LEWIS (Martha), Chatham-place, Hackney. Feb. 8; J. and consulting with his learned colleague) that if by this generous mark of your regard, how much

sion (in conformity with the usual practice) he was
sworn a member of Her Majesty's Irish Privy
Council. A year later he was elevated to the Bench
in his native country, being appointed Chief Baron
of the Exchequer. In July 1816, on the formation
of Lord John Russell's Administration, he was
raised to the Irish woolsack, which he occupied
until the succession of the Conservatives to
power under Lord Derby in 1852. Reappointed in
the following January, he held the same office
under the Administrations of Lord Aberdeen and

Lord Palmerston and again under Lord Palmerston and Lord Russell from June 1859 to June 1866, when he retired from the ministry whom he had always supported in politics as a hearty Liberal, although he had never held a seat in Parliament. He has also been for some years, Vice-Chancellor of the Queen's University in Ireland, and there is little doubt that he might again have held the Irish seals for a fourth time if he had not begun to feel the weight of increasing years, and if Mr. Gladstone had not considered it advisable under the circumstances to appoint In his stead a younger man, and one who is a Roman Catholic. Sir Maziere Brady is a Protestant, and bears a name familiar to Protestant ears, being the great-great-grandson of Dr. Nicholas Brady, the joint translator of the "New Version" of the Psalms along with Dr. Tate; and if we go a step further in his pedigree we continue it up to Dr. Hugh Brady, who was Bishop of Meath for some years in the reign of Elizabeth. Sir Maziere Brady has been twice married; first, in 1823, to Mary Ann, daughter of Mr. Bevor Buchanan, who

died in 1858; and secondly, in 1860, Mary, second daughter of the Right Hon. John Hatchell, of Fortfield-house, county Dublin. His eldest son, Mr. Maziere Brady, a member of the Irish Bar,

was born in 1827.

which indicated that in his new position he had
lost neither the suavity nor the firmness which
distinguished his judicial character. At a subse-
quent period of the day the Attorney-General,
Solicitor-General, and Mr. Serjeant Dowse ap-
peared at the side bar, and had their respective
appointments announced by the Lord Chancellor
in the usual form.

was

The Freeman makes the following observations
upon the first sitting of the Lord Chancellor
The first day of Hilary Term, 1869, will be
memorable in the history of the Irish Bar and
of Ireland.
Catholic filled the office of Irish Chancellor. He
Just 180 years ago an English
was a distinguished lawyer, a zealous Catholic,
and a faithful adherent of the house of Stuart.
Perhaps no name in the annals of the Revolution
incurred so much bitter and undeserved obloquy
as that of Alexander Fitten. He was suc-
ceeded by Chancellor Porter, who, according to
Dudley North, 'trailed a pike in Holland,' and
Limerick-by the way, not the worst of the
one of the signataries to the Treaty of
English Chancellors. Since then-for six genera
tions-no Catholic presided in the Court of
Chancery until the Right Hon. Thomas O'Hagan
occupied that distinguished position this day.
Catholics will not regard this memorable event
in the light of a triumph, and we are sure no
reflecting Protestant will envy them their just
exultation in seeing one of the most illustrious
of their body, after such a long lapse of time.
sharing in the privileges to which all subjects of
the Queen have an equal right. 'Let the dead bury
the dead;'
past. The year on which we enter, 1869, will be
we look to the future and forget the
equality, if not consummated, will have made
memorable in more than one respect. Religious
considerable progress before its close. The first
indication of the new era was the scene in the
Court of Chancery this morning, which will be
long remembered by those who were present, and
will make a deep impression on the country."
MONUMENT TO GRATTAN.-The Lord Chan-

to the Earl of Charlemont on the subject of the
proposed monument to Henry Grattan:-

Rutland-square West, Jan. 9.
My dear Lord Charlemont,-I inclose a check for 1001.
in aid of the fund for the erection of a statue to Henry
Grattan, as I learn that you fitly take a leading part in
the movement for that good purpose, which has been so
generously and hopefully begun.

not the movement of a party or a sect, but of a nation,
I tender you my humble co-operation, because it is
offering its grateful reverence to one of its worthiest

sons.

I remember the feeling with which, long years ago, I
stood in Westminster Abbey beside a shattered slab
bearing the name of Henry Grattan, and thought it a
symbol of the broken fortunes of the land for which he
lived and died. It seemed to me a national reproach
that his dust should have been left in English earth,
with no better monument by the people to whom he
rendered such loving service; and now I rejoice that
to put away that reproach for ever.
we are at last uniting, in a time of hope and progress,

We may hold various opinions with reference to
Grattan's policy and conduct; but we can have no dis-
sension as to his pure and earnest life-his public
virtue, his indomitable courage, his true and unchang
ing devotion to his country, the achievements by which
he lighted up the fairest page in our dismal story, the
genius which made him matchless among the orators of
The Irish Protestant will not hold unworthy of his
homage the chief of the great men, of his own faith,
whose labours and sacrifices for Ireland have given
lustre to their race. The Irish Catholic will be emulous
to honour him who, in evil days-untainted by corrup-
tion and unawed by power-was the dauntless champion
of religious liberty.

the modern world.

THE NEW LORD CHANCELLOR OF IRELAND.The opening of term in the courts of law on the 11th was signalised by an event of no ordinary significance and interest. For the first time since the Revolution a Roman Catholic judge took the highest seat on the judicial bench as Lord Chancellor of Ireland has addressed the following letter cellor of Ireland. Nearly 200 years have elapsed since even an Englishman professing the faith to which the majority of the Irish people cling with passionate attachment would have been deemed worthy of so signal a mark of the confidence and approval of the Crown. No wonder that the day on which the ban against their creed and country was for ever removed should be regarded as the commencement of a new era, and that a popular demonstration should have been made in honour of Lord Chancellor O'Hagan. The hall of the four courts has not for many years contained so great and animated a throng on the first day of term. There was but one motive to induce the presence of so many citizens of all classes. They came to witness the overthrow of a sectarian principle, and the inauguration of a new system established upon the firm basis of liberality and justice. The varied expression of the promiscuous concourse, and the hum of voices mingled in earnest conversation as they awaited with anxious expectation the sitting of the new Lord Chancellor, revealed the different feelings which animated the assembly. Some few looked grave and gloomy, and appeared to have come down to enter their protest against an innovation fraught with danger to the stability of the Constitution and the peace of the empire. But these dark dejected looks were only the passing clouds which made the general joy aud exultation seem all the brighter. The Court of Chancery was the great centre of attraction, and scarcely had admission been given to the public when it was filled in every part. It was a strange and suggestive spectacle. In the gallery was a dense crowd of people, chiefly of the artisan class, but including many persons of the highest respectability. In the body of the court all the seats and passages were crowded with a very motley assembly. There were ladies everywhere to be seen. Never did so meny silk gowns appear at the outer bar. The barristers were engaged until half-past twelve o'clock in private conference, at the termination of which the judges proceeded to their respective courts. The Lord Chancellor was accompanied by the Lord Justice of Appeal, the Vice-Chancellor, and the Master of the Rolls, in their state dress, and attended by Mr. C. H. Teeling, his secretary, and his pursebearer and mace-bearer. When he ascended the bench the assembly seemed fired with an electric impulse, and their impressible emotions broke through all the restraints which usage and the solemn associations of a court of justice impose, and found vent in enthusiastic demonstrations. The audience in the gallery mingled their ringing cheers with the more subdued though not less cordial manifestations of those below. His Lordship wore the full official costume, and in his glittering robes courteously acknowledged the greeting he had received. After the other judges who accompanied him had retired, he proceeded to dispose of some ordinary business in a manner

The f me of Henry Grattan is the common and the prond inheritance of all good Irishmen. It is no longer clouded by the mists and heats of faction. It suffers no more from the insolence of authority or the fickle. ness of the crowd. It lifts him high on the roll of names which live through ages. And we are boundone and all, of every class and creed-to demonstrate, according to our power, how dear it is to the memory and the heart of Ireland.-Believe me, dear Lord Charlemont, yours faithfully,

The Earl of Charlemont.

THOMAS O'HAGAN.

MAGISTRATE AND PARISH
LAWYER.

REPRESSION OF CRIME.
The subject continues to receive public atten-
tion, and the newspapers teem with articles and
correspondence all of one accord in recognising
the gravity and importance of the mischief,
but varying much in the remedies they pro-
pose. Many of the letters in the daily news-
papers are undoubtedly the dreamy composition
of men who have little knowledge of human
nature, or of the actual business of life; but
others narrate the results of practical experience,
and, therefore, are of great value. Among
these latter is the following, addressed to the

Times, from the Chief Constable of Chester.
He says:

66

The profession of crime is thoroughly estab lished; and, further, it is systematically divided into various branches. The majority of people seem to be quite unacquainted with this latter fact. A dishonest person is described as a "thief." To an old detective-officer this would be an exceedingly vague description. For instance, a burglar, or "cracksman," looks upon a pickpocket, or "hook," with contempt. They don't associate together. They follow different branches would never muster sufficient courage to "crack of their "profession," and the nervous pickpocket a crib." A robber of drunken men, or "cosh, knows nothing of "smashing coin, any more than a "sneak" or vagrant thief or uttering base would be equal to an infringement of the law stealer would "fence a thimble" (buy a stolen against false pretences, or a prad or horsewatch). Thieves, in great numbers, such as for want of work. pickpockets and burglars, are driven to crime them have a trade at their fingers' ends. It is well On the contrary, many of known that shoemakers and tailors furnish a large proportion of the pickpocket class, and a good many trades, such as painters, locksmiths, bricklayers, &c., are represented by burglars. An equally land and Wales 22,889 "known thieves," 2959 well-known fact is that there are at large in Engreceivers of stolen goods, besides 86,558 other persons who come under the head of "depredators, offenders, and suspected persons," making a total of 112,406 (exclusive of 28,770 in prisons and Those figures are not the result of any particular reformatories) persons of "criminal tendencies." impressions." With the exception, perhaps, of theory, nor are they "founded upon general the vagrant portion (32,558), names and resideuces-aye, and history-could be given in every instance; and those persons only are classified "who are known to be living by or following dishonest practices, and not those who, though they may have been convicted, have subsequently obtained honest employment" (a very small percentage, I am sorry to say)" and have abandoned

"known

their evil habits and associates." In 1867, according to the last published Blue-book on the subject, 18.971 persons were committed for trial. Of these 1601, or about 1 in every 12, or, if only offences against property" be taken, 1 in every 9, were known to have been previously transported or sentenced to penal servitude, and about every sixth person was recognised as a thief." Further, of the 145.184 persons of every class who were sent to gaol, about 31 per cent., or nearly every third person, had previously been imprisoned. Throughout England and Wales there are about five persons of known "criminal tendencies' to every policeman. If this army of 112,406, "cannot be cured," are they "to be endured," as at present? "Fagin' still exists. Though I regret to have to differ from your correspondent, Mr. Baker, I know, from personal observation. that Mr. Dickens's character still plies his nefarious trade, and, sad to say, is often found in the parents of the juvenile delinquents themselves. Instances crowd in upon my memory while I write. Consideration for your space prevents my giving a few. No doubt a large number of lads drift into a career of crime from being neglected by drunken and immoral parents, and the effect of their contact with the absolutely criminal seldom, if ever, fails to have a demoralising effect upon those who were, possibly, already criminally disposed. Within the last few years reformatories and industrial schools have, indeed, done something towards the remedy of this state of things; but while the present system of dealing with confirmed thieves exists, crime will neither be prevented altogether nor reduced to a minimum. For instance, in 1867, while 1339 juvenile thieves were sent to reformatories, even the temporary benefit their withdrawal from society might have conferred was more than balanced by the discharge, during the same period, of 1328 old convicts, of whom 1134 were liberated on ticket-of-leave. What, then, is to be done? The number of criminals is actually increasing; and, stimulated by the desire to escape detection, they are far more than a match for the police, whom they outnumber in the proportion of five to one. The criminal machinery at present in force is inefficient. "Direct aggressive action must be taken. The system of scale punishments suggested by Mr. Baker and others is a really good idea. At present, thieves never give up' until they are actually sentenced. They know from experience book before me, that, although committed, about and observation, as well as I know from the Blueevery fourth prisoner is acquitted on his trial; while, should the "worst come to the worst," there is a ticket-of-leave in prospective. A scale of punishments and no ticket-of-leave would, in my opinion, be an efficient deterrent. The "supervision" advocated in some quarters should come into operation after the expiration of the full term

of the sentence of imprisonment. Justice often miscarries now-a-days for want of a public prosecutor. A glance at the annual criminal statistics will show what a large amount of ruffianism-oneseventeenth of the whole number committed-is let loose upon society again before its time because there is no prosecutor." In other words, the person whose pocket-handkerchief or watch has been stolen, either from a wish to avoid trouble, the exercise of sickly sentiment, or from the fact true in a number of instances-that the prisoner's friends have squared" the matter, "does not wish to prosecute." A public prosecutor would be a public benefit. The question of what is to be done with those who, although known to be living by dishonest means, are not convicted of any offence, has occupied some attention. The Vagrant Act, passed in the beginning of the reign of George IV., enacts, "that any person sleeping in a shed or outhouse and having no visible means of subsistence shall be deemed a rogue and vagabond." and be liable to three months' imprisonment. If this quotation were amended so as to read " every person frequenting any street or public place and having no visible means of subsistence," &c., the onus of proving his means to lie upon the defendant, I think the case would be partially met. A person twice convicted as above might be deemed an incorrigible rogue, and so be liable to twelve months' imprisonment. No hardship to an innocent person could follow upon this in these days of railways, telegraphy, and police. Suppose half a dozen suspected persons found in the wake of His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales on some public occasion, or at some public fair or races, they could be interrogated according to a settled form, and their answers taken down. If satisfactory, they could be at once discharged; if on the contrary, they could be detained, and in twentyfour hours their statements could be tested. Other suggestions could be made, but I have already written at too great a length. One thing is certain the public mind is made up. The présent state of things has existed long enough. The robbers possess chances over the robbed which must be taken away. Society at large must at last take some steps, if only in self-defence.

NOTES OF NEW DECISIONS.

NUISANCE. The Improvement Commissioners of the town of C., in whom the pavements of all thoroughfares were vested, contracted with the defendants to light the town with gas. The defendants, a company incorporated under the Companies Act 1862, and without Parliamentary powers, proceeded to break up the pavements in order to lay their pipes, and continued to do so after the rescission of the contract in consequence of their default. A bill and information, in which a rival gas company which had for many years lighted the town were plaintiffs and informants, was during the existence of the contract filed to restrain them from doing so, but it was held (discharging the decree of Malins, V. C.), that in the absence of all proof of injury to the property of the plaintiffs, and of all evidence that injury was sustained by the public, the nuisance was of too temporary and trivial a character to justify the interference of this court by injunction. The Attorney-General v. The Sheffield Gas Consumers' Company, 3 De G. M. & G. 304, treated as a binding authority, and followed: Held, agreeing with the Vice-Chancellor, that, but for the dismissal of the bill upon its merits, it would have been proper that, at the hearing, the bill should be allowed to be amended by alleging the rescission of the contract, which had taken place after an order to set down the cause for hearing on motion for decree (Attorney-General v. Cambridge Consumer's Gas Company, 19 L. T. Rep. N. S. 508. L.JJ.)

SURREY SESSIONS.
Saturday, Jan. 9.
(Before Sir THOMAS TILSON, Chairman, and a
Bench of Magistrates.)

THE PARISH OF RICHMOND v. KINGSTON.
Singular Appeal Case.

This was a most singular appeal case, and occupied the attention of the court some time.

E. G. Clarke appeared for the appellants. Hon. Mr. Thesiger, with Oppenheim, for the respondents.

From the statement of Oppenheim, it appeared that a young woman, a native of Kingston, married a soldier on the 1st Nov. 1863, who left her to join his regiment abroad on the following day, and she had not seen him since. A short time ago she left her two illegitimate children-two years and a-half eld and ten months old-chargeable to the parish Kingston. She, however, having been married

at Twickenham, and her husband being a soldier,
the parish of Kingston made an order on Rich-
mond for their maintenance, but they, contending
that Kingston was her parish, and that there was
no proof that her husband was a soldier in Her
Majesty's army at the time she affiliated the ille-
gitimate children, appealed against the order.
Helen Douglas said that on the 1st Nov. 1863
she married Charles Douglas, at Twickenham Old
Church. He was then a bandsman in Her Ma-
jesty's 38th Regiment. The day following he left
her, and she had not seen him since. She had
heard from him, but that was a long time ago.
She now had two children, one two and a-half
years and the other ten months, both of whom she
had affiliation orders for, and had received money
from the fathers. She had lived at Kingston for
the last sixteen months.

Clarke here contended that, under the sta-
tnte, as she had lived more than twelve months
last at Kingston. that parish had no right to send
the children to Richmond. Besides, her husband
was a soldier, and married her at Twickenham.
therefore they were bound to support her and

them.

Oppenheim said there was nothing in the appellant's allegation that her husband was a soldier in the service of Her Majesty at the time of the marriage, therefore the appeal could not stand. She belonged to Kingston, and it was rather hard that Richmond should be compelled to support her illegitimate children.

Clarke having replied,

Sir THOMAS TILSON said the Court allowed the appeal, subject to an application to the Court of Queen's Bench.

The Recordership of King's Lynn, vacant by
the resignation of Mr. M. J. West, who has held
the appointment for many years, has been offered
to and accepted by Mr. Douglas Brown, of the
Norfolk Circuit. The new recorder graduated at
Trinity College, Cambridge, in 1843, when he was
bracketed 32nd Senior Optime in the Mathematical
Tripos, and was called to the Bar by the Honour-
able Society of Lincoln's-inn on May 6, 1847.

CRIMINALS AND PUNISHMENTS.-A correspon-
dent writes to the Times. From Mr. T. B. L.
Baker's letter in the Times of to-day it is evident
that he and Mr. Payne differ in their reading of
the last paragraph of the 27 & 28 Vict. c. 47, s. 2.
As this section is a fertile source of doubt and
discussion whenever the Quarter Sessions occur
it seems to me most desirable that a decision of
the Court of Criminal Appeal should be obtained
as to its correct interpretation. The convict Sum-
mers was on this occasion found guilty of a mis-
demeanor. Before the passing of the Act above
mentioned there was no power under the criminal
law to charge a previous conviction in any indict-
ment for misdemeanor. Sect. 2 enacts, "That
when any person shall on indictment be convicted
of any crime or offence punishable with penal
servitude after having been previously convicted
of felony,
the least sentence of penal
servitude that can be awarded in such case shall
be a period of seven years." The question, there-
fore, is, does this section give to the court power
demeanor, of a previous conviction of felony.
to take a cognisance, on a conviction of mis-
Many chairmen of Quarter Sessions hold with Mr.
Payne that the utmost punishment they can give
is that authorised by the statute under which the
misdemeanor is committed; while others, relying
upon the words "any crime or offence,' are of
opinion that they cannot give less than seven
years.

of weights to visit their peculiar description of shops; but the Brentford magistrates said they were clearly of opinion that they came within the Act. Mr. Honeybone, who acted as the spokesman of all the defendants, then objected to the jurisdiction of the magistrates, under the Bullion Act, and contended that if troy weight were intended to be meant in the 5 & 6 Will. 4, c. 63, it was confined in its application to bullion, and not to manufactured articles, such as those sold in jewellers' shops. The Bench, however, ruled that as silversmiths sometimes bought and sold gold not so made up. the Act applied, and the defendants were each fined 20s. ; a case, however, being granted on the objection raised by Mr. Honeybone.

REFORMATION OF CRIMINALS.-At the last two quarter sessions for Gloncestershire the court has been occupied in the discussion of a motion by Mr. Barwick Lloyd Baker in reference to the treatment of criminals, with especial reference to secondary punishments. The discussion was resumed and concluded at the sessions just held at Gloucester, when Mr. Baker laid before the court a memorial, which he proposed should be adopted by the court and forwarded to the Home Office. The memorial expressed the desire of the court for the adoption of such systems as might thieves from prevent hardened and skilled being loose on the world, with perfect liberty to their old courses. Reference to to return the statistics of crime showed that, of those once convicted, about one in five relapse; of those twice convicted nearly one-half were found guilty a third time; of these more than one-half offended fifth time. At the suggestion of Sir M. H. Beach, a fourth time, and of these nearly two-thirds a the following was added to Mr. Baker's memorial:

We are strongly of opinion that it is worthy of more attention that, though it may be desirable to retain the life sentence without remission as a clear and distinct sentence, yet power might be given to judges to pass on less aggravated crimes practically retain a surveillance for life; but that a sentence of such a number of years as shall should occupy a far larger portion than at present. in all cases except a life sentence surveillance The appointment of a central authority to communicate with the police of the different counties, to receive regular returns as to the occupation and habits of those on licence, and to spread through the kingdom notices and photographs of any who abscond, together with a promise of reward for their apprehension, is a matter of the greatest importance." Sir George Jenkinson, M.P. considered that surveillance over discharged convicts should be unlimited; and should last practically as long as it was made necessary by the conduct of the offender. He was for a stricter repression of crime. If under the present system they were to hang very few of their worst criminals, if they were to transport none, and if they were to let many go free without adequate surveillance, it was not unlikely that that the criminal class would eventually override the honest portion of the communinity. He thought a presentment by a grand jury, backed by the assize judge, would be a preferable plan to the adoption of a memorial to the Home Secretary by that court. Eventually the following was adopted :-"That in the opinion of this court the law, as at present administered, does and repeatedly convicted offenders who make not afford due protection to the public against old crime their trade. The limited experience now obtained of the effect of police superintendence over those under sentence of penal servitude on licence encourages the belief that the system might be extended with advantage, and that the security all grades of society might be promoted if all who, by repeated convictions, have shown themselves to belong to the criminal class were subjected to protracted supervision as part of their sentence."

CONVEYANCER.

RAID AMONGST SILVERSMITHS.-On Saturday Mr. Greig, inspector of weights and measures for the Brentford division, instituted a prosecution of a very important character against several highly respectable silversmiths, for using unjust troy REAL PROPERTY LAWYER AND weights not being stamped or marked, and not being in accordance with the standards in Her Majesty's Exchequer. These proceedings, which were taken under the 5 & 6 Will. 4, c. 63, ss. 10, 17, 21, 28, were the first which have been taken against persons for using illegal troy weights in Middlesex, troy weights not having been inserted in the various inspectors' indentures until October in last year, when they were reverified, and the warden of the Exchequer standards required that the law referring to troy weights, so long apparently inoperative, should be put in force. The defendants were Messrs. Thomas Honeybone, Old Brentford; John Treadmarch, Twickenham; Joseph Raper (pawnbroker), Old Brentford; Edwin Gaydon, New Brentford ; Thos. French Cloud, New Brentford; Samuel Frank Bax, Old Brentford, &c. Some of the defendants had in their possession weights which were not in the denomination of weights in Her Majesty's Exchequer, such as 32oz., 16oz., 8oz., and the like; and other weights were either light-as was the case in most instances or too heavy. The defendants questioned the right of the inspectors

NOTES OF NEW DECISIONS. WILL-GIFT OF REALTY AND PERSONALTYESTATE TAIL IN POSSESSION.-A testator devised and bequeathed real and personal estate to trustees upon trust for the eldest son then living of his daughter C. for life, remainder to his first and other sons in tail, with like remainder to the second and third sons of C., with divers remainders over, and ultimate remainders to his (the testator's) right heirs and next of kin. The testator then provided that such titled to an estate tail in possession in the real person or persons as should thereunder be enestate, should not be absolutely entitled to the leasehold and personal estates until he, she, or they respectively should attain the of twenty-one years; and that the said leasehold and personal estates should absolutely belong only to such person or persons as should first

age

and be applicable so as to be an additional security
for the payment of the said sum of £ and
further sums and interest in like manner, and as if
such sum and sums had formed part of the prin-
cipal money expressed and intended to be secured
by the said agreement (a). As witness, &c.
To be continued.

MARITIME LAW.

NOTES OF NEW DECISIONS. BILL OF LADING-FREIGHT-INDORSEMENT DELIVERY TO AGENT-LIABILITY.-The declaration in an action for freight by shipowners against the consignee of goods under a bill of lading alleged that the goods were by the bill of lading deliverable to the defendant on paying certain freight, that the property in the goods passed to the defendant, and that all conditions precedent to the defendant's liability to pay the freight had been fulfilled. The defendant pleaded that before the time arrived for the delivery of the goods the defendants indorsed the bill of lading to Messrs. W. and K. in the following terms: "Deliver to Messrs. W. and K., looking to them for freight and without recourse to us ;" and that the plaintiff accepted the indorsement, and delivered the goods in pursuance thereof to Messrs. W. and K., and not to the defendant. It appeared at the trial of the issue on this plea that the goods had been delivered to Messrs. W. and K. (wharfingers, who were to receive the goods on his behalf, and to whom the defendant admitted he would have been answerable for any freight they might have paid), on production of the bill of lading but the captain of the ship denied that he had ever seen any indorsement on the bill of lading in the terms mentioned by the plea. The judge thereupon directed the jury that it was immaterial whether the special indorsement was on the bill or not, unless the captain saw and assented to it: Held, that the direction was correct, for the plea, if possible, must be construed as a plea in confession and avoidance, and not a traverse, and so construed it, admitted a delivery of the goods under such circumstances as to make the defendant liable to pay freight, unless the shipowners had assented to the discharge of the defendant, and the substitution of the liability of Messrs. W. and K.; and it was therefore necessary to prove affirmatively an actual assent on the part of the plaintiffs, or their agents, to the special terms of the indorsement; and the mere fact of an indorsement in such terms being upon the bill of lading was not sufficient to prove such assent, unless brought to the knowledge of the plaintiffs or their agent. The cases of The York, Newcastle, and Berwick Railway Company v. Crisp, 14 C. B. 527; 23 L. J. 125, C. P.; and Van Toll v. The South-Eastern Railway Company, 31 L. J. 241, C. P.; 12 C. B. N. S. 75; 6 L. T. Rep. N. S. 244, approved, but distinguished; the ratio decidendi in those cases was that the person who sought to avail himself of a contract, and on whom therefore the onus of establishing it lay, having received a document from the other party containing the terms on which he was willing to contract, and negligently omitted to read it, either he must be taken to have assented to such terms, whatever they might be, or, the parties never having been really at one, there was no contract at all. Here, the circumstances being such as to make the defendant prima facie liable, it lay on him to show that the plaintiffs in fact assented to the substitution of the liability of third parties: (Lewis v. M'Kee, 19 L.T. Rep. N. S. 522. Ex. Ch.)

COUNTY COURTS.

A case of some interest to passengers by omnibuses has just been decided in the Glasgow Sheriff Court. Mr. Sheriff Galbraith ruled that an omnibus proprietor may legally refuse to carry a chimney sweep" or a baker" in his working clothes.

made up; and from them we may form some
opinion of the importance of the County Court Act
of 1867. In 1867 the total number of plaints
issued was 12,759, in 1868 the plaints were 16,198,
showing an increase of 3438. In 1867 the total
fees levied amounted to 54007., in 1868 the total
fees were 78001., showing an increase of 24001. In
1859, in May of the latter part of which year the
present judge was appointed, the total fees were
4104. The fees of last year being 78001., the
income of the court is now 37001. more than at
the time of his appointment. These fees do not
include the fees in equity. From the return it
further appears that in 1867 the court sat 91 days;
in 1668 there were 187 regular sittings. From
and after the 1st Feb. there will be sittings in
Admiralty causes, but these need not be at the
Court-house in Guildhall-buildings, which is utterly
unsuited for the transaction of Admiralty busi-
ness, if not, indeed, for the administration of
justice of any kind whatever.-City Press.

EXTRAORDINARY RECOVERY OF A COUNTY
COURT DEBT.-Mary Davies, a publican and shop-
keeper, living at Maestey, Glamorganshire, was
sued in the County Court at Bridgend, in July
1865, by Samuel Evans, a butcher of that town,
for a debt amounting to about 201., and he obtained
judgment against her. She, however, refused to
pay. In fear of the results which were to be
expected from such a course, she transferred her
business to her daughter, and, there being no
effects in consequence, upon which to levy, she
has been committed to Cardiff gaol for periods of
about thirty days, once in every three months.
This was the state of things when the old lady,
a life-like edition of Sairey Gamp, encountered the
new matron of the gaol, Mrs. Wrenn, wife of
Governor Wrenn, of Fenian arrest notoriety. She
at once took the debtor in hand, and insisted on
the gaol discipline being carried out, and searched
her. In addition to lots of luxuries which she had
concealed in capacious pockets about her corpu
lent person, a belt was found, under all her
clothing, which contained banknotes, gold, and
securities, amounting to 4301. Finding herself
detected, and fearing a visit from the bailiffs to
levy on her treasure, she consented to pay the
debt and costs, which by this time amounted to
65l. 13s. 4d., and was discharged from prison.

THE NEW BANKRUPTCY LAW.

LIVERPOOL COURT OF PASSAGE.
Jan. 7 and 8.
(Before Mr. PICKERING, Q. C., Assessor.)

YOUNGER AND ANOTHER V. CARSE.

spect thereof shall not have been ascertained before the filing of such petition, in every such case, if such liability be not provable under any other provision of this Act, the person with whom such liability has been contracted shall be admitted to claim for such sum as the court shall think fit; and after the contingency shall have happened, and the demand in respect of such liability shall have been ascertained, he shall be admitted to prove such demand and receive dividends with the other creditors." Under that section he was of opinion that the plaintiffs might have proved against the defendant in bankruptcy. He also referred to the case of Boyd v. Robins, 5 C. B. N. S. 599. In that case A. and B., in the month of July 1850, gave C. a guarantee continuing for goods supplied to D., with the stipulation that the security should subsist until C received a notice to the contrary. The goods were supplied to D. in respect of this guarantee, and a balance exceeding 2001. was due in respect thereof. In the year 1854 B. became bankrupt and duly obtained his certificate of discharge. No notice having been given to determine the guarantee, it was held that B.'s liability thereon was a contingent liability within the 178th section, and consequently that his certificate was a bar to a claim in respect of goods supplied to D. after the bankruptcy of B. There goods were supplied, as in the present case, after the bankruptcy, and so far the two cases were alike. But the cases differed in this respect, that in Boyd v. Robins there absolutely was nothing which the plaintiff could prove against the defendant in bankruptcy, because no goods had been supplied before the bankruptcy. In the present case, therefore, the plaintiff might have gone into the Bankruptcy Court and tendered a proof of his claim under the guarantee.

how to estimate a contingency which was dependant upon the supply of goods.

The ASSESSOR remarked that the difficulty was

Russell said it was clear that, so long as the plaintiffs chose to supply goods to Boyer on the guarantee, the defendant was liable, and that there was nothing to stop them from supplying goods after the bankruptcy. There was no failure under the guarantee by Boyer, because he was solvent at the time the bills were running, and the terms of the credit contemplated by the guarantee, namely, one month's credit, and four months' draft, had not expired. If there was no default until that time on the part of the principal debtor, Boyer, there was no liability against the surety. There was nothing, he contended, to compel the plaintiffs to prove upon the defendant's estate in bankruptcy, because the bills which were running were actually met and discharged by Boyer. The highest court in this country had decided that the section on which Mr. Gully relied applied only to cases in which there was merely a single contingency. In support of this view he quoted the case of Mudge Rowan, 17 L. T. Rep. N. S. 576, in which the defendant, having separated from his wife, had entered into a covenant to pay to her an annuity through a trustee during the separation. The defendant afterwards became bankrupt, and pleaded his bankruptcy as a discharge from the covenant. The court held that it was impossible to say how long the separation might have continued, and not one as to which the Court of Bankruptcy that therefore the liability under the covenant was could have the means of assessing the value of the contingencies; that the statute did not apply, and therefore that the defendant could not be discharged from liability.

A continuing guarantee-Bankruptcy of guarantor.
Held, that the quarantor's liability to payment.
for goods supplied after his bankruptcy, in pur-
suance of the terms of the guarantee was not dis-
charged by the bankruptcy. The 178th section of
the Bankrupt Law Consolidation Act 1849 held
not applicable to the case.

This was a case for the decision of the learned
Assessor. It was an action brought upon a
guarantee, by which the defendant, a spirit mer-
chant in Liverpool, understood that Mr. George
Boyer, an ale and porter merchant, should pay for
ale and porter supplied to him, in the way of his
trade, by the plaintiffs, Messrs. Younger and Co.,
brewers, Edinburgh; the amount guaranteed
namely 2501., and the guarantee was to continue
so long as the plaintiffs supplied goods.

The defendant became bankrupt on the 11th of September, 1867, and received his order of discharge 1868, Mr. Boyer executed a deed under the Bankup to the 11th of the following Dec., and in March ruptcy Act 1861. By the terms of the guarantee the defendant became responsible to the extent of 2501. for goods to be delivered to Boyer, at one month's credit and four months' draft, the guarantee to continue in force so long as plaintiffs continue to supply the goods. It appeared that prior to the defendant's bankruptcy, goods had been supplied to Boyer, and bills for them were running at the time of the bankruptcy. The sum due in respect of the goods supplied, and bills drawn on and after the bankruptcy of the defendant, which exceeded the amount of the guarantee, was the subject of the present action.

The ASSESSOR said he would consider the arguments, and deliver judgment on the following day.

Jan. 8.-The learned ASSESSOR now said he was

of opinion that the plaintiff was entitled to a verdict. He thought it was no answer to the action that the defendant became bankrupt, even assuming, what Mr. Gully had contended, that there was a power of proving under the bankruptcy the value of the goods which at that time had been delivered, but had not been paid for, and in respect of which bills were running. It did not appear to him (the Assessor) that that affected the case. The guarantee was a continuing guarantee, and nothing arising from the bankruptcy would prevent the supply of goods subsequently for which the guarantor would be liable. He agreed that the portion of the 178th section alluded to did not apply to the present case, namely, liability on a guarantee under which goods were supplied subsequent to bankruptcy. Mr. Gully had said that in Boyd v. Robius no goods had been furnished prior to the bankruptcy, but that in the present case goods (a) It must be remembered that although an equitable Gully argued that his client was discharged, and had been supplied previous to the bankruptcy. mortgage suffices, in many cases at a nominal cost, to in support of this contention he referred to the Even if that were so, it would not alter his secure to the satisfaction of a prudent lender the re- 178th section of the Bankrupt Law Consolidation (the Assessor's) opinion; but in Boyd v. Robins payment of his loan, still there are weighty objections Act 1849. That section says, "If any trader who it was distinctly stated that before and after to such a security, in the facts that an equitable mort-shall become bankrupt after the commencement of the bankruptcy goods had been supplied. The gagee cannot recover possession of the land by eject- this Act shall have contracted before the filling learned Assessor considered that the section of ment, nor can he compel payment of the rent from a tenant. Further, he may be postponed by a subsequent of a petition for adjudication of bankruptcy a the Bankruptcy Act was not meant to apply to legal mortgagee without notice: (See hereon Russel v. liability to pay money upon a contingency which a contingency of the kind indicated in the guaRussel, 1 B. C. C. 269; 1 L. C. Eq. 541, and notes.) shall not have happened, and the demand in re-rantee, and gave a verdict for the plaintiff for 2501.

66

THE CITY OF LONDON COURT.-The returns of this court for the year 1868 have just been

Charles Russell appeared for the plaintiffs, and
Gully for the defendant.

Russell contended that the guarantee being a
continuing one, was not discharged by the defend-
ant's bankruptcy.