be charged with duty under the stat. 30 Vict. c. 23, and may be stamped at any time within ten days after it has been first received in the United Kingdom on payment of the duty only."

Alterations.] By 30 & 31 Vict. c. 23, s. 10, nothing in that "Act shall extend or be construed to extend to prohibit the making of any alteration which may lawfully be made in the terms and conditions of any policy after the same shall have been underwritten; provided that such alteration be made before notice of the determination of the risk originally insured, and that it shall not prolong the time covered by the insurance thereby made beyond the period of six months, in the case of a policy made for a less period than six months, or beyond the period allowed by this Act in the case of a policy made for a greater period than six months, and that the articles insured shall remain the property of the same person or persons; and that no additional or further sum shall be insured by reason or means of such alteration."

The following cases were decided under 35 Geo. 3, c. 63, s. 13, now repealed, the provisions of which much resembled the above section. A mere extension of the time of sailing is within the above clause, and the alteration requires no new stamp. Kensington v. Inglis, 8 East, 273; Brocklebank v. Sugrue, 1 B. & Ad. 81. So a memorandum waiving the warranty of seaworthiness. Weir v. Aberdeen, 2 B. & A. 325. But where a policy on "a ship and outfit" was altered by inserting "ship and goods," it was held to require a new stamp, and to be void against the underwriters, though they had assented to the alteration. Hill v. Patten, 8 East, 373.

Power of Attorney.

See Letter of attorney, ante, p. 255.

Probate and Letters of Administration.

These duties were not affected by the Stamp Act, 1870. They were formerly payable on the instruments themselves, but under the Customs and Inland Revenue Act, 1881, 44 & 45 Vict. c. 12, Part III., by which they are now regulated, they are, by sect. 27, payable instead on the affidavit received from the person applying for probate, &c.; and by sect. 30, the probate, &c., bears a certificate showing that the affidavit has been delivered duly stamped and stating the gross value of the estate and effects as shown by the account. And by sect. 26, the probate, &c., having thereon such a certificate, shall for all purposes be deemed to have been duly stamped in respect of the value stated in the certificate." Under sect. 27, the scale of duties is as follows:

Where the estate and effects for which probate or letters of administration are granted, exclusive of debts and funeral expenses, are above the value of 1007. and not exceeding 5007.—at the rate of 21. per cent.; above 500l. and not exceeding 1,000l., 27. 10s. per cent.; above 1,000l., 31. per cent. By sect. 33, where the gross amount of the estate exceeds 1007. but not 300l., the duty is 17. 10s.

Sects. 32, 35, contain provisions for increasing the amount of duty when the estate is found to be of greater value than that under which it

was sworn.

By sect. 26, the provisions of former Acts relating to probates, &c. (see 55 Geo. 3, c. 184, Part III.), so far as they are consistent with the

provisions of this Act, apply to the duties on affidavits imposed by this Act.

Probate is admissible in evidence though not stamped within six months. Lacy v. Rhys, 4 B. & S. 873, Ex. Ch. The value must be calculated at the time the probate was granted, and not at the time of testator's decease. Doe d. Richards v. Evans, 10 Q. B. 476. Accord. Partington v. Att.-Gen., L. R., 4 H. L. 100. The insufficiency of the stamp to cover the amount sued for is a fatal objection. Doe d. Richards v. Evans, supra; Hunt v. Stevens, 3 Taunt. 113; Carr v. Roberts, 2 B. & Ad. 905; but see Whyte v. Rose, 3 Q. B. 493, 499, per Ld. Abinger. The objection must at any rate be taken as early as possible at the hearing of the cause, and is too late after the document has been received in evidence. Robinson v. Vernon, Ld., 7 C. B., N. S. 235; 29 L. J., C. P. 310, cited ante, p. 228. The duty attaches on all goods within the jurisdiction, whatever was the domicile of the deceased. Partington v. Att.-Gen., supra; Fernandes' Executors' case, L. R., 5 Ch. 314. As to what goods are within the jurisdiction, see Att.-Gen. v. Pratt, L. R., 9 Ex. 140.

Progressive Duty.

Under the Stamp Act, 1870, this duty is no longer chargeable.

Promissory Note.

See Bank note, Bill of exchange, &c., ante, p. 235.

Protest and Notarial Act.

"Protest of any bill of exchange or promissory note:

"Where the duty on the bill or note does not exceed 18. :-the same duty as the bill or note. In any other case:-18.

"Notarial act of any kind whatsoever (except a protest of a bill of exchange or promissory note) :-18."

Adhesive stamp.] Sect. 116. "The duty upon a notarial act, and upon the protest by a notary public of a bill of exchange or promissory note, may be denoted by an adhesive stamp, which is to be cancelled by the notary."

Proxy.

See Letter of attorney, ante, p. 255.

Receipt.

"Receipt given for, or upon the payment of, money amounting to 21. or upwards-ld."

Exemptions.] (1.) Receipt given for money deposited in any bank, or with any banker, to be accounted for and expressed to be received of the person to whom the same is to be accounted for. (2.) Acknowledgment by any banker of the receipt of any bill of exchange or promissory note for the purpose of being presented for acceptance or payment.

(3.) Receipt given for or upon the payment of any parliamentary taxes or duties, or of money to or for the use of Her Majesty.'

66

(7.) Receipt given for the consideration money for the purchase of any share in any of the Government stocks or funds, or in Indian stocks, or bank stock, or for any dividend paid on any share of the said stocks or funds respectively. (8.) Receipt given for any principal money or interest due on an exchequer bill. (9.) Receipt written upon a bill of exchange or promissory note duly stamped." (10.) Receipt given upon any bill or note of the Bank of England or of Ireland. (11.) "Receipt indorsed or otherwise written upon or contained in any instrument liable to stamp duty, and duly stamped, acknowledging the receipt of the consideration money therein expressed, or the receipt of any principal money, interest or annuity thereby secured or therein mentioned."

Other exemptions relate to payments made by various departments of the government. These exemptions are extended by 45 & 46 Vict. c. 72, s. 9.

Definition of receipt.] Sect. 120. "The term receipt' means and includes any note, memorandum, or writing whatsoever whereby any money amounting to 27. or upwards, or any bill of exchange or promissory note for money amounting to 21. or upwards, is acknowledged or expressed to have been received, or deposited, or paid, or whereby any debt or demand, or any part of a debt or demand, of the amount of 21. or upwards, is acknowledged to have been settled, satisfied, or discharged, or which signifies or imports any such acknowledgment, and whether the same is or is not signed with the name of any person."

Adhesive stamp.] Sect. 121. "The duty upon a receipt may be denoted by an adhesive stamp, which is to be cancelled by the person by whom the receipt is given before he delivers it out of his hands.'

Penalty for stamping.] Sect. 122. "A receipt given without being stamped may be stamped with an impressed stamp upon the terms following, that is to say:-(1.) Within fourteen days after it has been given, on payment of the duty and a penalty of 51.; (2) After fourteen days, but within one month, after it has been given, on payment of the duty and a penalty of 107.; and shall not in any other case be stamped with an impressed stamp."

The provisions of 43 Geo. 3, c. 126, s. 5, which enabled a debtor paying money and requiring a receipt, to provide a stamped receipt for the creditor to sign, are repealed by 33 & 34 Vict. c. 99, and there is no analogous provision in the Stamp Act, 1870.

Legacy receipt.] By 36 Geo. 3, c. 52, s. 27, no evidence may be given of payment of the legacy without producing the stamped receipt, or giving proof of the actual payment of the duty; but a copy of the entry in the books of the Commissioners of the stamps, of the payment of such duty, shall be admitted as evidence thereof. This section has a special provision with regard to the duty payable on annuities bequeathed.

It was held that the copy here referred to was an examined copy; and that a copy made and signed by the Comptroller of Stamps was not admissible in evidence under the above section; Harrison v. Borwell, 10 Sim. 380; but such a copy would now be evidence under 14 & 15 Vict. c. 99, s. 14, ante, p. 101.

By 36 Geo. 3, c. 52, s. 29; 48 Geo. 3, c. 149, s. 44; and 55 Geo. 3, c. 184, Sched., Part III., receipts for legacies may be stamped with the

amount of legacy duty payable thereon, without penalty, within twentyone days after they are signed; they may be stamped afterwards on payment of the duty, and a penalty of 107. per cent. on the duty.

Decisions on receipts.] An acknowledgment of having received acceptances, with an undertaking to provide for them, has been held to require a receipt stamp. Scholey v. Walsby, Peake, 24. So a bill of parcels, subscribed "settled by two bills, one at nine, the other at twelve months," was held by Lord Ellenborough to be an acquittance which could not be evidence unless stamped. Smith v. Kelly, Peake, 25, n.; S. C. (illreported), 4 Esp. 249. So the word "settled" under a bill. Spawforth v. Alexander, 2 Esp. 621. Memorandum. That any demand we have against G. W. for ironwork is this day discharged in consideration of services rendered by him to us: our account shall be delivered with a stamped receipt,"-requires a stamp. Livingstone v. Whiting, 15 Q. B. 722. An account containing acknowledgments of sums received, made at successive times upon the payment of the money, requires a stamp; it differs from an account current, where the sums stated to be received are not written in the account at and upon the receipt of the money, but long after, and only amount to admissions of money received at an antecedent time. Wright v. Shawcross, 2 B. & A. 501, n. See Jacob v. Lindsay, 1 East, 460; Hawkins v. Warre, 3 B. & C. 690. A mere acknowledgment, not of the payment of money, but of a sum due and owing (as an I O U, signed by the party), requires no receipt stamp. Fisher v. Leslie, 1 Esp. 426; Israel v. Israel, 1 Camp. 499; Childers v. Boulnois, D. & Ry. N. P. 8. And such an acknowledgment, though in form a receipt (being in fact for money received long before), requires no stamp: thus, " Received by B. T. 170., for which I promise to pay at the rate of 51. per cent.' (signed), is neither a receipt nor a promissory note, nor an agreement of the value of 201. Taylor v. Steele, 16 M. & W. 665. So, a receipt given by the banker of a company to a shareholder, for deposit paid in, formerly needed no stamp; Clarke v. Chaplin, 1 Exch. 26; see also Chaplin v. Clarke, Exch. 403; but such receipt is not within exemption (1) of the present Act. The signature of counsel for a fee on a brief does not require a stamp. In re Beavan, 5 D. M. & G. 40; 23 L. J., Ch. 536. Where it is made solely to avoid the Statute of Limitations, it is expressly exempted from an agreement stamp. 9 Geo. 4, c. 14, s. 8, ante, pp. 231, 232. An instrument in these terms, 66 Mr. T. has left in my hands 2007.;" Tomkins v. Ashby, 6 B. & C. 541; or in these, "I have in my hands three bills which amount to 1207. 108. 6d., which I have to get discounted or return on demand; Mullett v. Huchison, 7 B. & C. 639; or in these, "Mr. M. has this day left with me 107. on account of debt, interest, and costs," Levy v. Alexander, 4 Exch. 485, requires no stamp. So, the acknowledgment of the correctness of an account, containing a statement of sums advanced and disbursements made, has been held to require no stamp. Wellard v. Moss, 1 Bing. 134. So, "balancing up to this day. S. F., 19 Nov.," written on the back of an unstamped receipt, is evidence against S. F. of an admission of the state of account on that day, though the receipt itself is not admissible. Finney v. Tootel, 5 C. B. 504. And an unstamped receipt at the foot of a debtor and creditor account, signed by the party who received the balance, is evidence against him of the state of the account, the payment not being disputed. Mattheson v. Ross, 2 H. L. C. 286. A receipt is not inadmissible as such, because it notices the terms and consideration upon which the money was paid. Watkins v. Hewlett, 1 B, & B. 1. Nor, because it contains subsequent matter of agreement and has no agreement stamp; Odye v. Cookney, 1 M. & Rob.

517; unless the agreement controls or qualifies what goes before, when the paper will be inadmissible without an agreement stamp. Grey v. Smith, 1 Camp. 387. Where the indorsements of receipts on a bond have left no blank spaces for receipts of subsequent payments, such receipts written on an unstamped piece of paper annexed to the bond are within exemption (11). Orme v. Young, 4 Camp. 336.

Release.

"Release or renunciation of any property, or of any right or interest in any property:

66

Upon a sale. See Conveyance on sale," ante, p. 246.

"By way of security. See Mortgage, &c.," ante, p. 257. "In any other case:-10s."

Schedule.

Schedule, inventory, or document of any kind whatsoever, referred to in or by, and intended to be used or given in evidence as part of, or as material to, any other instrument charged with any duty, but which is separate and distinct from, and not indorsed on or annexed to, such other instrument:

Where such other instrument is chargeable with any duty not exceeding 108.:-the same duty as such other instrument.

"In other case:-108."

Exemptions.] (1.) Printed proposals published by any corporation or company respecting insurances and referred to in or by any policy of insurance issued by such corporation or company. (2.) Any public map, plan, survey, apportionment, allotment, award, and other parochial or public document and writing, made under or in pursuance of any Act of Parliament, and deposited or kept for reference in any registry, or in any public office, or with the public books, papers, or writings of any parish."

If a bill of sale refer to a schedule of things sold, but is complete and intelligible without it, it may be read, though the schedule, being unstamped, may be inadmissible; Dyer v. Green, 1 Exch. 71; Daines v. Heath, 3 C. B. 938; aliter, if insensible without the schedule. Weeks v. Maillardet, 14 East, 568.

Where a lease referred to an expired lease for the covenants, the expired lease (stamped as such) was held under 55 Geo. 3, c. 184, sched. 1, not to be "a schedule, catalogue, or inventory" requiring a stamp as such. Strutt v. Robinson, 3 B. & Ad. 395. So, when a lease, duly stamped as a lease, referred to the terms of an abandoned lease not stamped, the whole was considered as one lease, and admissible in evidence as such. Pearce v. Cheslyn, 4 Ad. & E. 225. The words of the Stamp Act, 1870, are perhaps somewhat wider.

It will be observed that this duty is only charged when the schedule "is separate and distinct from, and not indorsed on or annexed to," the principal instrument, and when the latter is liable to duty. The original object with which this duty was imposed, was to secure duty being paid where instruments escaped progressive duty, by their being shortened in length by reference to a separate schedule; as now, however, the progressive duty has been altogether abolished, there seems no good reason for the continuance of the schedule duty.