Imágenes de páginas


of his daughters should marry, and have children,” | under such influence, without proof that any independsuch children to have the mother's share. Both daugh- | ent advice was given, or that the parties were ever at ters married, but neither of them had children. Held, arm's length, the attendance of J. having been, not to that they took equitable estates in fee as joint tenants, advise or to sever the relationship, but to ascertain Ch. Div., June 13, 1877. Yarrow v. Knightly, 36 L. T. | whether the testator knew what he was doing. Mode Rep. (N. S.) 907.

of severing professional relationship under such cirEstate in tail : construction: derise to A. for life, and cumstances, and what is proper independent advice, after her death" to descend to her female heir." – De considered. Ch. Div., June 9, 1877. Morgan v. Mivise to trustees, in trust for A. for life, and “after her nett, 36 L. T. Rep. (N. S.) 948. decease to descend to her female heir, and whether

INSURANCE. sister or daughter." Held, that A. took an estate in

Marine insurance : wagering policy: open policy on tail female. Ch. Div., May 15, 1877. Lewthwaite v.

profits and commission : without benefit of salvage, Thompson, 36 L. T. Rep. (N. S.) 910.

* but to pay loss on such part as shall not arrive:" Legacy to executor: presumption of law: evidence to

illegality : 19 Geo. 2, c. 37: return of premiums. — An rebut: construction.-- The presumption that a legacy

assured under open policies of marine insurance on to an executor and trustee was given to him solely on

profits and commission on goods to be shipped, concondition of his undertaking the trusts of the will is

taining the classes “ warranted free from all average," rebutted by the fact that the legacy was only payable

and “without benefit of salvage," " but to pay loss after the death of the tenant for life. Ch. Div., Feb.

upon such part as shall not arrive,” declared upon a 17, 1877. Re Reeve's Trusts, 36 L. T. Rep. (N. S.) 906.

number of British ships, one of which was lost. Held, Release : 1 Vict., c. 26, s. 24: will speaking from its date:

that the policies were within 19 Geo. 2, c. 27, and moneys advanced after date of' will.-A will, made since

void. Return of premium refused. Com. Pl. Div., the statute (1 Vict., c. 26), after reciting that the testa

April 19, 1877. Alkins v. Jupe, 36 L. T. Rep. (N. S.) tor had advanced to his son A. various sums of money, contained these words, “I hereby release my said son

LEASE. from all claims in respect of the aforesaid moneys,

Underlease: covenant by underlessee not to build: * * * and all other moneys due from him to me."

purchase by underlessee of immediate reversion: merger: Held, that the release only applied to moneys due at the

liability in equity to building covenant. — A, being posdate of the will, and not to moneys advanced after

sessed of a piece of land for a term of ninety-nine ward. (h. Div., June 26, 1877. Everett v. Everett, 36 L.

years, laid it out in plots, and underleased one plot to T. Rep. (N. S.) 913.

the defendant for the residue of the term, less three Solicitor and client: gift pending professional rela

days, the defendant covenanting not to build more tionship: influence: independent advice: severance of

than twenty feet in height on that side of his plot relationship.-The defendant had acted for many years

which adjoined a narrow passage. A underleased as the confidential solicitor of the testator, a widower

another plot, which abutted on the other side of the with no near relations; testator and defendant were on

passage, to the plaintiffs. On A's death, the estate terms of great intimacy, defendant transacting all tes

was sold under conditions which provided that the tator's business. Testator had allowed the defendant

purchaser of the largest lot in value should take an £100 a year, and by his will and codicils gave legacies to

assignment of the whole, and grant fresh underleases a considerable amount to defendant, his wife, and children. The will and codicils were prepared by the de

to the various underlessees, for the residue of the term

of ninety-nine years, less two days. The defendant fendant. The testator was also in the habit of advanc

purchased his own plot, and the plaintiff's purchased ing money to the defendant from time to time. The

their plot, which was the largest in value. The plaindefendant, at the testator's request, prepared releases of various sums which had been lent him; these

tiffs took an assignment of the whole, and granted a releases were sent to the testator, executed by him,

fresh underlease to the defendant of his lot for the and returned to the defendant. Upon the testator

residue of the term, less two days, at an apportioned having occasion to execute a further codicil, J., a solici

ground-rent. Held, that though the defendant's tor from Hereford, was, at the defendant's suggestion,

original underlease was merged at law, he was still

bound in equity to observe his building covenant; and called in to explain to the testator the purport and effect of his will, numerous codicils thereto, and the

that the plaintiffs could obtain an injunction to rereleases. J. attended and went through the various

strain him from infringing it. Ch. Div., June 28, documents with the testator, and the codicil, which

1877. Birmingham Joint-Stock Co. v. Lea, 36 L. T. confirmed certain previous, and made some addi

Rep. (N. S.) 843. tional dispositions, was executed by the testator in

NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT. J.'s presence. On the testator's death, the plain Bill of exchange: advance secured by bills and by tiffs (relations of his) sought to set aside the releases as assignment of debts due to borrower : bills negotiated : having been executed while under the professional in bankruptcy of acceptor : application of proceeds of fluence of the defendant, and without proper indepen- | assigned debts.-Advances were secured by bills drawn dent advice. The defendant denied any undue in by the lender upon, and accepted by the borrower, fluence, and contended that the testator had received and by the assignment of debts due to him, notice proper independent advice from J. Held, that while being given to the debtors. The lender discounted the relationship of solicitor and client exists, a gift from the bills with his bankers. The borrower became the latter to his solicitor cannot be sustained. That bankrupt, and the bankers proved under the bankthe relationship might be severed for the occasion, but ruptoy for the full amount of the bills. It was arranged that in the present instance this had not been done, between the lender and the trustee in tho bankruptcy but was in full force when the releases to the defend that the latter should collect the assigned debts and ant were executed. The releases must, therefore, be hold the proceeds without prejudice to the lender's set aside, as they were executed by the testator while I rights. Held, that the lender was not entitled to the

proceeds, unless he took up the bills, and that the 2. Adverse possession: statute of limitations.-App trustee should be ordered to apply the proceeds in dis- | paid rent till 1850, when he asked plaintiff for a deed charging the lender's liability upon the bills. Court , and wanted it made to his son Samuel; afterward of Appeal, March 15, 1877. Ex parte Mann, Re Kat Samuel, who occupied the lot, said to plaintiff, he tengell, 36 L. T. Rep. (N. S.) 840.

would claim the property, that plaintiff had no title TRADE-MARK

and his father would pay no more rent. Held, even if Secret preparation : use of name of original producer:

Samuel spoke by authority of his father, it was a mere injunction. - Where a person has, without unfair

declaration accompanied by no act and was not evi

dence of an adverse holding by App. The statute of paration of an unpatented article, universally known

limitations does not begin to run in favor of one who by the name of the original producer, he may, after

has entered in subservience to the title of another the death of the original producer, make and sell the

until the privity between them is severed by some article, and advertise it as made from the original

unequivocal act; mere declaration of his intention is recipe; provided he does not lead the public to sup

insufficient. April 24, 1851, App wrote to plaintiff that pose that the article sold by him is made by the suc

having failed to comply with his agreement to make cessors in business of the original producer. Ch.

him a deed for the lot, etc., “and said neglect * * * Div., June 14, 1877. Massam v. Thorley's Cattle Food

having continued for so long a time and after repeated Co., 36 L, T. Rep. (N. S.) 848.

demand, I notify you that I no longer recognize your title and will hold you accountable for the rent already

paid you * * * under the claim set up by you," RECENT AMERICAN DECISIONS.

etc. Held, that this was a disclaimer of any adverse

holding prior to that date. Ib.

Traveler crossing railroad track: contributory negli-

Repeal of statutes -An affirmative statute repeals a gence.-A traveler about crossing a railroad on an em

precedent affirmative statute where its matter necesbankment twelve feet high, in an open country, where

sarily implies a negative and the repugnancy is such an approaching train could be seen for some hundred

that the two acts cannot be reconciled. A general feet, walked his horses up the ascent at a distance of

statute without negative words will not repeal a preninety feet from the road without looking up or

vious statute which is particular, though the provisdown the road; when near the track, the train being

| ions in the two be different. Wright, assignee, v. within a short distance, going at twenty-five miles


TRIAL. an hour, he lashed his horses to cross the track; the

Expressions made by judge in charge.-A judge may wagon was struck by the engine and he killed. Held,

express to a jury an opinion on the facts in a case that he was guilty of contributory negligence. In a suit by his wife against the railroad company for caus

properly referred to them; but must not infringe their

province, so as to mislead them or relieve them of full ing his death, she was properly nonsuited, although

responsibility of pronouncing judgment on the facts there may have been negligence in the engineer.

themselves. When there is sufficient evidence for a Gerety v. Philad., Wilm. and Balt. R. R. Co.

jury on a given point, the judge should submit it STATUTE OF FRAUDS.

calmly and impartially. If the judge states the evi1. Agreement concerning lands : party to be charged dence he shouid state it accurately, as well that which only need sign memorandum.-Penn in 1784 leased a lot

makes for a party as that which makes against him. to Wormley for ten thousand years, at an annual rent,

The judge should studiously avoid deductions and with right of distress and re-entry to forfeit the lease

theories not warranted by the evidence. Burke v. in default of payment, if there were not sufficient

Maxwell's Administrators. distress on the premises to pay the rent. Wormley

USURY, died in 1829 without known heirs; App then took possession of the lot; the plaintiff had been agent of

Purchaser of land incumbered by judgment on usuriPeny before Wormley's death, and so continued until

ons debt cannot plead : usury not fraudulent as to cred1838, when Penn's devisee conveyed to him the ground

itors.-Wren borrowed money at usurious interest and

gave a bond for its payment, on which judgment was rent and all the grantor's estate in the lot. No rent having been paid by Wormley, the plaintiff, July 1,

entered, He was afterward adjudged a bankrupt, and 1839, entered for its non-payment, declaring his inten

his land sold by the assignee subject to the judgment. tion to resume possession. By arrangement with App,

Held, that the purchaser could not have the judgment in order that plaintiff might make title to him, he re

reduced by the amount of the usury. The act of May

28, 1858 (usury), applies only to the parties to the moved every thing from the lot, and continued in its

transaction; it being at the election of the borrower occupancy to take care of it for plaintiff. In October,

whether he will withhold the excess or recover it back 18:39, App and plaintiff signed without seals a paper by

within the time limited. In the distribution of a fund which App agreed “to take the lot,” describing it, ou

judgment creditors may attack a judgment collatera ground-rent of $60. Held, that this paper was an

ally for fraud on them, but not because it is a fraud agreement in writing, under the statute of frauds, for

on the debtor. A subsequent judgment creditor cana lease of the land on ground-rent. The requirements

not set aside a judgment merely because it is erroneof the statute are met by a memorandum in writing

ous. Payment of usury is not necessarily fraudulent signed by the party to be charged therewith. If signed

as to creditors. Whenever the usurious contract is by the vendor alone and delivered to the vendee no

intended to defraud creditors, or when the circummore is required. It is not necessary that the writing

stances of the debtor are known to be such, that it can be under seal nor in any particular form of words.

be reasonably presumed that this will be the natural Cadwalader v. App.

effect, creditors have the right to postpone the excess * To appear in 31 P. F. Smith's (81 Penn. St.) Reports. " of interest. The purchaser, having bought subject to

the judgment, is presumed to have paid as much as original construction, impliedly warrants that the the amount of the judgment less than he would have | unfitness of the articles is not occasioned by any fault done. There was no privity of contract between the of his own. Ib. creditors and the purchaser, and he cannot invoke

MORTGAGE. their equities and claim under them for his exclusive

1. When deed absolute in form treated as mortgage.bencfit. Miners' Trust Co. Bank v. Roseberry.

A deed absolute in form, if intended to secure the

pay of money, and the relation of debtor and creditor SUPREME COURT COMMISSION, OHIO.*

exists between the grantor and the grantee at the time

of its execution, will be treated as a mortgage. But BAILMENT.

where no such relation exists, and the grantor and 1. Liability of bailee without reward.-- In case of a

grantee, at the time of the execution of the deed, deposit of property, to be kept by the bailee without

agree in writing that the grantor shall have the option reward and returned to the depositor on demand, the

of repurchase in a given time, at a certain price, the law holds such a bailee liable only for losses arising

transaction is a conditional sale. Slutz v. Desenberg. from his gross negligence. Griffith v. Zipperwick.

2. Rule to determine character of instrument.--To 2. What coustitutes negligence.- What will constitute

determine whether a deed, absolute in form, is in such gross negligence must be determined as a ques

equity a mortgage, requires that the real intention of tion of fact, in each particular case, by the jury, under the parties to the transaction be ascertained. A fair proper instructions from the court. Ib.

criterion seems to be this: If, under all the facts and 3. Duty of bailee without reward.-Good faith re.

circumstances, the relation of lender and borrower, or quires, generally, that such a bailee should keep the

creditor and debtor, do not subsist, and the gran goods intrusted to him, with as much care as he ordi

under no personal obligation that can be enforced by narily keeps his own, of the same kind. And he

the grantee as creditor or mortgagee, the transaction should also keep them with such degree of care as is will be treated as a sale and not as a mortgage. Ib. reasonable, with reference to the nature of the goods, 3. Position, rights and liabilities of parties to instruand the particular circumstances of the bailment.

ment.- Where the transaction is a sale, with a right of Ib.

repurchase by the grantor within a stipulated time at 4. Facts showing want of good faith: bonds left for

a stipulated price, and is not in equity a mortgage, the safe-keeping.-On the trial of an action brought to re grantor, under such contract of repurchase, occupies cover the value of certain government bonds, depos the position of a vendee, with such rights and liabiliited by the plaintiff with the defendants as gratuitous ties as attend such relation, and not of mortgagor. Ib. bailees, and which were stolen from the vault of their banking-house by burglars, the evidence tended to

BOOK NOTICES. show that the plaintiff's bonds, when deposited, were inclosed in a tin box, fastened with a padlock, of

THE ANNOTATED POCKET CODE. which the plaintiff retained the key; that defendants | The Revised Code of Civil Procedure of the State of New York. had a small burglar-proof safe in their vault, in which

as amended in 1877, according to the Standard Text de

posited in the Office of the Secretary of State by the they kept similar bonds of their own and other depos Revision Commissioners. With Notes and References itors, which were all inclosed in paper envelopes, but to Decisions bearing thereon. Also, the Temporary Act,

the Suspension Act, the Repealing Act, and the Uure. that plaintiff's box, and similar bonds of another de

pealed Sections of the Former Code Albany, N. Y.; positor, also inclosed in a box, were kept in the vault,

John D. Parsons, Jr., 1877. outside of the burglar-proof safe, such other depos THE lawyers of this State cannot complain that the itor consenting that his box should be thus kept. 1 New Code has not, at least so far as the text is Held, that the court did not err in refusing to instruct concerned, been made accessible to them. Nearly the jury that these facts, if proved, would be conclu every publisher of law books in the State bas issued sive evidence of a want of good faith or of gross negli an edition, and some of them have gone so far as to gence, and would require a verdict for the plaintiff, issue two editions; the second edition being put forth nor was it error to instruct the jury that they might because the first was discovered to be full of errors. properly take the character of plaintiff's package or We mentioned a few weeks ago, in a review of the box into consideration. Ib.

book prepared by Mr. Throop, that it was the ouly MISTAKE OF FACT.

Code yet printed that could be relied upon as accurate. 1. Rescission of contract for.-A contract made un

All previous publications purporting to be the Code, der mistake as to a material fact may be rescinded by

were at best only approximations, and, in the nature

of things, could not be relied upou as accurate. The the party sought to be charged, upon discovery of the

Codes published since the work of the commissiouers mistake, he being guilty of no want of diligence in

has been accessible, are, presumptively, accurate in not ascertaining what the real facts were. There is

their text, though in one of the “second edition" no difference in principle between the rescission of a

issues, we have discovered errors of considerable imcontract to perform, and the rescission of a contract

portance. which is in itself the rescission of another and existing contract. Byers v. Chapin.

Among all the editions of the Code yet appearing, 2. Grounds of rescission : duty of party seeking it.

in many respects the one before us will be found the A party selling articles for a specific purpose impliedly

most useful to the practicing lawyer. In the first warrants that they are fit for that purpose, and a fail

place its size recommends it. It is not, indeed, a book ure of such warranty is ground for rescission of a con

for the vest pocket, but it can be conveniently carried tract based upon it. A purchaser making such rescis

in a coat pocket. For a year or two at least, all the sion, when it is his duty to expend labor and skill in

practitioners in the State will need to take the law order to render the articles fit for the purpose of their

governing practice with them, and the ponderous oo

tavo, which is the regular thing in the law book line, * From advance sheets of 28 Ohio State Reports. I cannot be transported, without great trouble, to every place where its owner may want to consult it. For the rules of law governing the notarial office in a clear reference and study the larger works are suitable | and concise manner, and it may, we think, be relied enough, and every practitioner should have one to on as accurate in all its statements. The statute law remain in his office. But a handy volume which can of Michigan, where the book is issued, is, in respect to be carried and put down anywhere, and is right side the same subject, also given, but as that resembles, in up in any shape, will at the end of the year give evi most particulars, the statute law prevailing in other dence of more frequent and constant use than the States, the work can be used and depended upon by larger book. Several of the Codes issued have been those for whom it is designed in almost every section printed with small type on thin paper, with the view of the country. The various topics considered in the of making them handy for use and carriage, but they book are these: The Office, Affidavits, Acknowledgare all of them of an inconvenient shape, and thus are ments, Commercial Protests, Marine Protests, Liabilnot well fitted for the purpose designed. This volume ity for Negligence, Proofs in Bankruptcy, Special Duis all that could be desired, not only in size, but in ties, and Fees. A number of forms, sutficient to meet shape. It, however, does not secure convenience for the necessary requirements of Notaries, are also given. one purpose, by the sacrifice of convenience for an The book will be found to supply those for whom it is other; that is, it is not made small by reducing the designed, with all the information they are apt to size of the type to a degree that renders the print not need, and in a better and more convenient shape than easily readable. The pages of this volume can be read

the larger works on the same subject. as easily as those of the edition of Mr. Throop, which

COURT OF APPEALS DECISIONS. is a splendid specimen of printing. The volume before us contains another feature

THE following decisions were handed down in the which peculiarly fits it for the use of the practicing

1 New York Court of Appeals on Tuesday, Sept. attorney. Every section of the book is annotated as

18, 1877: fully as in any large Code, and every fact of importance

Judgment affirmed with costs – Towle v. Remsen; bearing on the section – where it appears in pre-exist

Steele v. Lord; The Village of Gloversville v. Howell, ing laws or for what it is a substitute - is stated, and

McVey v. Cantrell; Potter v. Smith; Alexander v. every case wherein the previous law was construed or

Dutcher; Magnin v. Dinsmore; Campbell v. ('onner; passed upon, is given. Where the decision referred

Pierce v. Keator; Beckwith v. Whalen; Hickler v. to, or explanation made, bears only on a single sen

Leighton; Oakley v. The Mayor, etc.-- Order affirmed tence or paragraph of the section, that circumstance

with costs - Williams v. Thoru; In re N. Y. Elevated is indicated. This work appears to have been thor

R. R. Co.; In re Gilbert Elevated R. R. Co.; Kobbe oughly well done, and a somewhat extended examina v. Elevated R. R. Co.; Tilton v. Ormsbee. — Judgtion has satisfied us that all the refereuces are reliable ment and order affirmed with costs -- Peck 1. Collins. and will prove of value to those having occasion to use

- Judgment affirmed with no costs to either party them. The principles enunciated in the cases cited

as against the other in this court - The Children's Aid are not given, as this would have taken so much space

Society v. Loveridge. — Order affirmed and judgment and would have so enlarged the book as to render it no absolute for respondent, ou stipulation, with costs longer a handy volume. Every case decided bearing

Hathaway v. Howell. — Order affirmed with costs upon a given section is referred to, and the practi

and judgment absolute for defendant as of date of tioner can, if he desires, very easily reach all that is argument — Miller v. Winchell. Order affirmed with necessary.

costs and judgment absolute for defendant on stipulaAnother feature in this work is, that it gives not

tion — Ham v. The Mayor.- Order of General Term only the new Code, but all of the old Code that is not

affirmed and judgment ordered on report of referee, abrogated, fully annotated. This brings the whole with cost payable out of the fund - Boon v. Moss. law governing practice into one book, and those using - Order of General Term, also assessments of 1869, tbis Code need not search through two or more vol

1872 and 1874 affirmed, and reversed as to that of 1870, umes when examining a question controlled by that and that assessment vacated without costs to either law.

party - In re Petition of Hebrew Benevolent Orphan We have spoken thus favorably of this volume, not Asylum.-- Judgment reversed and new trial granted, merely on account of the skill, care and accuracy with costs to abide event - Ferguson v. Crawford; The which the work upon it is done, but also because it is

Trustees of Columbia College v. Lynch; Lanigan v. in its form, typography and arrangement precisely

The Mayor. what we have long wished to see in the way of a work of this kind. The Code of Civil Procedure is a book to

NOTES. be used, not one to be read and put away. It is to the A NEW treatise on the Law of Private Corporations practicing lawyer what the lancet is to the surgeon, a | A for Pecuniary Gain is announced by t ublishthing never to be left behind, and the publisher who ing house of John D. Parsons, Jr. Its author is Geo. presents it in a form fitted for the purpose of easy | W. Field, Esq., who is well kuown to the legal world carriage, while containing every thing of value usually | by his able work on Damages, and other treatises of found only in more pretentious tomes, is worthy the merit. As the subject of corporations is one upon thanks and the support of the profession.

which most of the elementary treatises are much be

hind the times, those of the profession who are interTHE NOTARIES' MANUAL.

ested therein will welcome the announcement meuThe Notaries' Manual, showing the Rights, Duties and Lia

tioned, as Mr. Field's reputation is such as to insure bilities of Notaries, according to the common law

that the work will be all that can be desired to meet throughout the Union. Detroit: Richmond, Backus

the existing want. & Co., 1877. This handy little volume is intended as a common Mr. Marshall D. Ewell, author of " A Treatise on the law guide to Notaries throughout the country. It gives | Law of Fixtures," and " Leading Cases on Iufancy, Coverture and Idiocy,” has been appointed Professor the case, we do not deem it is necessary to print Judge of Common Law and Evidence in the Union College Dillon's remarks in full. After Judge Dillon had conof Law, of Chicago. As a legal author, Mr. Ewell has cluded, Judge Love made some appropriate remarks. displayed both ability and acquirements of the first | A meeting of the bar was called to take action in the order, and these ought to make him a successful matter; but as few members of the bar of the circuit teacher.

not connected with the case were present, it was adjourned until the regular October term. Cate, the

author of the slanders, was in town, and was invited The Association for the Reform and Codification of to the bar meeting, but did not put in an appearance. the Law of Nations opened its fifth annual conference In the course of his address Judge Dillon said: “The on the 30th ult., at Antwerp, under the presidency of | bar is my constituency. They are the proper accusers Lord O'Hagan. M. T. 0. Engels, manager of the of a bad judge, and the proper defenders of a just Belgian Lloyds, is the president of the local commit judge unjustly assailed. Against such assaults as have tee; and, in welcoming the members of the associa been made against me, a judge is almost helpless, so tion to Antwerp, he alluded to its growing import far as positive action by him is concerned. Under ance as a seaport, and its consequent advantages as a

the act of Congress he cannot punish a libeler for place of meeting for those interested in settling the

contempt of court. If the bar do not sustain a judge, conflicting practices connected with general aver

he is defenseless. He cannot, like his assailants, go age questions, which occupied a prominent place in

week after week into the press, or issue pamphlets, the programme of the congress for the year. Lord

and in this manner defend his official action. Such a O'Hagan, in his i:itroductory address, gave a history course is alike indelicate and impossible. By misof the steps which led to the convening of the first

representation it is possible to so present the rulings confereuce at Brussels on the 10th of October, 1873. in any case as to raise at least ungenerous suspicions The primary object of the association was described among the uninformed. * * * The bar, and the in their first resolution as “the substitution of the

press, and the public have had the penetration to see arbitrament of reason and justice for the arbitrament the couspiracy to defame me. And the counsel in the of the sword.” While this noble design had not been cause and the bar at large, have nobly discharged lost sight of, the exigencies of the time had led the suc their duty, and the press of my circuit, and, indeed, cessive conferences that had since been held, to fix elsewhere, have as pobly discharged its duty to the their attention, in the main, on questions the discus- | public; and in the sacred name of justice, rather than sion of which was likely to have a more immediate as the expression of my personal gratitude, I now and practical result. He proceeded to point out the ad here, in the most solemn and deliberate manner, vantages of, and the steps that had been taken by the thank them for it. The bar have resented this outrage association to further a unifurm usage for the nations as an affront and wrong to themselves, and I have been of Europe and America with reference to bills of ex touched as never before in the course of my judicial change, general average, patents, copyright, cuinage, experience, now neither short nor uneventful, by maritime capture, and the extradition of criminals. their general uprising; by the expressions of their Lord O'Hagan concluded his address by dwelling on steady and unshaken confidence, and by the demonthe ancient commercial and maritime renowu of the strations of their devotion and affectionate regard. I city of Antwerp. From the secretary's report it ap- am proud of it. This repays me for the laborious days peared that there had been added to the vice-presi and nights of nearly twenty years, which, with pure deuts: For the United States, the Hon. Bancroft purpose, and to the best of my humble abilities, I Davis, American Minister at the Court of Berlin; for have loyally consecrated to my profession, as a minCanada, Sir William Young, Chief Justice, Halifax; | ister of justice. I can never forget it. It would, and others. Among those added to the members of indeed, be sad and most discouraging, if the fabric of council was Mr. T. Aston, Q. C. Letters were read a man's character, almost the only substantial reward from Lord Cairns, Sir John Lubbock, and Lord Derby, of an American judge - reared in toil, stone by stone, the latter encouraging the association to hope that through the period of the greater part of an active wheu they had practical results to show they would

life, would crumble at the touch of unestablished and have the support of the English government. Among baseless slanderers, or could be swept away by an artithose present at the conference were: Dr. Tristram, ficial tempest having origin in the disappointment, Q. C. ; Dr. Spinks, Q. C.; C. Clarke, Q. C.; J. Hinde

ignorance, or diseased imagination of litigants. I Palmer, Q. C.; and Professor Amos. The conference have not referred to this matter for the personal wrong closed its labors on the 3d inst.

done to myself, for the assault upon me bas proved harmless and impotent, but rather to call the atten

tion of the bar to the great outrage done judicial office The Central Law Journal says, that on the occasion and to the administration of public justice. Every of the Special Term of the United States Circuit thoughtful person, lawyer or layman, will agree with Court, which met at Des Moines week before last, to Lord Chancellor Thurlow, that 'the villifying and mishear the motion to confirm the sale of the Central representing the conduct of judges and magistrates, Railroad of Iowa, Judge Dillon addressed the bar at intrusted with the administration of justice and the some length, with reference to the charges which had laws of the country, is a crime of a very heinous been made against his integrity by one of the litigants nature, and most destructive in its consequences, bein the case, and circulated in pamphlet form through cause it tends to lower them in the opinion of the out his circuit, and published in influential journals public, who ought to feel a proper reverence and rein the east. Judge Dillon went over the case at consid spect for their high and important stations.' In no erable length, with the record before him, and showed country is this vital truth so important as in ours, that the charges made were false in every particular. | where public opinion is formed more largely than elseAs our readers are already familiar with the facts of where by the public press."

« AnteriorContinuar »