them go better than to-day's closing prices. Brighton A's are also improved, and, as I expressed earlier in my article, it is astonishing that this stock should remain as low as it is, especially considering that the time of the year has arrived when most of the Southern lines look their best. It is worth noting that the increase in the traffic returns of this line resulting from the Epsom traffic alone amounts to no less than £5,418. This is a big lift, and only illustrates of what the existing plant is capable if the opportunities are afforded it. Other Rails, particularly Chathams, are also looking healthy, but the biggest rise of the day was provided on that hitherto depreciated line, Hull and Barnsley.

Rumours of more favourable terms being settled, with the view of carrying on the business, has led to this renewed confidence; but I question if the lead is worth following, and I should rather advise great caution in touching the investment, as, like many other rumours which have been started in connection with it, the report may turn out pre

mature.

In the Mining Market, Copper remains firm, and, notwithstanding the strenuous efforts of a big bear school, I am not at all sure that these securities will suffer the awful fate which is being freely predicted for them. Diamonds are still on the downward line, and those who have followed my advice respecting them will be thanking their lucky stars for acting upon my frequently-expressed opinions. In Colonial Rails, Grand Trunks are looking healthier, on the traffic return showing a better balance than expected. A decrease of £4,000 was anticipated, but, on the publication of the reports, it turns out that the falling off was only £2,904. There is a grain of comfort in this, and friends of the Grand Trunk line have taken full advantage of it. Canadian Pacifics look like mounting up again, and, unless I misread the signs of the market, they will be quoted much higher than their present prices between now and next settling day. Mexican Rails also were in more favour, and look good for a further rise.

MERCATOR.

WILLIAM HENRY BUMPUS, STOCKBROKER AND MINING SHARE DEALER, 44, THREADNEEDLE STREET, LONDON, E.C. (Established 20 years at this address), transacts business in Mining Shares of every description. English and Foreign Stocks, Colonial Government Bonds, Railways, Banks, Financial and Miscellaneous Shares, and all Securities dealt in on the London Stock Exchange. Mr. Bumpus devotes Special Attention to Legitimate Mines, and is in a position to afford reliable information and advice to intending investors and others in the selection of Shares either for Investment or Speculation.

*The present is a most favourable opportunity for investing in Sound Mining Securities, a judicious purchase of which at the low prices now ruling will, in all probability, result in large profits within the next few months. Cornish Tin Mines-Special Business. Indian Gold Mines, South African Gold and Diamond Mines, Queensland and New Zealand Gold Mines, American Gold Mines, Copper Mines, Lead Mines. Mr. Bumpus has large transactions in the above, and can execute orders at close market prices. Send for Investment List (free on application). All Business receives Personal Attention. W. H. BUMPUS, 44, Threadneedle Street, London, E.C. (Established 1867). Telegraphic Address :—“ Singular, London." [Advt.

THE CENTRAL STOCK EXCHANGE, 57, Charing Cross, S.W.

TELEGRAPHIC ADDRESS, "ANTECHAMBER";
TELEPHONE No. 3,235.

[Advt.

"PUMP COURT" ACROSTICS.

RULES.

I. Answers to the Acrostics must be addressed to the
ACROSTIC EDITOR of Pump Court,

33, Exeter Street, Strand, W.C., and must reach him, at the latest, by the first post on the Wed. nesday morning following the publication of the Acrostic.

2. Prizes will be given to the most successful solvers at the end of every three months, as follows:-1st. Prize, £3; 2nd Prize, ₤2; 3rd Prize, 1; and, in addition, Annual Prizes of the same amounts will be given at the close of the year.

3. The winner of a Quarterly Prize is disqualified from winning another Quarterly Prize during the same year, but is free to compete for the Annual Prizes.

4. Ties will be decided by means of Special Acrostics set for the purpose; or the Prizes may be divided, at the Acrostic Editor's discretion.

5. Prize-winners must apply to the Acrostic Editor for their Prizes as soon as the decision is announced, forwarding their real names and addresses for publication: cheques for the amount will then be sent to them.

6. When alternative words are sent, they must not exceed three for each individual "light."

7. The decision of the Acrostic Editor is, in all cases, final.

DOUBLE ACROSTIC. (No. XXII.)

ALL London, all the world was on the course,
Plungers, and bookies screaming themselves hoarse;
By your A. E. right humbly 'tis suggested
"Don't bet, you'd better not, for you'll be bested!"

1. Gravesend, Whitechapel, Mansion House, here lie;
And further still, the land of Muscovy.

II. I pray you my direction don't deride,

Do as I bid, and look at t'other side.
III. A kind of rig, which strange seems to the nigger,
When first he feels our northern winter's rigour.
IV. This poet wrote, ere Orpheus touched the lyre,
Hymns sung at solemn times by Delphic choir.
v. Long time he dwelt among us, now he's gone
To take his ease the Bosphorus upon.

Solutions must be posted BEFORE Wednesday. ANSWER TO LAST WEEK'S DOUBLE ACROSTIC. (No. XXI.)

1. W rat H 2. Heigh O 3. I smai L 4. T hiak I 5. S indba D 6. U topi A 7. N orro Y

4. The ancient Ithaca. 6. Literally, "no place." 7. The King of Arms. Correct answers have been received from Abel, Aglae, Aliquis, Anisor, Auster, Ballyhooley, Bey, Bo-Peep, Cactus, Canny Scot, Caramel, C. C. Č., Common Room, Conic, Corisande, Danger Signal, Dexterimus Twister, Divorçons, Dr. Johnson, Dorothy, Dum Spiro Spero, Eaf, Eillen, Elm, Eversden, F. C. R., Fleur-de-Lys, Forty-eight, Geraldine, Germinal, Go-Bang, Hafre, Hampton Courtier, Here we are again, Hit or Miss, Kindergarten, King's Bench Walk, Larnet, Lent Lily, Leonardo, Madame X., Max, Melcombe Regis, Merrythought, Moslem, Mountain Dew, Musquash, Nempe, Nine o' Diamonds, Nox, Edipus, Only Three Pence, Pegtop, P.L., Prismatic Compass, Regina, Reldas, Ryecroft. Hopeville, St. Elm, Sampan, Sand Witches, Shaston, Surbiton, Sweet Lavender, Swizzlestick, Syriga, Thanet, The Gunner's Daughter, Thistle, Toucan, Two Heads, Wastrel, Wedidit, Wesmonastrensis, Yacht Club, and Yoko; 76 correct and 12 incorrect; in all 88.

Nox.-"Engli" cannot be accepted; there was no comma at the end of the first line of the couplet, so that it was the origin of the Squires only that was referred to.

Corisande.-The Acrostic Editor regrets that he is unable

to agree.

Max. Clearly the "State of Denmark" is not all that could be desired, for the answer to No. XX never arrived at all, while No. XIX was posted May 16th (Wednesday), and reached Exeter Street, May 17th. This is unfortunate, but such is (Acrostic) life!

Eversden. See rule 6. "Indian," "Irishman," " Italian," and "Indo-Britain" (sic), make four alternatives; as to the telegram, "Suave" must either have been held to cancel the words already sent for that light, or to be in addition to them, which gives us four alternatives again. The course adopted in the case of telegraphic second thoughts is to add the telegram to the original answer, but if the number of alternatives is thereby exceeded, the telegram is understood as cancelling the previous solution, so far as that light (or lights) is concerned. Of course a written second thoughts cancels the original answer entirely.

VOL. VII.

PUMP COURT.

The Temple Newspaper and Review.

CURRENTE CALAMO.

De Lege; de Omnibus Rebus et Quibusdam Aliis.

MR. JUSTICE STEPHEN has again been liberating his soul as to the Libel Law Amendment Bill, and his later utterances are distinctly more judicial and unimpassioned than those to which we referred in our last issue. It was inevitable that so sweeping a condemnation should provoke criticism, and now Sir James has rather assumed the attitude of the heroine of Don Juan, who, "whispering she would ne'er consent, consented." The learned judge commences by asserting that it is not his intention to enter into any controversy with either of the gentlemen who have observed. upon his letter on the Libel Law Amendment Bill. Yet, as he has a professional dislike to the mis-statement of legal authorities, he must ask leave to make two remarks on "An English Barrister's" references to cases. He then proceeds to controvert that gentleman's statements, with considerable ingenuity.

BUT the most interesting portion of the latest communication from Sir James is that in which he says that his object in writing was merely to prevent a Bill of this importance from passing without examination and discussion. He has certainly no hostility to the press. Any one who knows what his career in life has been, must have thought such a suggestion absurd, says Stephen, J., adding: "But I am jealous for its honour and respectability, and I think that such legislation as is proposed would foster abuses to which I certainly do see a tendency in newspapers which I should not call respectable, though they are influential. Most newspapers, both in London and in the country, carry on their business with the utmost propriety, under circumstances at times of great difficulty. The Times' reports of the Divorce Courts, for instance, succeed in giving accounts of the most shameful stories in language as unobjectionable as is consistent with any reference to the facts; and I am far from saying that all reference to them should be omitted. But there are journals which I would certainly not trust with a legal right to publish verbatim reports of indecent trials or meetings. Prurience and purity have met together on many occasions of late years, and it is impossible to walk the streets without seeing that the sham indecent trade (whether it is a sham or not I cannot say) may be carried on by newspapers which try to attract customers by suggestive titles prefixed to articles which, I hope, disappoint their readers. To such papers the proposed Bill, as it

No. 86.

stands, would be a Magna Charta." We are glad that Mr. Justice Stephen has thus modified his views in the direction which we indicated 'clearly enough in our last issue, and we are quite in accord with him as to the pruriency of most of the purity crusades.

DIRECTORS of Building Societies would do well to take heed to the severe strictures recently passed on such societies by Vice-Chancellor Bristowe during the hearing of an application for the winding-up of a Liverpool building society. He said he had often thought of the gross folly of persons trusting these miserable societies with their money. He had seen no more deplorable thing since he came there than the aspect of careful and thrifty people being drawn into these miserable societies, where, by inattention to the rules, or by mismanagement of the funds, large numbers of people had been ruined.

MR. LEWIS CARROLL, writing in this month's Theatre, says of Mr. Gilbert's "Pinafore": "As played by children, one passage in it was to me sad beyond words. It occurs when the captain utters the oath, Damn me!' and forthwith a bevy of sweet, innocent-looking little girls sing, with bright, happy looks, the chorus, 'He said, "Damn me!" He said, "Damn me!" I cannot find words to convey to the reader the pain I felt in seeing those dear children taught to utter such words to amuse ears grown callous to their ghastly meaning. Put the two ideas side by sidedo), and those pure young lips thus sporting with its horrors hell (no matter whether you believe in it or not; millions -and then find what fun in it you can! How Mr. Gilbert could have stooped to write, or Sir Arthur Sullivan could have prostituted his noble art to set to music, such vile trash, it passes my skill to understand." Does Mr. Carroll need to be informed that Mr. Gilbert writes to make money, and flings his golden hoofs in the face of any one who ventures to criticise his doggerel ?

Is the Law Socialistic? A London Rector at the Southport Evangelical Conference, after defining Socialism as the expression of a discontent which was legitimate and wholesome, in so far as it led to constantly-increasing desires and efforts towards an improvement of their social condition, went on to suggest that we might regard all the functions of the Government, and all the laws which had been passed, as the expression of Socialism. The Poor Laws, the Education Acts, the Factory Acts, the Truck Act, the Employers' Liability Act, the Irish Land Acts, and a hundred others were abundantly sufficient to show that it was regarded as the proper function of the State to interfere with the operation of what might be regarded as natural laws, and that expressly for the purpose of protecting the weak, and defending them from the oppression of the strong.

AN enormous amount of business now transacted by solicitors, will be taken away by the Trustees Companies, which, if they are permitted to be established, will take the place of private executors and trustees-it is therefore absolutely imperative that the legal profession should bestir itself in this matter. What is wanted is that, wherever possible, the law relating to trustees should be improved, and thus render the execution of trusts less liable to doubt and difficulty. By making the position of trustees less burdensome, many of the arguments that the promoters of

these companies use to urge their establishment would be of no avail. Accountants, too, are threatened by these companies, but they are moving in the matter. May we expect the Law Society to do the like for us? or is it hopeless to expect that aimless body to protect our interests?

THE Trinity Sittings of the Four Courts, Dublin, which opened on the 1st inst. will be productive of several interesting cases, not the least of which was to have been the action brought by a lady who has long loomed large in the public eye as a truly philanthropic friend of Ireland, and who has certainly lost no opportunity of pushing herself and her cause to the front. The action was that of Hart v. Sinclair, in which the plaintiff, Mrs. Ernest Hart, of London, sought to recover £5,000 damages from the defendant, a gentleman of landed property in the North of Ireland, for an alleged libel, contained in letters published by the defendant in various newspapers, reflecting, as the plaintiff alleges, upon her action in connection with a fund started by her for the development of industries in the North of Ireland. Whatever might have been the result of the trial, its progress would have been watched with great interest, as Mrs. Hart is extremely well known in society, and is at the present moment taking an active part in the affairs of the "Shamrockeries," at Olympia. But, as we go to press, we understand that Mrs. Hart has abandoned the proposed action.

WHILE yielding to none in our zeal for the due observance of the rights and privileges of the profession, we must repeat our conviction that as it is strong, so should it be merciful, and that it is not judicious to be hyper-critical upon the subject of an assumed arrogation of legal functions or legal phraseology by persons not entitled to them. A case in point is the recent prosecution of some accountants by the Leicester Law Society. The sole offence of the defendants seems to have been that of informing a debtor that they had "instructions to commence legal proceedings." Now, seeing that the defendants had been authorised to act as debt-collectors in this instance, and had probably also been authorised to instruct a solicitor to institute legal proceedings if necessary, it is impossible not to feel that they may at all events have had no knowledge that they were exceeding their rights in using such a phrase. The law upon the subject is no doubt clear enough; none the less, we are very certain that such extreme sensitiveness as that shown by the action of the Leicester Law Society in this particular instance is distinctly calculated to make the profession unpopular, and so do it grave and lasting injury.

THE return lately issued, showing the percentage of the costs of winding-up estates by trustees under the Bankruptcy Act of 1869 to gross assets during the three years 1881-83, and the percentage of the costs of administration by official receivers and non-official trustees under the Act of 1883 during the three years 1884-86, may be studied with advantage. The estates administered are classified in groups according to the value of the assets, from estates valued at less than £50, and so on to estates valued at £40,000 to £80,000, and above £100,000. The percentage of costs is throughout much lower under the administration of official receivers since the passing of the Act of 1883 than under that of trustees under the 1869 Act, or even that of the non-official trustees appointed under the Act of 1883. Thus for the group of cases with total assets under £50, the percentage of costs under the 1869 Act was 79 10, against 72.30 with official receivers under the 1883 Act, and 114 50 with non-official trustees. In all these cases of small estates the costs are, of course, higher than with larger estates. As the estates increase in value the percentage of costs, as will be seen from the following figures, under official receivers diminishes more rapidly than under the trustees of the Act of 1869:-Estates of £100 to £150, cost per cent. 70'93 under 1869 Act (trustees) and 33.48 under 1883 Act (official receivers); £200 to £250, cost per cent. 6178 and 27:15; £400 to £500, cost per cent. 49 48 and 22'13; 1,000 to £1,200, cost per cent. 33°53 and 16.75; £2,000 to £3,000, cost per cent. 26:52

and 8.69. The return shows clearly that the costs of windingup bankrupt estates has been very much reduced under the new Act, and that official administration is much cheaper to creditors than non-official administration, even under the new Act. Non-official administration for large estates is, however, now very much cheaper than formerly, the percentage for estates from £40,000 to £80,000 under the new Act being only 2'02, against 12 16 under the old Act. The winding-up under the new Act is also much more rapid than under the 1869 Act, and official winding-up is more rapid than non-official winding-up under the new

Act.

A GENTLEMAN, whose memory goes back thirty years without undue effort, referring to the lamented death of Mr. W. L. Birkbeck, chronicled in our last issue, points out the interesting fact that at that period Mr. Birkbeck, Dr. Maine, Mr. J. G. Phillimore, QC., Dr. Herbert Broom, and Mr. Badger Eastwood, filled the five readerships on Equity, Jurisprudence and Roman Law, Constitutional Law and Legal History, Common Law, and the Law of Real Property, respectively, at the Inns of Court for the instruction of Law Students reading for the Bar, and for the examination of those gentlemen after having kept their proper number of terms, and eaten their dinners in the orthodox manner prescribed by the Council of Legal Education in those days. Mr. Birkbeck is remembered as an exceedingly quiet, amiable man; though the examination questions set by him had the credit of being the most difficult of the 110 questions or thereabouts put for paper work in the five subjects. A quarter of a century ago the following appeared among Mr. Birkbeck's questions:"State the general rules for determining whether precatory words create a trust." "What consideration is sufficient to support-1st, a use-2nd, a trust-3rd, an agreement?"

AMONG Sir Henry Maine's questions were these:-" What was the ancient and what is the modern meaning of an 'Imperfect' Law?" "What is meant by the expression Positive Morality?" Mr. Phillimore asked, inter alia: "Give an account of Lord Danby's impeachment, and of the constitutional questions to which it gave rise ? "Give an account of the Trial of the Seven Bishops." The Trial of the Seven Bishops occupies 100 pages in March Phillipps' selection of State Trials. And Dr. Broom, a most patient and cautious tutor, required from his students. lucid answers to the questions: Explain the doctrine of our law as to nudum pactum, and the proposition that an executed consideration must be supported by a previous request." "State the facts and resolutions in the Six Carpenters' case." While Mr. Eastwood, the most approachable of all the tutors at the Inns of Court, whose subject was the Law of Real Property, propounded the following problems for solution by the students :-" In what cases, and in whose favour, will equity relieve against the consequences of the defective execution of powers?" "Give examples of conditions precedent, and conditions subsequent, and point out the practical distinction between them ?"

UPON the occasion of Mr. McLaren's speech on Tuesday night, upon the Repeal of the C. D. Acts in India, all ladies approaching the gallery set apart for their use in the House of Commons were considerately informed that a discussion upon a very delicate subject was to be sur le tapis. As a natural consequence, one would suppose that no bright eyes beamed from behind the grille that night, the British Matron and Mr. Podsnap's Young Person having retired in modest confusion. But not a bit of it. Only two ladies took the hint thus delicately given to them; the other women deliberately choosing to sit out a discussion in which many matters offensive, even to the ears of clean-minded men, were unavoidably touched upon. "Didn't I order all ladies to leave the Court?" said a judge upon a memorable occasion, glancing significantly in the direction of a brace of immovable bonnets still in evidence. "All ladies have left the Court, m' lud," said the usher, with quiet satire. We commend the little story to the attention of the occupants of the Ladies' Gallery on Tuesday night.

THE latest suggestion in the direction of the reform of limited liability companies is that a Company Reform Club should be started in the City, to encourage shareholders to take an intelligent interest in the management and affairs of their property, and to unravel the mysteries of cooked balance-sheets, take in hand cases of imprudence of directors, fraud, and so on, and to present a united front to dishonest promoters, ornamental directors, fat liquidators, complacent auditors, wreckers of companies, converters of rotten business, fraudulent valuers, et hoc genus omne. The idea is a good one, but something of the kind has been tried more than once before without achieving conspicuous success. The fact remains that small capitalists are lamentably careless about their investments, while the classes who have larger sums to lay out very prudently decline to move, as a rule, without the advice of their solicitor or broker.

WE are for ever hearing complaints of the law's delay in this country, but we doubt whether, after all, our procedure will not compare favourably with that of other countries. In Germany, for instance, the delay in the "Landgericht," or court for commercial affairs, could not easily be exceeded. A Birmingham solicitor had occasion to sue, through a Hamburg solicitor, on behalf of some English clients, last year, for a debt of £36 5s. 4d. After various remittances on account of costs, &c., the matter stands some chance of being settled by September of this year, just one year after the initial steps in the action were taken!

THE papers have been lamentably full during the past few months, of cases in which the honour of the profession did not shine with untarnished lustre; but few incidents have been sadder than the bankruptcy of Mr. Thomas Miles, the Leicester solicitor, who was robbed of £20,000 by a confidential clerk named Murdin, of whom it might be said, that nothing in his life became him like the ending of it for he had the grace to hang himself in Leicester gaol while under remand for robbing his employer, who was totally blind. Mr. Miles will have the sympathy of every member of both branches of the profession.

THE rumour that the Attorney-General was about to be raised to the bench has been contradicted. It is now said that Lord Esher, having served the period necessary to secure a retiring pension, is anxious to be relieved of the Mastership of the Rolls, and that Sir Richard Webster is willing to take the post. For the consequent vacancies full arrangement is said to be made. Sir Edward Clarke would take a step upwards, and Mr. Finlay is talked of as the Solicitor-General.

Ir is well for Mr. Todd, of Hounslow, that he does not live in Russia, or, most assuredly, his fine tenor voice would get him into difficulties. As it is, his loud singing in the church which he favours with his patronage has brought upon him a sort of reprimand from the churchwardens. Some time ago the Czar was of opinion that a certain artillery officer spoke in too loud a voice in making the responses, and consequently placed him under arrest for eight days. The churchwardens of Holy Trinity, Hounslow, cannot go as far as this; indeed it is a question how far they can interfere with a member of the congregation who, being something between Stentor and Boanerges, fondly imagines himself a Sims Reeves, and is ready to back his opinion by singing any member of the choir for a guinea. If the Salvation Army may yell with comparative impunity, it is doubtful how far a private individual may transgress the laws of good taste and yet keep within the law of the realm. Mr. Todd could not be summoned for brawling, but it is possible that his near neighbours in the church might indict him as a nuisance; though we are afraid such an action would give occasion to scoffers to blaspheme.

A CASE of much interest and importance to the trading community was decided recently in the Court of Chancery by Chitty, J. Both employers and employés, especially if the latter are inclined to be ambitious and set up for themselves," will do well to take the lesson of the case to heart.

FROM the evidence it appears that a Holborn tailor made an agreement with his cutter that the latter, if he left the former's service, should not engage in any business within a mile of the Holborn shop. The cutter did leave, and did engage in a tailoring business within the mile, and the plaintiff moved the Court to restrain the cutter from this breach of covenant. The Court declined to interfere. The original covenant was in restraint of trade, and the law does not sanction such restraints. It considers them contrary to public policy, and therefore void. The moral of the case is that if employers desire to secure themselves against the competition of their servants, they must be very careful to make their stipulated precautions moderate; and even then the Court may, if it please, take into consideration any reasons which the defendant may urge in mitigation of the bargain which is not good on the face of it, but only if it can be shown to be fair. The same conditions apply to bargains in which one person sells a business to another and contracts not to engage in opposition to the buyer. In short, a person who makes a bargain which imposes restriction on another's action must remember that the State has an interest in the matter, and that it will not enforce any agreement which unduly hampers the liberty of the subject and his usefulness to the community.

"bigotry and virtue" into hard cash must often be very THE temptation to turn pictures and other articles of strong, but the law will not permit an owner to exercise a free hand in this direction, when the articles in question are heirlooms. This was plainly laid down by Chitty, J., in the recent case of Sir George Beaumont. The law which sanctions heirlooms may have in some respects an unreasonable and perhaps unjust appearance; but, so long as the right of a man to dispose of his own property is recognised it is difficult to condemn it, provided that it does no substantial injustice. After all, Sir George Beaumont has no very serious reason to complain of the result of his application to the Court. In the first place, he received from the testator a legacy of £17,000, and it appears that the estates bring in a revenue of £7,000 a-year, one-half of which is subject to settlement. That being the position of the applicant, he finds that he has succeeded to heirlooms, consisting of pictures and other things, which are estimated to amount in value to £7,300. These Sir George Beaumont wished to turn into hard cash, but finds now that he is obliged to keep the articles during his life and hand them on unrealised to his successor. Sir George applied under the Settled Estates Act of 1882 for leave to sell his heirlooms, but Mr. Justice Chitty considered that the circumstances did not disclose any good reason for interfering with the dispositions of the testator.

L'AUDACE, l'audace, toujours l'audace, must be the motto of the perpetrator of the extraordinary jewel robbery reported to have taken place the other day in the West End. A man is said to have visited 73, Portland Place, and, representing that he was from the Grosvenor Gallery, requested to be allowed to look at the electric light apparatus with which the establishment is provided. His request was granted. The man had a bag with him; this is now supposed to have contained his burglary apparatus. Be that as it may, he is said to have managed to remain in the house until an opportune moment presented itself, when he forced open a number of drawers, and escaped with jewellery and valuables worth at least £2,000. It is impossible not to feel, in a measure, that the fellow deserved his luck for his pluck, and that the owners of the jewels, or the servants who were so easily imposed upon, deserved a sharp lesson for their stupidity. None the less we hope the criminal will be found, and dealt with as such impudent scoundrels should be.

A LETTER from Mr. Blaine, dated Paris, May 17, was published in New York on Wednesday. Mr. Blaine says flatly that he would not accept the nomination for the Presidency if it were offered to him. He declares that his former letter should have been construed as an unconditional withholding of his name from the Republican Convention. This is accepted by all parties as final. The talk now turns upon the candidate most likely to be chosen by the

Republicans. The leading candidate is a judge, Walter L. Gresham of Illinois. He was a member of President Arthur's Cabinet, leaving that for a seat upon the United States Circuit Court Bench, which he holds now. He is a man of very high character, and has a large following among the Republicans of the Western States.

MR. FRANCIS K. MUNTON is agitating for a postponement of the extended jurisdiction clauses of the new County Courts Bill until the machinery is perfected, so that it can cope with the inevitable influx of new work. Mr. Munton urges that "it is impossible to estimate the amount of work this new provision may throw into the already overburdened County Court. Most defendants are prone to seek removal, and one may safely predict a large increase of County Court trials. This being so," Mr. Munton asks, “Has any competent person considered the insufficiency of the machinery for the new work, or dwelt upon the chaotic confusion which will arise if this part of the Act is to come into operation (as is proposed) on the 1st of next month ?" And adds: "Surely there ought to be at least six months' time. to prepare for such an influx."

WE are quite with Mr. Munton in his contention, and shall be glad to learn, as we believe we shall ere long, that the suggested postponement has been agreed to. It would be worse than folly to thrust all the new work which would be bound to come on to the shoulders of the County Court judges, until every possible precaution against a "block" had been taken; and we are glad to find Mr. Munton giving lucid and vigorous expression to what the majority of members of the profession must have felt.

LADY FLORENCE DIXIE is of the opinion that "to the pure all things are pure," and that the Christmas card sent by Lord James Douglas, her ladyship's brother, to Miss Mabel Edith Scott, in which a little child of two is asleep on the sea-shore, and three little elves or sprites are crawling on their hands and kness to surprise it, was not by any means improper. On the other hand, her brother's own counsel admitted that is was "in the worst possible taste, to say the least of it," while Chitty, J., considered it an "insult." We have not seen the card, but presume it was one of those popular little nastinesses in which nudity does duty for art. We observe that the ages of the "three little elves or sprites" are not stated. No doubt Lady Florence, as a British matron, knows what is right and what is wrong, and we should be sorry to differ from her impetuous little ladyship. None the less, it will be well if the action of Scott v. Douglas ends in checking the output of these naked children. cards; as, unfortunately, the "pure" to whom "all things are pure" are not in a majority in modern society.

Mr.

LAYMEN and lay journals are rather fond of attacking "legal fictions" and holding them up to ridicule. A contemporary remarks:-"Legal fictions are time-honoured institutions in this country; but when they are too transparent they suggest that there is something wrong in our law. An extract from the report of the proceedings in the 'Isleworth Murder' case, at the Central Criminal Court yesterday, will illustrate this fact. When prisoner was called upon to plead, she replied, 'I did kill her.' Justice Stephen said she had better plead not guilty, and she accordingly did so. Doubtless in the end substantial justice will be done, as the woman was found to be insane, and she was ordered, as usual, to be detained during Her Majesty's pleasure; but this little incident would hardly lead an uninformed observer to the conclusion that an English Court of Justice was sacred to the cause of truth 'and nothing but the truth.' What could be simpler or more intelligible than the significant sentence, I did kill her'? Is our law so barren in expedients that it must make a miserable creature, out of her senses, solemnly tell a lie pro formâ, in order that she may qualify for the mercy of the tribunal? If the prisoner of yesterday was a fitting object for such clemency, she was none the less so because she confessed her crime. An unnecessary display of the 'properties' of the law tends to make the Courts look pedantic and unpractical, and to emphasise the difference between legal truth and other standards of truth."

THE annual "Churching of the Judges," as the ancient function is quaintly called, is always an interesting and imposing ceremonial, and that of Sunday last was no exception to the rule. The Lord Mayor, Aldermen and Common Council escorted the Judges to service in St. Judges usually visit the Cathedral on the first Sunday in Paul's, where there was a very large congregation. The Trinity Term, and as they go in State the Lord Mayor and the Corporation meet them in State also. The Lord Mayor, the Sheriffs and Under Sheriffs, the Aldermen and Councillors, with the City Marshal, Sword and Mace Bearers, and the Recorder and Common Serjeant were the first to arrive, and they awaited the Judges in the nave, where the procession was formed, every one taking part in it being presented by the Corporation with a bouquet of flowers. Upon the choristers and clergy making their appearance the vast congregation rose. Then came the civic procession, headed by the officials preceding the Lord Mayor; following him were the Magistrates, the Aldermen and Councillors; then came the Judges, in their robes, with their train-bearers, in the following order :-Lord Esher (Master of the Rolls), Lord Justice Lindley, Lord Justice Lopes, Justices Kekewich, Wills, Charles, and Stephen, the Recorder, and the Common Serjeant. The Rev. L. Gilbertson read the prayers, and the Rev. H. D. Macnamara, a minor canon, read both lessons. Dr. G. Martin presided at the organ. The anthem consisted of three movements from Sphor's short cantata, "God, thou art great." The sermon was preached by Bishop Bickersteth, of Japan, who took for his text the words "To be testified in due time."

SIR PATRICK COLQUHOUN, Q.C., the Treasurer, and the Masters of the Bench entertained at dinner, on Wednesday, it being the grand day of Trinity term, the following guests-The Lord Chief Justice of England, Sir A. H. Layard, G.C.B., Sir Charles Clifford, the Very Rev. Dr. Vaughan, Master of the Temple, Lieutenant-General Sir W. B. Radcliffe, K.C.B., Sir John Coode, K.C.M.G., the Nawab Fathah Newaz Jung, Sir Edward Hertslet, C.B., the Rector of Lincoln College, Oxford, the Master of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, Dr. Redhouse, Mr. C. G. Leland, Professor Frankland, Mr. A. F. Boyd, Mr. W. F. Smith, Mr. Herbert Steward, Mr. G. B. Houghton, Mr. H. W. Lawrence, the Sub-Treasurer, and Mr. J. E. L. Pickering, the librarian. The Benchers present were-Lord Bramwell, Mr. Venables, Q.C., Judge Cooke, Mr. Dowdeswell, Q.C., Judge Lushington, Mr. Hare, Judge Bristowe, Mr. Marten, Q.C., Mr. Baylis, Q.C., Mr. Patchett, Q.C., Mr. Simpson, Mr. Bompas, Q.C., Mr. Millar, Q.C., Mr. Coltman, and Mr. Myburgh, Q.C.

ON the same evening, the Treasurer, Sir Henry James, Q.C., M.P., and Benchers of the Middle Temple entertained a distinguished company at dinner in the hall of the Inn. The guests present were the Duke of Cambridge, the French Ambassador, the Marquis of Hartington, Earl Cadogan, Lord Esher, Lord Burton, the Home Secretary, Admiral the Hon. Sir H. Keppel, Mr. Childers, M.P., Mr. J. Chamberlain, M.P., Mr. John Morley, M.P., Mr. Baron Huddleston, Sir John Millais, R.A., the Rev. Canon Ainger, and the Under-Treasurer. The Benchers present were Sir Montagu Smith, Lord Young, Mr. Hunter Rodwell, Q.C., Mr. Justice Hawkins, Sir Thomas Chambers, Q.C., Mr. Johnson, Q.C., His Honour Judge Prentice, Q.C., Mr. Edlin, Q.C., Mr. Justice Wills, Mr. Speed, Q.C., Mr. Lloyd, Q.C.. Mr. Philbrick, Q.C., Mr. Griffiths, Q.C., Mr. Macrory, Mr. Locock Webb, Q.C., Sir Richard Couch, Mr. Kemp, Q.C., Mr. Trevelyan, Mr. Hall, Q.C., M.P., Mr. Dauney, Mr. Collins, Q.C., Mr. Stallard, Mr. Finlason, Mr. Bruce, Q.C., and Mr. Will, Q.C., M.P.