. Affidavit in Tort, and other Causes of Action for the like... 75. Order for Time to Plaintiff to proceed (sec. 81) 76. Order for Time to Defendant (sec. 81) 77. Warrant of Execution in Replevin ... 80. Order for Commitinent for Non-payment of Instalments... 81. Warrant of Commitment for Non-payment of Instalments..... SPECIAL FORMS required by Clerks, Attorneys, and Parties, but 39. Particulars of Plaintiff's Demand (Rule 2). 44. Demand of a Jury by Plaintiff or Defendant (Rule 20) 45. Notice to Clerk of Application for a new Trial (Rule 21) to be good, and that no previous summons was The Court of Queen's Bench being thus equally For all practical purposes the Small Debts Act is repealed by the operation of the County Courts Act; but as the section in the latter Act is almost a verbatim copy of that in the former one, the principle of this decision materially affects the construction of the latter; this will be" a leading case" in County Courts Practice, and therefore is it so fully and carefully reported. Let us now see what are the powers of committal given by the County Courts Act. Sec. 101, empowers the Judge at the hearing, if judgment be given against the defendant, to proceed without summons to an examination into the FORMS required by Builiffs.-No. 59. Return of Summonses served circumstances of the debt, as provided by sec. 99, 55. Consent for an Order to Pay Debt and Costs... 74. Notice by Plaintiff of Plaint withdrawn to be affixed in Clerk's Office (Rule 46) 4s. per quirc. MISCELLANEOUS, 4 COUNTY COURT CAUSE BOOKS, on a convenient plan, for the use of Attorneys, so arranged that the Practitioner may record and ascertain in a moment the state of his causes. TABLES of FEES, constructed to enable the Officers and the Pracwhat are the Fees to be paid in every kind of action in the County titioner to ascertain at a glance, without the trouble of computation, Courts, and for every amount of debt or demand, and where the de fendant resides at any distance within seven miles. closing three shillings, in penny postage stamps. Copies are stamped for transmission by post, free, to any person in Price of the sheet, containing both sets of Tables, 3s. on paper: 48. 6d. on millboard; 6s. on canvas, with frame; 7s. on canvas, glazed, with rollers. The Tables, mounted separately, each, on millboard, 28. 7d. on canvas, with frame, 4s. ; on roller, glazed, 5s. SCHEDULE of FEES, on a large sheet, price 6d. each. The THIRD EDITION OF PATERSON'S COUNTY COURTS ACT, containing a List of the County Court Towns and Districts, with and to commit the defendant, or make such an And sec. 99 empowers the Judge to examine a the Officers of all the Courts, Precedents of Statement of Cause of obtained shall have ordered, and if he shall refuse ordered, or as shall be ordered pursuant to the The Judge is empowered to commit- 1. Not attending, or not alleging a sufficient excuse for not attending. 2. Refusing to be sworn. 3. Refusing to disclose any of the things afore- 5. If it should appear to the Judge that the de- So far all is clear enough, but now comes the provision in which the question under consideration will arise: 7. And if he shall refuse or neglect to pay the same as shall have been so ordered. 8. If he refuse or neglect to pay the same "as shall be ordered pursuant to the power hereinafter provided;" which power is contained in sec. 100, empowering such Judge, on the hearing of such summons, to rescind or alter any order previously made against the defendant for payment by instalments or otherwise, and to make any further or other order for the payment of the whole forthwith, or by any instalments, &c. Thus there are provided in these two sections no less than eight distinct grounds for a committal. But upon the first seven the question under consideration can never arise, for all of them refer to past or present acts or defaults of the defendant. The eighth ground of committal, however, is wholly prospective. The Judge is empowered to alter or rescind the original order, and make a fresh order for payment by instalments, which, if the defendant "shall refuse or neglect to pay," "it shall be lawful for such Judge, if he shall think fit, to order that any such party may be committed," &c. The language of the statute here falls entirely within the decision in Kenning's case. The Judge is, on a summons, to hear, and to make an order for payment by instalments, and if the defendant neglect or refuse to pay, the Judge may, if he think fit, order that he be committed. Although the language is very confused, the interpretation put upon this by plain men would be that the order for payment and for committal should be made at the same time, in the alternative. But, according to the case in question, it must not be so read. If he shall refuse or neglect to pay, it shall be lawful for the Judge to order that he be committed. The order of commitment is to follow the refusal or neglect. Besides, committal is a judicial act; it cannot be prospective, or with an alternative; the party is entitled to shew cause why he did not pay, and a fresh summons must issue, and a new hearing be had. It is clear that, as the Act is worded, the Judges of the County Courts cannot, under this decision, order payment or imprisonment. The practice, therefore, should be, where payment of a judgment is ordered by instalments under the provisions of the 99th section, on failure of such payment to issue a summons under the 98th section, and upon that summons to commit. But, inasmuch as such a summons requires personal service, and this decision opposes a serious obstacle to the recovery of a judgment debt by instalments, it behoves the Judges to be more chary of ordering such a mode of payment, otherwise the Courts will be shorn of half their utility. And if defendants do not find so much leniency as before, they will owe it to the Court of Common Pleas E. W. C. APPOINTMENT OF CLERKS. The fact is, that Mr. ABLETT is not an Attorney, and therefore the Judge deemed him disqualified from acting as Clerk, and appointed Mr. GIBSON in his place. We presume, therefore, that the question turns on the construction of the singularly dubious language of the 34th section, which provides, that the existing clerks of local courts, "whether or not qualified as hereinbefore provided, shall be entitled, if not disqualified under this Act, to be the first elected, &c." It appears to us that the proper reading of this sentence is, that the Clerk shall be continued, whether he be qualified or not, provided he be not disqualified. The qualification by sec. 24 is, that the clerk shall be an attorney. Mr. ABLETT is not an attorney, and therefore he is not qualified, as by the Act is provided. But by sec. 34, the clerk of the local court is to continue, whether qualified or not, according to secc. 24. So far, then, his case is clear. But although he need not be qualified," as hereinbefore provided," he must not be " disqualified under this Act." What, then, are the disqualifications? We can find no other than those set forth in sec. 28; viz. that a treasurer or his partner, or high bailiff or his partner, or any person in his or their employ, shall not act as clerk. Unless Mr. ABLETT falls within one of these disqualifications, upon the facts, as stated by Mr. GIBSON, his claim appears to us to be unanswerable. Mr. GIBSON's letter is a satisfactory explanation of the circumstances; but we are here viewing the case as one of pure law. E. W. C. SPLITTING DEMANDS. An interesting and able judgment by Mr. Moylan, the Judge of the Westminster Court, reported below, adopts very nearly the views put forth here last week. Another case, before Mr. Palmer, at Bristol, further illustrates the subject. We purpose to return to it next week. EXTENSION OF THE COUNTY COURTS. It will be seen from the report of the Lords' Committee on the Law of Bankruptcy, that they recommend the transfer to the County Court Judges of the jurisdiction in Insolvency in the country districts. This will introduce a new and extensive branch of practice; and this is only a beginning. [ADVERTISEMENT.] COUNTY COURT AT ST. ALBANS. TO THE EDITOR OF THE LAW TIMES. SIR,-Your correspondent, "E. W. C." having, I presume, based his observations in the Law TIMES of the 5th instant, upon an ex parte statement, has fallen into an error which I am sure you will correct. In your report, and your correspondent's comments thereon, it is made to appear that Mr. Ablett lost his appointment entirely through what may be termed a "legal quibble." Your report states "that, upon the new Act coming into operation, Mr. Ablett applied to the judge, &c. and was informed that Mr. Edward Gibson had been appointed, &c. and that as the St. Albans Court was abolished on the 13th of March, and the new Act did not come into operation until the 15th of March, he was not entitled to be reappointed," &c. Now the fact is, that the judge had declined to appoint Mr. Ablett before I made my application, which I did not do until the eleventh hour, and my appointment was not promised until the 29th of March, and the formal appointment not received until the 2nd of April. When I applied for the office, I distinctly stated that if Mr. Ablett could have the appointment, I should not ask for it; besides which, I had repeatedly told Mr. Ablett previously, that as it was a doubtful point whether or not he could hold the office, he had better ascertain whether he could or not. The real ground upon which the judge declined to appoint Mr. Ablett, viz. that he is not an attorney, is, for obvious reasons, studiously kept back. Independently of the 24th section of the Act, which enacts that the clerk shall be an attorney, I think any person acquainted with the duties of the office will admit that the right discharge of those duties requires considerable legal knowledge and experience and such, I conceive, is your own opinion, judging from the various articles which have from time to time appeared in your publication. It is somewhat remarkable that Mr. Ablett's legal adviser was most active in endeavouring to procure the appointment for another professional gentleman resident in St. Albans. I am the more anxious to give this explanation in justice to the judge, who manifested, throughout, the utmost anxiety to act fairly, and appointed me (an entire stranger to him) solely on the faith of the testimonials which he received. I am, Sir, Yours, &c. EDWARD GIBSON. the reduction be the result of stipulation, or even of an implied agreement, it has then failed, and cannot be considered a splitting within the meaning of the 63rd section of the Act. This principle will, I think, prove the safest guide in considering the point, on this view, I will take a supposed case or two to which In illustration of which difference of opinion exists. the principle will be found to apply. A job-master agrees to supply a carriage and horses for what is called the London season, at the rate of one guinea per day. In this case he should not be permitted to make an arbitrary rest at the end of every nineteenth day, and sue in this court as for a substantive debt of nineteen guineas. This, in my opinion, would be a contravention of the statute. Also in the case of a shoemaker or tailor, where any stipulation is made as to cash payments, an implied understanding, founded on the general custom in Westminster, would be that the tradesman's bill was payable at Christmas. The bill was sent in at Christmas, and although it may contain twenty different items of the value of 51. each (each item having been delivered separately in the course of the year), I never could consider such a bill as fairly divisible into five, any more than into twenty sepaSplitting demands-Jurisdiction. rate causes of action; and I should certainly hold it Where there had been several distinct purchases at to be beyond the jurisdiction of this Court. I will different times, and delivery of distinct invoices, the on the other hand, suppose the case of a yearly tenant contract being, in each case, for four months' credit, agreeing to pay at the rate of 80l. per annum by which had expired; and the plaintiff had afterwards quarterly payments of 201. Here there is, by special sent to defendant one account, comprising the amount agreement, a distinct and substantive cause of acof each invoice, and the whole added together and tion for the recovery of that sum at the end of each brought into one sum; and then plaintiff and defend-quarterly period, and the landlord would clearly have ant met and settled the account, and the defendant the right to sue upon each separately. After some furpaid several sums on account : ther remarks upon landlord and tenant, the learned St. Albans, June 7, 1847. BRISTOL. (Before A. PALMER, Esq.) NASH and ANOTHER V. Held, to be one cause of action, and not within the jurisdiction of the Court. Messrs. Nash and Gardiner, wholesale oil merchants and drysalters, applied for summonses against a party who had been a druggist in the City of Bristol, but who now resided out of the jurisdiction of the Court. Upon investigation it appeared that there had been several distinct purchases made at different times, and that several separate invoices had been delivered. In each case the contract was for four months' credit, and the terms of credit had expired; but afterwards the creditors sent to the debtor one account, comprising the several amounts of such purchases, and adding them together and bringing them into one sum; and subsequently there to the creditors and debtor met and agreed to, and settled the account, and the debtor on three several occasions afterwards paid to the creditors several sums on account. Splitting demands-Cause of action. Where a promissory note had been given for some goods sold, but it had not been paid, aad after such note given other goods were bought, Held, to be two distinct causes of action. In this case, which was an application by an iron merchant, it appeared that goods having been sold and delivered, the debtor gave a promissory note for the amount, which note had become due, but had not been paid, and that subsequently after such note had been given, goods had been sold and delivered by and given. The two amounts together exceeded 201. to the same parties, for which no security had been His HONOUR held that there being two distinct causes of action, two actions would lie, and summonses were granted accordingly. WESTMINSTER. Splitting demands. When the division of an entire debt is ex parte and arbitrary, the plaintiff will not be permitted to split the demands. Otherwise, if there be an agreement, express or implied, from which it would appear that the parties contemplated distinct dealings. The course of dealing between the parties will determine the nature of the implied contract. "A demand may include two or more causes of action. This was an application for leave to bring a claim for 271. into this court, by dividing the amount into two parts, as the goods were delivered in two or three different parcels at separate times. The case excited considerable interest, in consequence of the judge of the Bristol Court having decided that debts above 201, could be divided. The learned Judge said, the principle seems to me to be this, that when the division of a whole debt is ex parte and arbitrary, the plaintiff should not be permitted to bring his case, by reducing it within the limited jurisdiction of these County Courts. But if Judge said that where an Act of Parliament, in its wording, is at all ambiguous, I feel myself bound to consider the spirit and intention of the Legislature; and nothing can be more certain than that the meaning of the 63rd section was to limit the jurisdiction of these County Courts to matters not exceeding 201. It will be perceived that there is a material difference between the words of the marginal note to the 63rd section and the words in the text itself. The note is, that "demands shall not be divided," whilst the Act itself says, "no cause of action shall be divided." A demand may include two or more causes of action, and it is to be regretted the word "demand" was not introduced into the statute. It was the word used in the old Westminster Act (6 & 7 Wm. 4, c. 137), under which this court was formed, and from which some of the most useful clauses in the new Act seem to have been copied. The application must be refused. GLOUCESTERSHIRE. (Before JAMES FRANCILLON, Esq.) At this Court 179 causes were entered for trial. The Court stands adjourned to Saturday, the 19th of June. Precedence to professional men-Practice. In the course of the forenoon of the second day Mr. Jellinger Symons, the barrister, applied to the judge to give precedence to those causes in which professional men are engaged, urging upon his consideration the advantages of the attendance of professional gentlemen to the suitors generally, and the propriety of encouraging their attendance. In reply to this application the Judge made the following remarks:-"My great desire is to encourage the attendance of professional men in the courts on this circuit, for I am convinced that their assistance greatly conduces to the proper administration of justice in any court, whatever its rank, in which that assistance is rendered. I have therefore given the subject-matter of this application my most careful consideration. To give professional men preaudience is certainly an obvious mode of encouraging their attendance, and I should be very ready to do so were it not that considerations of greater weight make it in my opinion incumbent on me to prefer the convenience of the numerous suitors who are brought here, as the place where they can obtain redress for wrongs, or resist unjust claims, rather than the ap parent interests of gentlemen who come here in a professional capacity. To give pre-audience to the latter would, in numberless cases, inflict a serious hardship upon poor persons who cannot afford professional assistance, and very many of whom would in that case be detained from their means of livelihood, while the cases of the more wealthy suitors receive the consideration of the Court. I should add, that my experience in courts, where the convenience of practitioners is apparently more regarded than the regular order of business, has for many years satisfied me that the practitioners themselves would in those courts be more benefited than they appear to be aware of, by cases being taken in their regular order. I am satisfied that priority being given to cases in which professional men are engaged would, in practice, involve difficulties and inconveniences, both to themselves and the suitors generally, which can readily be avoided by the obvious course of taking the cases in the order in which they are numbered. Every person who has had business in the crown |