Imágenes de páginas


Prichard, Sidcup, Kent, apothecary, Sept. 28 at 12, London,

div.-Wm. Robi. Nield and Wm. H. H. Collander, CannonBANKRUPTS.

street West, shawl warehousemen, Sept. 28 at 12, London, THOMAS GODFREY, Forston-street, Shepherdess-fields, div.-Wm. Jones, Liverpool, shipwright, Sept. 28 at 11, Li egg merchant, Sept. 20 at 12, and Oct. 19 at half-past 1, verpool, div.-Henry Frederick Newell

, Bradford, Yorkshire

, London: Off

. Ass: Whitmore ; Sol. Sturmy, 8, Wellington linendraper, Sept. 28 at 11, Leeds, div. street, Southwark.-Pet. f. Sept. 4.

CERTIFICATES. WILLIAM PATTULLO, Thornbill-place, Caledonian-road, To be allowed, unless Cause be shewn to the contrary on or and St. James-road, Holloway, baker, Sept. 19 at 12, and

before the Day of Meeting. Oct. 16 at half-past 12, London: Off. Ass. Lee; Sol. Sadgrove, 64, Mark-lane.- Pet. f. Sept. 4.

Edward Green, Bath, tavern keeper, Oct. 8 at 11, Bristol. JOSEPH PLAYER, Winchester-buildings, Broad-street,

-James Burnblum, Manchester, commission agent, Sept. 28 dealer and chapman, Sept. 21 at 1, and Oct. 16 at 2, Lon at 12, Manchester.- Geo. Nelson, Leeds, upholsterer, Dec. 3 don: Off. Ass. Edwards ; Sols. Bishop & Son, 23, New at 11, Leeds.- John Henry Bradshaw, Birmingham, inn. Bridge-street, Blackfriars.Pet. f. Sept. 6.

keeper, Oct. 4 at half past 10, Birmingham.-T. Price Smith, THOMAS ORTON GOODWIN, Longton, Staffordshire, Birmingham, factor, Oct. 4 at half-past 10, Birmingham.

dealer and chapman, Sept. 29 and Oct. 19 at 11, Birming- To be granted, unless an Appeal be duly entered. ham : Off. Ass. Bittleston; Sols. Young, Longton ; Hodgson, Thomas Shepherd, King's Lynn, hop merchant. ---Robert Birmingham.-Pet. d. Sept. 1.

Martin and David Wardlaw Scott, Great St. Helen's, mer. GEORGE HANCOCK, Fenton, Stoke-upon-Trent, Stafford- chants.-Wm. Sheldrake Francis Sparkes, New Bond-street,

shire, builder, Sept. 26 and Oct. 17 at half-past 10, Bir- waterproofer.- Frederick Divers, Great Bell-alley, Moorgate. mingham : Off. Ass. Whitmore; Sol. Smith, Birmingham. street, victualler.– Henry Lockey Edridge, Monmouth-road, -Pet. d. Sept. 6.

Bayswater, builder.- George Tidd, Codicote, corn dealer.JOHN GRANVILLE HOPKINSON, Nottingham, dealer Daniel Golding, Isleham, Cambridgeshire, butcher.-- James

and chapman, Sept. 25 and Oct. 9 at half-past 10, Not- Holmes, Regent-street, Westminster, shawl warehouseman.tingham: Off. Ass. Harris; Sols. Deseriil, Nottingham ; Thomas Roberts, Llanstephan, Carmarthenshire, and Newport, Hodgson, Birmingham.-Pet. d. Sept. 3.

Monmouthshire, builder. - John Brooks, Weston-super-Mare, JOSEPH ATHERLEY, Mountsorrel, Leicestershire, apo- Somersetshire, wine merchant.- Abraham H. James, Newport,

thecary, Sept. 18 and Oct. 9 at 10, Nottingham: Off. Ass. Monmouthshire, stonemason.-D. Foster, Goole, Yorkshire, Harris; Sols. Inglesant, Loughborough ; Hodgson, Bir- ironmonger.

mingham.-Pet. d. Sept. 3. THOMAS READ, Nottingham, builder, Sept. 25 and Oct.

TUESDAY, Sept. 11. 9 at 10, Nottingham : Off. Ass. Harris ; Sols. Motteram & Knight, Birmingham.-Pet. d. Sept. 4.

BANKRUPTS. EDWARD WAĎGE, Linkinhorn, Cornwall, dealer and HENRY HOUGHTON, Friday-street and Watling-street,

chapman, Sept. 20 and Oct. 18 at 1, Exeter: Off. Ass. merchant, Sept. 21 at 2, and Oct. 16 at half-past 1, LonHirtzel ; Sol. Elworthy, Plymouth.-Pet. f. Sept. 5.

don: Off. Ass. Edwards ; Sols. Reed & Co., 59, FridayCHRISTOPHER VICKRY BRIDGMAN, Tavistock, De- street, Cheapside.-Pet. f. Sept. 8.

vonshire, dealer and chapman, Sept. 20 and Oct. 25 at 1, GEORGE ALEXANDER M'LEAN, High Holborn, tailor, Eseter : Off. Ass. Hirtzel; Sol. Stogdon, Exeter.— Pet. f. (now a prisoner for debt in Whitecross-street Prison), Sept. Sept. 4.

28 at half-past 2, and Oct. 18 at 2, London: Off. Ass. JACOB ABRAHAM JACQUES and LOUIS SELIG, Edwards ; Sol. Gilham, 24, Bartlett's-buildings, Holborn. Liverpool, traders, Sept. 20 and Oct. 11 at 11, Liverpool :

-Pet. f. Sept. 10. Off. Ass. Turner; Sols. Evans & Son, Liverpool.- Pet, f. WILLIAM HIPKINS, Birmingham, dealer and chapman, Aug. 13.

Sept. 21 and Oct. 19 at 11, Birmingham : Off. Ass. Christie ; BRIGHT EAGLAND and WILLIAM CRAMPTON, Bed- Sol. Bartleet, Birmingham.- Pet. d. Sept. 8.

ford, near Leigh, Lancashire, cotton manufacturers, (carry. WILLIAM BROADHURST and WILLIAM MARSHALL ing on business under the style of Bright Eagland & Co.),

BROADHURST, Sheffield, table-knife manufacturers, Sept. 19 and Oct. 10 at 12, "Manchester : Ox. Ass. Pott; Sept. 29 and Oct. 27 at 12, Sheffield : Off. Ass. Brewin; Sol. Potter, Manchester.—Pet. f. Aug. 31.

Sol. Webster, Sheffield.-Pet. d. Sept. 5, and f. Sept. 6. JOSEPH ALDRIDGE, Leeds, dealer and chapman, Sept. 20 HENRY EVANS and SAMUEL EVANS, Dudbridge

, and Oct. 18 at 11, Leeds: Off. Ass. Hope ; Sol. Clarke, Stonehouse, Gloucestershire, saddle-tree makers, Sept. 24 Leeds.- Pet. d. Sept. 3.

and Oct. 22 at 11, Bristol : Off. Ass. Miller ; Sols. Phipps, ABRAHAM TAYLOR, Halifax, coal merchant, Sept. 27 Caincross, near Stroud ; Bevan & Girling, Bristol.—- Pet. f.

and Oct. 22 at 11, Leeds: Off. Ass. Hope ; Sols. Mitchell, Sept. 6. Halifax; Bond & Barwick, Leeds.- Pet. d. Sept. 4.

WILLIAM SWIFT, Liverpool, dealer and chapman, Sept. 21 JAMES FINLINSON, Leeds, sharedealer, Sept. 27 and and Oct. 12 at 11, Liverpool: Ass. Off. Bird; Sol. Etty,

Oct. 26 at 11, Leeds : Off. Ass. Hope ; Sols. Bond & Bar- Liverpool.- Pet. f. Aug. 30. wick, Leeds.-Pet. d. Aug. 16.

MEETINGS. WILLIAM HOLMES, Wilsden, Bradford, Yorkshire, dealer and chapman, Sept. 24 and Oct. 26 at 11, Leeds: Off. Ass. Sept. 24 at 1, London, pr. d. ---John Steele, Manchester, ma;

Henry Bennett, Christchurch, Hampshire, linendraper, Hope ; Sols. Taylor, Bradford ; Blackburn, Leeds.—- Pet. nufacturer, Sept. 28 'at 12, Manchester, last ex.-Samuel

d. Sept. 4. THOMAS LINFOOT, York, builder, Sept. 20 and Oct. 18 Sept. 27 at 12, Manchester, last ex.John Jones, Manches

Howarth and Noah Howarth, Radcliffe, Lancashire, dyers, at 11, Leeds : Off. Ass. Hope ; Sols. Newton & Robinson, ter, machine maker, Oct. 4 'at 12, Manchester, last ex.-Thos.

York; Bond & Barwick, Leeds.- Pet. d. Aug. 31. JOSEPH SIMPSON, Leeds, dealer and chapman, Sept. 27 Kitts, Bolton, Lancashire, cotton spinner, Sept. 27 at 12, and Oct. 22 at 11, Leeds: Off. Ass. Hope ; Sols. J. & H. Stepney, auctioneer, Sept. 26 at half-past 1, London, and, ac.

Manchester, last ex.- Thomas Sloper, White Horse-terrace, Richardson & Gaunt, Leeds.- Pet. d. Sept. 1. WILLIAM MARRATT, Doncaster, attorney-at-law, Sept.

-Harriet Swindell, Ashborne, Derbyshire, wine merchant, 22 and Oct. 20 at 12, Sheffield : Of. Ass. Brewin; sols. Oct. 2 at 10, Nottingham, aud. ac. and div.Oliver Apple

. J. & J. W. Collinson, Doncaster; Hoole & Yeomans, div.-John Parkinson the elder and John Parkinson the Sheffield.-Pet. d. Aug. 27.

younger, Leicester, hosiers, Oct. 2 at 10, Nottingham, aud. MEETINGS.

ac. and div.-Samuel Thraves and William Harrison, NotFrancis Lloyd Bayley and Samuel Millner Barton, Man- tingbam, upholsterers, Oct. 2 at 10, Nottingham, aud. ac chester, smallware manufacturers, Sept. 21 at 12, Manchester, and div.-Thos. Charlesworth, Nottingham, plumber, Oct. ? last ex.-John Wood, Manchester, Sept. 19 at 12, Manchester, at 10, Nottingham, and. ac. and div. - Thomas Briggs, North aud. ac. - Robert Nodes Newton and Thomas G. Payne, New Shields, Northumberland, grocer, Oct. 2 at half-past 12, Park-street, Southwark, gas engineers, Sept. 28 at balf-past Newcastle-upon-Tyne, aud. ac. ; Oct. 5 at 11, div.-Joseph 12, London, fin. div. sep. est. of Robert Nodes Newton.-T.

[For continuation of Gazette, see p. 369].

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

CONTENTS. London Gazettes.......

364 Vice-CHANCELLOR Wood's COURT-(Continued). Leading Article

365 Firth v. Greenwood.-(Vendor and purchaser-Agency The Operation of an Unsealed Lease 366 -Delay)

866 Correspondence


Consolidation of Statute Law-Commissioners' Report 368

By G. J. P. Smith, Barrister at Law.

Vansittart v. Taylor.-(Point reserved at trial- Ap-

pealCommon-law Procedure Act, 17 d. 18 Vict. By F. FISHER, Barrister at Law. c. 125, 8. 34, not retrospective).


Alleyne v. Reg.-(Writ of error-Judgment of ExE.x parte Tindall, in re Tindall.-(Bankrupt-law Con.

chequer Chamber Writ of error quashed solidation Act, sect. 80, construction of - Personal

Amendment of record).

869 service of summons).......


Rolls Court.

By G.J. P. Smith and W. B. Brett, Barristers at Law.
By G. Y. Robson, Barrister at Law.

Derecourt 0. Corbishley.-(Assault and batteryHoneyman 0. Marryat.-(Vendor and purchaser

Imprisonment - Justification Policeman - ByPayment of deposit money-Time of the essence of

stander). .

870 the contract)..


Warburg 0. Tucker.-(Bankruptcy - 12 & 13 Vict. Armstrong o. Armstrong.—(Ship Registry Act--Pro.

c. 106, s. 178—Liability to pay money at several ceeds of sale of ship)..


times on several contingencies Certificate no bar VICE-CHANCELLOR STUART's Court.

-Policy of assurance Covenant to pay premiums, By T. F. MORSE, Barrister at Law.

and to repay premiums paid by covenantee). 871 Houghton v. Lees.-(Specific performance-Family

Cannan v. Reynolds.—(Judgment for plaintiff - Misarrangement-Consideration)..


take-Application by plaintiff to set aside judge ment-Amendment of particulars)

873 Jones 0. Jones.—(Prosecution, motion to dismiss for want of —Answer, notice of filing of —23rd Gene

Hilton o. Eckersley.-(Bond-Manufaclurers-Com. ral Order of October, 1842)


bination to close works--Illegality-Public policy - Restraint of trade).

874 VICE-CHANCELLOR Wood's Coort.

Reg. o. The Town Council of Gravesend.-(Borough, By MATTHEW B. Begbie, Barrister at Law.

Grant of separate quarter sessions-Contribution Hodson 0. Cash.-(Trustees severing in defencem

to expenses of county-Contract with countyCosts)

864 Support and maintenance of prisoners in county Bulkeley v. Hope.-(Land tax redemption- Tenant

prison-5 & 6 Will. 4, c. 76, ss. 114, 117–5 & 6 for life). 864 Vict. c. 98, s. 19)..



house of correction, to be imprisoned, with or without

hard labour, for any period not exceeding threc calendar TO CORRESPONDENTS.

months; and if they find the offence not proved, they

are to dismiss the charge, and deliver to the person We must refer our Shrewsbury correspondent, who denies charged a certificate of such dismissal. There are that Watts v. Porter conflicts with Whitworth o, Gaugain, to three cases, however, in which this sumınary jurisdicwhat we have written on those cases in pp. 313, 322, and 331. We cannot hope to make our views clearer by any fur: tion is not to be exercised by the justices. ther exposition of them. We agree with all that our cor- First, if the person charged do not consent thereto; respondent urges in favour of the judgment creditor, viz. and for the purpose of ascertaining whether he conthat his notice gave him a priority over any prior conflicting claim not protected by notice. What we say, on the authority sents, one of the justices, after the examination of all of Whitworth o. Gaugain and of common sense, is, that there the witnesses for the prosecution, and before calling on was no such conflict in Watts v. Porter; but the judgment the party charged for any statement, is to state to him creditor's lien or charye was never intended to affect any, the substance of the charge, and to say to him, “Do thing more than what was left in the debtor after satisfying The mortgagee.

you consent that the charge against you shall be tried

by us, or do you desire that it shall be sent for trial by LONDON, SEPTEMBER 15, 1855. a jury at the sessions,” (or “ assizes," as the case may

be]; and if he consent, the charge is to be reduced into The act for “ diminishing expense and delay in the writing, and read to him; and he is then to be asked administration of justice in certain cases" (18 & 19 whether he is guilty or not of such charge; and if he Vict. c. 126) came into force on the 14th of last says that he is not guilty, he is to be asked whether he month, and we propose briefly to consider the most has any defence to make to such charge; and if he state important of its provisions. The main object of the that he has, his defence is to be heard. statute is to give justices in petty sessions a summary Secondly, if it appear to the justices that the offence jurisdiction to try, by consent of the prisoner, charges of is one which, owing to a previous conviction, is punishlarceny where the value of the property stolen does not able by law with transportation or penal servitude; and, exceed 58., and of attempts to commit larceny.

Thirdly, if they are of opinion that the charge is, First, as to the jurisdiction. Magistrates in petty from any other circumstances, fit to be made the subsessions are empowered, by consent of the prisoner, to ject of prosecution by indictment. adjudicate summarily upon charges of simple larceny, if In any of these three cases they are to deal with the the value of the whole of the property alleged to have charge in all respects as if the act had not been passed. been stolen does not in their judgment exceed 58., and It is further provided, that if upon the hearing of the upon charges of attempts to commit larceny from the per- charge they shall be of opinion that there are circumson, or simple larceny. If they find the offence proved, stances in the case which render it inexpedient to inthey may commit the offender to the common gaol or flict any punishment, they may dismiss the person charged without proceeding to a conviction. (Sects. the jurisdiction of the justices depends upon the value 1, 2).

of the article stolen, in their judgment not exceeding It will be seen that a distinction is made between 58., it will be advisable to allege that fact, because, charges involving the actual commission of a larceny although the offence of larceny does not depend upon and those which relate only to attempts to commit it: the amount of the property stolen, provided that it be in the former case the offence must be simple larceny, of some value, yet it is a part of the specific offence and the value of all the articles stolen must not in the over which jurisdiction is given by the act; and it is a judgment of the justices exceed 58.; but they may rule, that all facts essential to jurisdiction must appear decide in a summary manner a charge of an attempt to upon the face of summary proceedings, unless the statecommit not only simple larceny, but larceny from the ment of them is expressly dispensed with by statute. person, and this whatever may be the value of the It will be observed that no appeal is given by the article attempted to be stolen.

act, and therefore none will lie; but as the writ of By the 3rd section an enlarged jurisdiction is con- certiorari is not taken away, the proceedings may be ferred upon magistrates in cases where the accused removed, and quashed for want of jurisdiction in the pleads guilty to the charge. Thus, if a person is charged justices who have made the conviction. This course, with simple larceny, (the value of the property exceeding however, will not probably be often adopted, as, if the 58.), or stealing from the person, or larceny as a clerk or conviction is quashed for want of jurisdiction, the servant, and the evidence on the part of the prosecution party would not, in the eyes of the law, have been in appears to the justices sufficient to put the accused on jeopardy, and therefore might still be indicted for the his trial, and they think that the case may be properly offence. disposed of in a summary manner, they are to reduce the charge into writing and read it to the accused, and THE OPERATION OF AN UNSEALED LEASE*. explain to him that he is not obliged to plead or answer before them at all, and that if he do not do so he will be committed for trial in the usual course, and then to

The decision in Stratton v. Pettit, (1 Jur., N. S., ask him whether he is guilty or not; and if he says misunderstood, and has not been approved of by all

part 1, p. 662), noticed ante, p. 305, has been somewhat that he is guilty, they are to cause the plea of guilty to be entered on the proceedings, and to convict him, and even of those who have not mistaken its real scope and to commit him to prison, with or without hard labour, Vict. c. 106, are, that “a lease required by law to be in

effect. The words of the 3rd section of the stat. 8 & 9 for any term not exceeding six calendar months.

In all cases of summary proceeding under this act writing, of any tenements or hereditaments, shall be the accused is to be allowed to make his full defence, void at law unless made by deed.” The instrument in and to examine

and cross-examine witnesses by counsei Stratton v. Pettit was an unsealed agreement in writing, or attorney. (Sect. 4). The justices may remand the signed by the plaintiff and defendant, and in the matecase to the next petty sessions, and in the meantime,

rial part thus expressed :—"The said J. G. Stratton 5, 6). The justices by whom any person is con- said G. Pettit, to hold unto the said G. Pettit, his if they think fit, admit the accused to bail. (Sects: agrees to let, and the said G. Pettit agrees to take, all victed under the act may order the restitution of pro- executors, administrators, and assigns, from the 25th perty stolen, taken, or obtained by false pretences, in March last, for the term of five years; and the said those cases in which restitution might have been J. G. Stratton also agrees to sell, and the said G. Pettit awarded after trial upon indictment. (Sect. 8). They may also, upon the request of the parties, order the agrees to purchase, the fee-simple of and in the said espenses of the prosecutor and his witnesses to be paid. premises, to be conveyed unto the said G. Pettit, bis (Sect. 14). The petty sessions, for the purposes of the of the said five years; yielding and rendering by the act, are to be an open public court

, and to be the petty sessions holden for a petty sessional division; and a

said G. Pettit unto the said J. G. Stratton, as well for written or printed notice of the days and hours for the rent or use of the said premises for five years as for holding such petty sessions is to be affixed by the clerk the said purchase thereof, 101., in and by seventy shares to the justices of petty sessions upon the outside of the receipt and delivery unto the said J. G. Stratton of some conspicuous part of the building where the same the said shares in full for the said rent and purchase are held. (Sect. 10). The conviction, or duplicate of certificate of dismissal, with the written charge, the the said J. G. Stratton hereby admits.” There were depositions of the witnesses, and the statement of the further agreements respecting the title, &c., and an accused, are to be transmitted to the next court of agreement by Pettit forthwith to do all acts necesgeneral or quarter sessions*, to be kept among the re- for breach of the agreement to transfer the shares. The

sary to transfer the shares. The action was brought cords of the court; and a copy of the conviction or cer- declaration alleged that the

shares had been delivered tificate, certified by the proper officer of the court, or to the plaintiff, but not legally transferred, and that the the conviction or dismissal. The conviction will have tion. The defendant, among other pleas, pleaded that the same effect as a conviction upon indictment, but it the agreement purported to be a lease, and was not be quashed for want of form; and no warrant of com. held good.' Jervis, C. J., in delivering judgment, said, mitment thereon is to be held void for any defect, if it " The question is, what was the intention of the parties be alleged therein that the offender has been convicted, when the instrument was made. Doubtless they inand if there be a valid conviction to sustain it. The tended to make an instrument which should have some stat. 11 & 12 Vict. c. 43, (Jervis's Act), relating to summary convictions and orders, is not to apply to operation; but did they intend to make a lease or an any proceeding under the act; and the statute is not agreement? If the former, they have not done what to extend to Scotland. (Sects. 7, 9, 13, 24). Forms they intended, because the lease is void by the statute. of conviction and of the certificate of dismissal are

... It is admitted that before the statute the instrugiven in the schedule. In stating the offence, where ment would have been held to be a lease. It is void as

a lease, and the defendant is therefore entitled to our * These words, relating to the next sessions, in a former

judgment." statute, were held to be directory merely, and not imperative

There were two points in the case: first, did the parupon the justices.

* From a Correspondent.


ties intend the agreement to operate as a lease; and if so, tract, merely because if they occurred in a deed they
secondly, did the failure of that intention excuse the would make a demise. If the words “ I agree to let's
defendant from his undertaking to transfer the shares? are held to include a binding agreement, can the words
The Court decided both against the plaintiff. It did “I let” be held to be wholly inoperative? The old
not decide the more important point which was sug- doctrine was, that the words "grant” and “ lease” in-
gested by the circumstances, but did not arise in the case, cluded not only a conveyance, but a warranty.
viz, was the instrument operative as an agreement to
lease ? Could the defendant have sued the plaintiff for
breach of his contract to let?

The decision on the first point is somewhat startling.
It is conceivable that the Court might have decided as

THE JURIST." they did in connexion with the second point, on the SIR, -I trust that your article of the 1st instant may ground that the instrument manifested an intention to have the effect of arousing the Profession to exert itself make the existence of a valid lease a condition prece- to procure the revision of the law relating to judgments, dent to the legal transfer of the shares, and also the or rather to procure the abolition of the judgment lien; understanding of the parties that the instrument ope- and as there are other impediments to the free transfer rated as a performance of that condition. But the of land which are almost equally objectionable, it would language and the attendant circumstances are scarcely not be amiss if the movement were to extend to them capable of that construction; and it was not relied on also. by the Court. The decision was founded expressly on The cry of the day is for cheap law in general, and the ground that the agreement would have operated as cheap conveyancing in particular. How can the de a lease under the old law-a ground which seems insuf- sired cheapness be had whilst purchasers are compelled ficient to support it. The old decisions proceeded on to make some half dozen different searches for incumthis-that the Court found in each case an intention brances which in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred do positively and unconditionally expressed, that a tenancy not exist? The solicitor may, at the same time, inshould be created on certain terms, and expressed by an crease his labour and pare down his profits by carefully instrument sufficient in point of solemnity to create such curtailing the length of his deeds, and by studying a tenancy. No intention was expressed or implied that economy in other respects; but small must be his proit should not so operate, but in some of the cases an in- gress towards satisfying the popular demands so long tention was expressed to have a formal lease executed. as the law obliges him to waste his client's money in (Barter v. Browne, 2 W. Bl. 973; Poole v. Bentley, 12 searching for judgments and cases of lis pendens, searchEast, 168, where an agreement containing a stipulation ing for Crown debts, searching for annuities, searching for granting a lease as soon as certain houses were built for bankruptcies and insolvencies, and so on. Now, was held to operate as a present demise). The parties experience shews, as speculation would lead us to anintended that a certain relation should forthwith be ticipate, that of the persons who are in a position to ereated between them: they also intended that that have land to deal with, not one in a hundred is either should be done by a future instrument; but the ex- indebted on judgment, or a defendant in Chancery, or pression of the principal intention in an informal way, accountable to the Crown, or dishonest enough to conby writing, being sufficient to effect it, the Court disre- ceal an annuity, or an insolvent or uncertificated bankgarded the secondary intention as superfluous. In rupt; yet, as every vendor may be the hundredth man, doing this, they did not frustrate any intention, or cause every purchaser who would be secure must go to the any inconvenience, except in some cases inconvenience expense of the various searches above enumerated. The from the want of a stamp-an inconvenience which for conclusion to be drawn is, that land in the hands of a fiscal reasons they could not take into consideration. purchaser ought to be entirely relieved from the claims But where the intention to create a tenancy is expressed, of the judgment creditor, the Crown, the annuitant, as in Stratton v. Pettit, in terms which are just as con- and the assignee. It is possible that fraud and conse. sistent with an intention to make a present agreement quent hardship would occasionally be the result; but and a future lease as with an intention at once to make unsound is the policy which would buy off a contina lease, and is expressed by an instrument incapable of gent, rarely occurring, and individual hardship, at the operating as a lease, there seems to be no reason for re-cost of a certain, constantly recurring, and public infusing to recognise the instrument as an agreement only. convenience. (See Doe v. Powell, 8 Scott's N. R. 700). However this Besides, we must not omit to inquire whether the may be, the criterion which the Court professed to judgment creditor and the rest are in fairness entitled apply is clearly unsafe. It will never do to decide that to the special protection which the law throws around an unsealed instrument was not intended to operate as them. Take them one by one. If the judgment crean agreement, merely on the ground that before the ditor neglect to follow up his judgment, he surely can late act it would have been held to be a lease. Such a have no just grounds of complaint should the debtor rule of decision would deny operation to any stipula-avail himself of the opportunity thus afforded to part tion on the intended lessee's part contained in such an with his property. It will be said that the creditor agreement as this, if unsealed :-“F. agrees to let all may be ignorant of his debtor's property. This is true; that &c. to W.for a term of seven, fourteen, or twenty- but if the creditor were armed, as he ought to be, with one years, from Christmas next, at the option of the the power of summoning the debtor from time to time said w., at the yearly rent of £- payable quar- for the purpose of examining him as to his property, terly; the said W. to keep the premises in repair, and the objection would be removed; and in any case, to &c. and also to pay all the expenses of preparing a whether with or without such a power, as he originally lease for either of the terms above mentioned." This trusted the debtor without security, he has no equitable was the instrument in Warman v. Faithfull, (5 B. & title to a security which it is impossible for him to Ad. 1042). Alderman v. Neate (4 M. & W. 704) is a enjoy without detriment to the interests of third perstill stronger case.

sons. The above reasoning applies, with little variation, The principal case did not decide, that though the to the case of assignees of bankrupts and insolvents. intended lessee's covenant could not be enforced, the The creditors confide the estate to their management, intended lessor was free from obligation to grant an and if, neglectful of their trust, they allow the bankeffectual lease; and we think that the Courts are not rupt or insolvent to remain in possession of property, prepared to decide that these words “ I agree to let," and to appear to the world as owner, it appears but in an unsealed instrument, do not make a binding con- fair that this ostensible ownership should, as a sort of counterpoise to the reputed ownership provisions Another important preliminary question is, what of which they get the benefit, confer the rights of real is the exact meaning of the term " consolidation ?" In ownership. The Crown has by far the worst case of a simple case the meaning of the term, and the mode all; for, as it has been well reinarked, there is in these of executing the process, are obvious enough; hut many da's of guarantie societies no excuse for the Crown difficulties present themselves in the course of an atfettering the transactions of its subjects with its sweep- tempt to carry the process into effect on any important ing liens; and even without the protection which these scale. societies are capable of affording, it would, to use Mr. The most serious of the questions which arise with Preston's words, (3 Treat. on Abstracts, 310), “he far reference to this is, whether any and what amount of better, in a country like Great Britain, that the King, simplification and amendment of the law can properly or now, in more accurate language, the public, should be introduced by us in the bills which we prepare for Jose the debts of those who have been trusted, than that presentation to Parliament, and whether we are authe industry of honest and bona fide purchasers should thorised to attempt the rewriting, with the correction be sacrificed by the misfortunes or the dishonesty of of admitted imperfections, of those acts which do not Crown debtors."

require consolidation, strictly so called. It is conThen with respect to annuitants. Life annuities (ex- tended, on the one hand, that the business of the comcept those granted by will or settlement, which do not mission is different from that of a responsible minister require registration) are of such infrequent occurrence, who prepares a consolidating bill. That is always prothat it would really be better to abolish altogether thé fessedly a bill to consolidate and amend the law, and it power of charging them on real property than that pur- is presented to Parliament for the purpose, primarily, chasers should be placed in a position that they must in most instances, of removing defects which have been incur either expense in making a search or risk in discovered, as well as for the purpose of making the omitting it. But it is not necessary to go to this length. law more accessible. The duty of the commission, on There are few cases in which a conveyancer could not the contrary, is, it is said, to present the law as it finds suggest some expedient by which notice of the annuity it, only in a more accessible form; and if Parliament is might be given to persons dealing with the property satisfied that it confines itself to this

province, the bills charged; and any annuitant neglecting such a precaus which are prepared under its superintendence will (or tion, or taking an annuity where the precaution is im- should) be accepted and passed by Parliament without possible, ought to do it at his own risk. "It is with regard discussion on the propriety of the law itself; whereas to parties to a lis pendens alone that I feel any difficulty, if the bills contain alterations of the existing law, Parsince, whilst they are prosecuting the proceedings with liament cannot, without abdicating its functions and diligence, they cannot be accused of remissness. It its duties, treat them otherwise than as substantive might be a question whether, in these days of Chancery new bills. dispatch, it would be worth while to break in upon a On the other hand it may be urged, that however general scheme by an exception in their favour, and easy it may appear to lay down as a rule that no whether the Courts could not in most if not in all cases amendments of the law are to be introduced in the devise means by which the interests of suitors might consolidated acts, yet such a rule, if strictly enforced, be protected during the pendency of proceedings. At would deprive the process of consolidation of a great all events, if registration is in this case indispensable, part of its value. One of the great practical inconthe evil might be greatly diminished if weekly lists veniences of our statute law (arising froin its having were made out under authority, to be supplied to soli- been framed by different hands at different times, withcitors on payment of an annual subscription. Of course, out any single superintending authority) is, that it conif this plan were adopted, it would be necessary to tains a vast number of variations to which it cannot be publish yearly or half-yearly a revised list, containing supposed that any serious importance is or ever was all the cases registered during the last five years. attached, and which might easily and advantageously

I will not add to the length of my letter by offering be reduced to a single rule; and thus, it is said, the an apology, but subscribe myself,

denial to a draftsinan of liberty to use his judgment Your obedient servant,

and discretion, within moderate limits, will compel Sept. 10, 1855.

A SOLICITOR, him to work under the discouraging conviction that he

is required to take great pains to produce a result which, CONSOLIDATION OF THE STATUTE LAW. if he possesses the intelligence without which he could

not properly execute his task at all, he must feel to be REPORT OF THE COMMISSIONERS.

very unsatisfactory, and comparatively useless, and

which, moreover, he must feel that he could with ease (Continued from p.360).

make much better. Although, it is said, the question We do not, however, mean to imply that much may of the extent to which the framers of consolidated not be done in the way of introducing order and a more statutes may safely be authorised to alter the substance systematic arrangement where there is now an entire of the existing statutes presents some difficulty if we absence of both;

but, while doing so, it appears to us attempt to treat it abstractedly, and to lay down general that we shall be best serving the convenience of those rules for observance, the difficulty of solving it in actual who have to deal with the law by disregarding to a practice, in the course of working out any given concertain extent the principles of scientific classification, solidated act, will not be great to a person of discretion in favour of another consideration—that of the con- and judgment; and with regard to the objection, that venience of keeping together in one new statute the it will be found impracticable to pass consolidated bills contents of existing groups of statutes. Still, even with unless they can be accompanied with an assurance that this limitation, great difficulties of detail present them- they contain no alteration of the law, it is contended selves in many cases, which can at best only be solved that it might be objected with more propriety to pure in an imperfect manner. It has been thought that consolidations, that it is a waste of the time and powers considerable assistance towards the solution of diffi- of the Legislature to put the whole machinery of legisculties of this kind would be furnished by having a lation in motion for the purpose of deliberately giving a complete analytical arrangement, according to subjects, new parliamentary sanction to laws which are admitted of all the statute law now in force; and such a work is to be in an imperfect or unsatisfactory state, without now in course of preparation for our use by Mr. T. taking the opportunity of introducing unobjectionable Chisholm Anstey, under the immediate superintendence amendments. of the Attorney-General.

(To be continued),

« AnteriorContinuar »