Dear Mr. Yerburgh,- .

The matters to which you refer are not governed by any written rule, but by the practice and tradition of the profession, which have, I believe, been recognized from time immemorial.

It is essential to keep in view throughout the distinction between contentious and non-contentious business.

With reference to contentious business, in my opinion, neither before nor after litigation is commenced should a barrister act or advise without the intervention of a solicitor. One very grave reason for this rule is obvious-In contentious business, which frequently affects the rights of other persons, it is most important that the ficts should be as far as possible accurately ascertained before advice is given. For this purpose, as a barrister cannot himself make proper inquiry as to the actual facts, it is essential that he should be able to rely on the responsibility of a solicitor as to the statement of facts put before him.

As regards non-contentious business the case is, in my opinion, somewhat different. It is scarcely possible to state the rule in a way which will be absolutely accurate under all circumstances; but speaking generally, there is, in my opinion, no objection to a barrister seeing and advising a lay client without the intervention of a solicitor, upon points relating to the lay client's own personal conduct or guidance, or the management or disposition of his own affairs or transactions. I only desire to add that great care should be exercised by members of the Bar who do advise lay clients, to abstain from advising upon matters which are, in effect, of a contentious character.

As regards the fee in cases in which counsel are willing to advise a lay client under the circumstances to which I have referred, I know of no rule beyond this-that no junior should accept a fee of less than 1 35. 6d., and no leader of less than £2 4s. 6d. I am, yours very faithfully,

Robert Yerburgh, Esq., M.P.

RICHARD E. WEBSTER.

We have also been asked to publish the following additional correspondence :

SIR, I think that the question dealt with in the letter of the Attorney-General is one of vital importance to the general public, to whom the main consideration is, how the cost of law may be diminished without impairing its quality. There is considerable ground for believing that the solution of this problem may follow out of the answer of the Attorney-General; and that if the public go direct to barristers for their legal opinions, their wills, settlements, contracts, and conveyances, they will find their work not only better done but at infinitely less cost.

First, then, as to its quality. It is sufficient to consider the multifarious duties which solicitors have to perform, to come to the conclusion that they cannot maintain as high a level of efficiency as a barrister who habitually confines himself to special subjects. Even before recent legislation and changes of practice, what was expected of a solicitor was already a serious matter. He was required to possess a general knowledge of every department of law, besides being perfectly familiar with the practical details of his own business, to which in some cases he added the rôles of auctioneer and estate agent. Now, however, by the gradual extension to solicitors of the right of audience, and by the opportunity and stimulus given them under the Conveyancing Act of 1881, they have come to undertake in addition those duties which were originally assigned to the other branch of the profession-viz., advocacy and conveyancing.

But even a more serious matter, from the points of view of the public, is that of expense. The present system, under which a solicitor is entitled in conveyancing business-sales, mortgages, and the like to adopt the most remunerative of two alternative scales of charge, one ad valorem and the other according to the work actually done, is not calculated to lessen costs. It is needless to say that barristers have no such option. When it is considered that the ordinary barrister's fee for drawing a settlement of personalty of, say £10,000 Consols, would be three to five guineas, according to length, while the ad valorem scale of the Incorporated Law Society, which presumably represents the practice of the best-known firms, suggests £60 as the proper remuneration of the lady's solicitor and £30 for the gentleman's, the discrepancy of charge becomes obvious.

It would be most regrettable, I venture to think, if the effect of Sir Richard Webster's opinion is to exclude the public from consulting a barrister direct in all matters which might conceivably lead to litigation; for, in many cases, it would be a great boon to the lay client to get an opinion direct from a barrister as to whether he should go to law or not. It is unquestionable that numbers of actions would never have been brought if the litigant had first interviewed his counsel.

And surely in these latter days it must be admitted to be a strange relic of superstition which would preclude one class alone of professional men from communicating the results of their labour and study to those who seek to profit thereby, without employing an intermediary. It would scarcely be more preposterous if a practice had grown up, by connivance between doctors and chemists, whereby the patient was forced to have his symptoms diagnosed in the first instance by the apothecary, and reduced to the form of a "case for opinion." This is the unnecessary middleman with a vengeance! The restriction which prevents counsel from seeing the lay client direct after litigation has begun is an entirely different matter, being imposed quite as much for the convenience of barristers as for any other reason; and probably there is not a single member of the Bar who would wish the rule altered.

Your obedient servant,

A BARRISTER.

THE BAR AND THE PUBLIC. To the Editor of PUMP COURT.

SIR,-The profession is to be congratulated on the answer Mr. Yerburgh has succeeded in obtaining from Sir Richard Webster to the question so gallantly pressed on Sir Henry James by your correspondent, Mr. Stern, four years ago.

The opinion of the Attorney-General practically coincides with that maintained by you at the time of that correspondence, for it is evident that by contentious business Sir R. Webster means business after litigation has been decided upon. To suppose that he means all business which by any possibility may at a future date become the subject of litigation is to suppose that he is blind to the obvious fact that this would practically reduce to nil the sphere of noncontentious work, and leave the rule of etiquette as rigid, and what is more, as devoid of a common sense basis as before.

For what, Sir, is the origin and ground of this self-same rule of etiquette? In default of any historical answer to this question, I would suggest that it came into being when the respective provinces of barristers and solicitors were defined, and that it merely put into formal recognised shape the honourable understanding which was then known to regulate and limit the sphere of the upper branch of the profession.

In days told of by old Dr. Cowell, the attorney's functions chiefly consisted of getting up the evidence or ascertaining the facts on which counsel founded his pleadings or conveyance. This a barrister could not do himself, having no staff of clerks and being unable to absent himself from the Courts. Now, it seems most natural and convenient that some agreement should have been come to between barristers and attorneys in process of time, that as the latter had to keep large numbers of clerks for the peculiar work they had to undertake, they should not be exposed to the risk of competi tion from the Bar. On the other hand the Bar doubtless stipulated that they should have the final settling of drafts and pleadings, and the exclusive right of advocacy.

If this view be correct, it is obvious at a glance how one side of the bargain has been infringed, while the other has not only been honourably adhered to but has even been strained so as to exclude barristers from work which neither common sense nor their own conscience, nor the public good, can suggest the smallest reason for their having abnegated.

The existence of such a perverted view of the rule of etiquette as generally prevailed a fortnight ago, is a strange reflection on those who are responsible for the continuance of an error which enured to the benefit of the leaders of the Bar and the solicitors alone, and kept the barrister without solicitor interest from all chances of making a practice.

I rejoice, Sir, to think that PUMP COURT, which par excellence represents the Bar, is sure to take this matter up and carry it through. There are various points which must be looked to if the new practice is to come into general vogue. For instance, the question of conveyancing fees might at least be considered by the Bar Committee. It would be a great moral support to conveyancing counsel if the committee were authoritatively to state that a_barrister (who is paid by length only, and has no alternative ad valorem scale) should be entitled to at least as much for drafting and settling as the solicitor charges for nominally drafting-as you are aware he most rarely does it in actual fact, and did not even before the invention of ad valorem scales, i.e. 25. a folio; or, say, 10 folios for a guinea. Another point I would suggest is this. If barristers may act and advise direct, a power ought to be given to barrister trustees to charge. There is no valid reason why the exception to the general rule should be confined to solicitors. Yet, if a barrister were to exert such a power before the Bar Committee has pronounced an opinion that he may do so, he would run the risk of being boycotted by his solicitor clients. You are doubtless aware that the Law Society issued an approved form of power to solicitor trustees to charge, and thereby gave their formal sanction to the regular exercise of such a power. Let the Bar Committee do one tenth for us that the Law Society have done for solicitors, and we shall have cause to be grateful.

Yours obediently,

Oxford and Cambridge Club.

LEGAL EDUCATION.

A BARRISTER.

DEAR SIR,-Referring to my letter to you of the 22nd ult., and also to the accompanying speech on "the neglected State of the Education of Articled Clerks," delivered at the Law Students' Congress, held at Lincoln's Inn Old Hall, I quite forgot to acquaint you with the result of the voting upon my resolution. It was carried unanimously by the delegates.

I do hope you will be able to give the publicity I desire to the shocking manner in which the Incorporated Law Society are fulfilling their educational trust.

Unless the columns of your leading paper are thrown open to this the paramount grievance of the Articled Clerks of this country, our efforts towards future organisation will be rendered hopeless, and our applications for redress to the head society futile.

New Companies.

CAPEL COURT.

THE list of new investments about to be offered to the public has been considerably enlarged since my last, and many promising schemes are on foot, intended to enrich the investing public with an ever-increasing percentage. Amongst those schemes likely to be taken hold of by speculators may be mentioned the Old Albion Brewery Company, capital £50,000, in £10 shares. The objects of the company are to purchase an already established and going concern in Sheffield, and to extend and improve thereon. Considering the great rage that has existed of late for breweries, or anything belonging thereto, there is little question about the company floating, though of the merits of the scheme, at the present moment I know nothing. The North Stockton Coal Company is not, as its title would seem to indicate, an English, but an Australian company, and is started for the purpose of mining coal in the Newcastle district of New South Wales. The sum proposed to be raised is £120,000, in 1 shares. The Commercial Steamship Company is another added to the already congested list of shipping companies. The capital asked for is £107,650, in shares of £10 each. The articles of association do not say as to whether this odd amount is required for the purchase of a going concern; but I should presume that it is so, as they state their intention of purchasing merchandise suitable for freighting any vessels belonging to, or which the company may be interested in, and to carry on any other businesses which can be conveniently carried on with the Commercial Steamship Company. The Koko Maricopas Company, with a capital of £5,000, in £1 shares, is registered for the purpose of purchasing a hair-wash. The promoters will, doubtless, keep this invaluable specific to themselves, and its registration only comes before us as the necessary legal consequences of going to Somerset House. The Electrical Purification Association, with a capital of £15,000, in shares of £1 each, is registered for the purpose of securing certain patents relating to improved means of oxydising and decomposing by electrical action organic matter and inorganic salts in sewage and other liquids. This small sum will surely be rapidly subscribed when the great interests at stake are duly considered. Just think of it, the whole question of main drainage and sanitation for our big cities settled at once and for ever for the paltry outlay of £15,000 in patents! Paraguay has much land, a lot of it has at various times been given away. I, myself, have met two gentlemen, both of whom have received gifts of tracts of land from the Paraguayian Government, and one of them was closely associated with a huge scheme of emigration by means of which the unemployed were to be shipped out in large parcels, carried into the heart of Central South America, a trip by road and rail of upwards of 1,500 miles, for the small sum of, if I remember rightly, about £10 sterling, and were to receive gifts of small farms when they arrived at their destination. This tempting offer was actually refused alike by government and the governed, and the offices of the company, then situate in Queen Victoria Street, have since been closed; but I understand the gentleman who held the property, finding what a thankless lot the English were, has made his appearance in Berlin. Of course the frugal Berliners will jump at the offer. This, however, is a digression but it leads to the Paraguay Land Company, capital £120,000, in shares of £5 each, whose object is to acquire in exchange for shares of the company all or any of the land warrants issued by the Republic of Paraguay, for the lands given in discharge of the interest arrears on the loans of that Republic issued in London in 1871 and 1872. A strong first board of directors has already been selected, and doubtless when brought out the company will receive some attention from investors. An industrial investment, and one which will certainly catch on is the North of Ireland Woollen Company of £50,000, in 10 shares. In good hands and well managed, any Irish investment of this class will be popular.

The Stock and

The settlement in Consols having passed Share Market. Off satisfactorily, a better speculative feeling seems to have infused itself into the House, which has resulted in a general improvement, not only in

the tone but in the bulk of the business done since last week. Foreign Governmental Securities remain steady, and many of them which looked uneasy at the commencement of the week have recovered lost ground, and are going strong and well. The principal speculation has been in Greek bonds, which have risen 1 during the last two days. Egyptian Unified, the Dairi and Domain are higher, as are both Spanish and Imperial Ottoman. A further issue of £1,200,000 on behalf the Argentine Republic at 6 per cent. is being asked for, Messrs. C. de Murietta and Co. being the agents for the loan.

Home

The weekly traffic returns in the heavy lines have materially assisted in making all Railways. the Midland and Northern Stocks and Shares in increased demand. Considerable advances have to be recorded in Midland, London and North-Western, and Caledonians. Holders of dividend lines are commencing to speculate as to what is likely to be the amount of interest paid upon their holdings. In the case of the London and North-Western, 6 to 6 per cent. is reckoned upon; Midland, 4; Great Western, 41, and North-Eastern, 54. Should these figures prove accurate, then dividends will have improved in each case and will lend considerable confirma. tion to the statement that trade is rapidly improving in the North.

American Rails.

Without any very marked advances in prices, American Rails remain remarkably firm, and for the time being, at any rate, it is evident that the bulls are getting all the best of the business. Nor is it likely they will get knocked out just directly, seeing that several of them who have for months past been heavy "bears" have changed sides and are now voting strongly with the majority. Amongst the lines which have benefited by the rise are Northern Pacifics, Central Pacifics, Philadelphia and Reading, Denvers, and Lake Shores, though Union Pacifics and New York Centrals both show a slight loss.

Railway.

Once more this line has proved its supeThe Mexican riority to rumours adverse and threatening, and to-day is quoted at something like old quotations. That bugbear so often held over the heads of the shareholders-an opposition line-seems still unable to make himself a substantial and animated figure. As long as he is a bugbear only he does very well to rig the market with, but attempt to localise him, to give shape and make, or to get him to explain his nature, characteristics, and object in life, and he disappears into thin air, and is not heard of again until the market gets thoroughly settled and active speculation almost dead; then he wire pullers reproduce this dear little ghost-opposition-and nervous holders, forgetting they have seen the same bogey at least a dozen times before, clear out in a fright, and Mr. Manoover, the manipulator secures a few points by the ruse.

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. 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.

Mr.

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.

VOL. VII.

PUMP COURT.

The Temple Newspaper and Review.

CURRENTE CALAMO.

De Lege; de Omnibus Rebus et Quibusdam Aliis.

THE following are the arrangements made by the judges of the Queen's Bench Division for transacting the business. arising in that division during the Michaelmas sittings, which begin on October 24, viz. :-Four Divisional Courts will sit at the commencement of the sittings, the first of which, in Queen's Bench Court I., will take ex parte motions and opposed motions on the civil side on Mondays and Tuesdays, and on the other days in the week the new trial paper will be taken. The second Court, in the Lord Chief Justice's Court, will take ex parte motions on the Crown side and Crown paper on Mondays and Tuesdays; on Wednesdays and Thursdays, ex parte and opposed motions on the civil side; and on Fridays and Saturdays, ex parte motions on the Crown side, Crown paper and Revenue paper. The third Court will sit in Queen's Bench Court VI., and will take the special paper on Mondays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays; and on Fridays and Saturdays ex parte and opposed motions on the civil side. The fourth Court will sit in Queen's Bench Court VII., and will take the Crown paper every day in the week. Six Courts will sit for the trial of actions on Thursday, October 25, and for the first two weeks of the sittings; one for the trial of London special juries, two for Middlesex special juries, two for London and Middlesex common juries, and one for withoutjury actions.

A BILL, of sixteen clauses, intended to improve the law with regard to the levying of distress for rent and execution of small debts in Dublin, has had a wonderful, perhaps unprecedented, legislative history. It has been brought into the House, been read a second time, and gone through the committee, without there being a single word of explanation, or an argument uttered for or against it. Mr. W. Murphy, who has had the entire charge of the Bill, had his duties limited to merely raising his hat when the Bill, in due course, was reached on the list of orders for the day.

A BILL to amend the law relating to law agents practising in Scotland has been prepared and brought in by Mr. Caldwell, Mr. James Campbell, Mr. M'Lagan, and Mr. Mackintosh. It provides that any person who, either by himself or in conjunction with others, whether law agents or not, wilfully and falsely pretends to be, or takes or uses

No. 91.

any name, title, addition, or description implying that he is duly qualified to act as a law agent or notary public, or that he is recognised by law as so qualified, or who, not being so qualified, gives or offers to give, legal advice for any pecuniary fee or other reward or recompense, or draws or frames, or offers to draw or frame, any deed, instrument, or writing, for any pecuniary fee or other reward or recompense, shall be guilty of an offence under this Act, and be liable to a penalty not exceeding the sum of ten pounds for the first offence, together with the costs of prosecution and conviction; and any such person who shall be guilty of a second or subsequent offence or offences under this section shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding twenty pounds, with the alternative, in case of failure in payment of such penalty, of imprisonment for a period not exceeding one month for each such subsequent offence, in addition to the costs of prosecution and conviction as aforesaid. No costs, fee, reward, or disbursement on account of or in relation to any act or proceeding done or taken by any person who acts as a law agent or notary public without being duly qualified so to act, or who, not being so qualified gives legal advice, or frames or draws any deed, shall be recoverable in any action, suit, or matter by any person or persons whomsoever. Any offence under the Act may be prosecuted before the sheriff, either of the county in which the offence is committed, or of the county in which the offender resides, by the procurator-fiscal, or by any incorporated society of law agents, or by any enrolled law agent, in manner provided by the Summary Jurisdiction (Scotland) Acts, 1864 and 1881. The admission and enrolment of notaries public is to proceed according to the present law and practice, except as provided, viz. :-That the First Division of the Court of Session shall remit the applicant's petition to the examiners appointed in virtue of the eighth section of the first-recited Act to take trial of the petitioner's qualifications by examining him on all legal subjects on which applicants for admission as law agents are examined, with the exception of forms of process and Court procedure, and the report of such examiners shall be made to the said First Division of the Court. Nothing in the Act is to be held to apply to, or to affect any of, the privileges at present possessed or enjoyed by the Faculty of Advocates in Scotland, or any member therecf.

HAS any one noted that in the debate, on Monday night in the Upper House, on the subject of the so-called inter ference of Peers at elections, Lord Salisbury limits the right of the Commons to the passing of money measures, and the election of the Executive? "I venture to prophesy," said his lordship, "that your lordships will at all times express your opinions as to who are the best persons to frame financial laws and to select the rulers who will rule in the country."

THE latest explanation of Mr. C. J. Rhodes's contribution to Mr. Parnell's Home Rule fund is that Mr. Rhodes is in training for a Home Rule seat in the House of Commons. As an M.P., says the Financial News, Mr. Rhodes could do great things for the Diamond Ring, and it rests with Mr. Parnell to secure him this honour.

OUR contemporary, who does not meddle with politics, would have us believe that the skill of the successful promoter, and the plans of the diamond manipulator, have more to do with the investment than the grand consideration of Imperial Federation.

WE are glad to know this. We yield to no one in our desire for Imperial Federation, and we have never spared efforts to help the cause. But it is a slander on the Colonies to suggest, as Mr. Rhodes has done, any connection between their grand aspirations for Imperial Brotherhood and the blood-stained record of Irish Fenianism. The Imperial Federationists do not require Mr. Rhodes's help, and they see no chance of working out their glorious idea if it is to be mixed up with a movement which is so largely based on crime. Crime!!! Cannot some one find out another name for the cowardly assassination of public servants for performing their duty, and so not still further degrade ordinary criminals by classifying them with such wretches.

THERE has been a recent decision under the Merchandise Marks Act that "refined" lard, adulterated with cottonseed oil, or beef fat, cannot be imported and sold in this country unless it is so labelled as to indicate its composition honestly and truthfully. This decision has attracted much attention in America, and is declared to be infinitely more fair and reasonable than the decrees of some European States, which entirely exclude certain American products, on the ground of unwholesomeness. The manufacturers and exporters of lard cannot complain of this decision, if, as they contend it is, their mixture is perfectly wholesome and palatable, and, for the same reason, this construction of the Act will not injure their trade.

A CASE of importance to church restorers was recently decided by Mr. Justice Day. It related to the ownership of a pew, and the question to be decided was whether a pew which had been in the uninterrupted possession of one family during one hundred and thirty years, could be removed under the authority of a faculty? The Hallidays (the plaintiff's family) have occupied a house in the parish of Warminster from 1644. In the vestry-books there is an

entry under the date 1680:-"Received from E. Halliday for the ground on which he has built his seat, 5s." The pew, which was probably erected on the site of the seat was considered by the family as an appendage to the house, and in the year 1832 it was conveyed with the house. It was let with the house, and the Hallidays kept a key of the pew, and it was used exclusively by them. There was accordingly a user of ten times the length of the period prescribed by law, and it might be supposed that the possession of the pew was safe under the Prescription Act. But Mr. Justice Day, who tried the action, held that the Prescription Act did not apply to the case. His lordship held that the original title was most irregular, as it was simply a permission given by the churchwardens, and there was nothing to show connection between the pew and the mansionhouse, or that one was an appurtenant of the other. The churchwardens, accordingly, obtained judgment with costs. The case shows that the Courts will not hesitate to inquire into the origin of an alleged right; as there was no evidence of a special faculty, the entry of 1680 was considered as valueless.

Ar the Liverpool County Court, on Tuesday, Mr. J. Bertram Jones, who appeared for the defendant in a local case, called the judge's attention to some letters which had been written by a Mr. Joseph Corner, an accountant, to the effect that if the account were not paid, "my instructions are to take legal proceedings." He submitted that this might bring Mr. Corner within the Solicitors Acts, and make him liable to penalties. As the Law Society was taking up the matter of accountants acting as solicitors, he would be glad to have an expression of opinion from the Court. His Honour said the expression referred to was one which a person in Corner's position had no right to use. As, however, he had not acted in the matter, he could give no expression further upon it. He should be happy to do so when occasion arose.

THE following is important to valuers who have been going through life with the comfortable feeling that they were not responsible for the grossest errors in valuation. In 1883 an application was made to solicitors in Nottingham for a loan of £2,000, They instructed a firm of

auctioneers and valuers to examine the premises offered as security, and received a report in which the valuation was put down at £3,000. On the faith of that advice a sum of £2,045 was lent. After a time, as the borrower was in arrears with his interest, the property was put up for auction. The highest bid was £680. Afterwards the property was valued by two experts. One said it was worth £1,200, and the other £1,100. The judge thought there was no reasonable cause for giving the value as £3,000, and the statement seemed to be reckless. There was no ground for supposing that the defendants were in any way gainers by giving so high a valuation, but they were held by his lordship as liable for negligence. Judgment was, therefore, given for the plaintiffs, with an order for an inquiry into the damages sustained through the negligence and misrepresentation of the defendants.

AT the Colchester County Court, on Wednesday, in the course of the hearing of an appeal against the registrar's taxation of costs, counsel raised the question whether, under the construction of the scale by the registrar, a solicitor was compelled to personally perform the work involved in County Court procedure, or lose the fees. He contended that, by the universal practice, a solicitor could delegate his work to a clerk, with the exception of advocacy. Otherwise, he pointed out that a solicitor would be personally compelled to serve a summons on witness. He quoted two instances within his Honour's jurisdiction where the clerk's fees had been allowed; but his Honour refused to allow the learned counsel to cite the practice of other Courts.-The judge: The managing clerk and other clerks might be unable

to attend, and the little office boy sent to watch an action.— For the appellant it was urged that the power of the County kind. The point was also raised as to the interpretation of Court was sufficiently strong to put down an abuse of that the term "scientific" as to witnesses, appellant's counsel contending that, within the meaning of the rule, persons called to give evidence as to experience were scientific witnesses. His Honour : I know that the word "scientific " is derived from scio, "I know," and that is all I know. (Laughter.) His Honour further defined accountants as coming under the term "scientific," but many of them, he said, could neither "count" nor account." (Renewed laughter.) After considerable argument, the judge, in giving his decision as to the disallowance of the fees to the managing clerk, observed that it had been contended that, as in two of his Courts an allowance had been made to managing clerks, this should also be done in the present instance. He could not, however, take that as a precedent, holding that if the framers of the Court rules had intended that the

clerk should be entitled to an allowance, they would have so expressed their intention, adding to the word "solicitor" "or clerk." He thought the registrar was quite right in strictly adhering to the wording of the schedule in disallowing the managing clerk's charges in this case.

A STRANGE legislative omission has been discovered during the hearing of a case at Aston, Birmingham Police Court. A man was summoned under the Wild Birds' Protection Act for having a thrush in his possession during the close season. The Bench were compelled to dismiss the case, as neither blackbirds nor thrushes are included in the schedule of birds protected by the Act. The magistrate observed that it was a remarkable fact that two of the most charming of English birds were omitted, and expressed the hope that they would be speedily included in the Act.

A REMARKABLE case was that of Jeffe and Son v. Darando, where the plaintiffs applied for the arrest of the defendant, or to have him held to bail under the Debtors Act of 1869. It appeared that the plaintiffs had brought an action to recover a sum of over £2,000 for goods sold and delivered last year, but the defendant resided, and carried on business, in San Salvador, Central America, and was about to start for there in a few days, and, if he was allowed to go, the plaintiffs would have very little chance of bringing their action. In an affidavit by the solicitor to the plaintiffs, it was stated that the goods forming the subject of the action were ordered by letters written by the defendant; that neither

the plaintiffs nor any person in their employ could prove the defendant's handwriting, therefore the ordering of the goods could be proved by the defendant alone, and his absence from England would absolutely prejudice the plaintiffs' action. Mr. Justice Manisty, however, thought the materials before the Court were not sufficient to justify such a serious step as arresting the defendant. The plaintiffs could get over the difficulty with regard to proving the handwriting by examining witnesses in America on commission; and Mr. Justice Wills said it was too serious a thing to arrest and detain a man in order to prove his handwriting.

AN application for the issue of a summons against the Committee of Management of the Royal Liver Friendly Society was recently made at the Liverpool Police Court. The proceedings were taken under 38 & 39 Vict., c. 60, sect. 16, and it was stated that at the end of 1886 the management fund had proved insufficient to meet the expenses of management by the sum of over £5,000, and that the benefit fund had been improperly charged this amount, although the rules had provided, if the management fund was insufficient, it must be made up by a special levy among the members. In 1887 the deficiency, instead of being made up in this manner, had been heavily increased, and this also had been improperly charged. Some correspondence had passed between the Chief Registrar and the secretary on the subject, the latter ultimately stating that the committee would undertake that the total management fund should be paid off before the end of the year. The summons was granted, a hope being expressed that some arrangement would, however, be come to.

THE attention of directors of industrial life offices should be drawn to a case lately before the Knutsford Quarter Sessions. An old woman, a hawker, had been insured in different industrial life offices no less than thirteen times for a sum reaching in the total £189. One of the companies claimed that this system of insurance was a complete gambling system, and it got judgment on the ground that there was nothing to show what age the assured was. Wholesale life assurance like this could not be carried out if the companies were compelled to furnish themselves with legal documentary evidence of the age.

THE Grand Committee of Law met on Thursday, and further considered the Employers' Liability Act Amendment Bill. Mr. Fenwick objected to the provision in Clause 4, which provides that notice of action shall be given within three months. The Home Secretary contended that it was not unusual to require notice of action. After a long discussion, the clause was adopted by 23 votes to 5. Mr. Fenwick moved on Clause 6 an amendment, making it competent to bring an action against an employer in the County Court, if the compensation claimed exceeded £100, or in any case by consent. He explained that the object was to prevent workmen being harassed by the removal of the cause from court to court. Sir Edward Clarke said no advantage would be gained by the adoption of the amendmend, but it was carried by 15 votes to 13.

MR. E. W. PARKES, the solicitor who has just been sentenced to penal servitude for seven years, was not long since apparently a most prosperous man, who gave good dinners, and, generally speaking, entertained his friends in the most hospitable manner. He kept a carriage, lived in a handsome house, and was thought to be as honest as he was genial. He was the promoter of a company which was formed to acquire a patent for taking photographs in a new way, and, it is said that, burning his fingers in this enterprise, he was tempted to appropriate money belonging to his clients.

MR. G. W. CHURCHLEY, solicitor, of Broad Court, Bow Street, and a Mr. Krott were summoned before Sir J. Ingham at Bow Street, to answer the charge of conspiracy to obtain by fraud certain property belonging to Mr. Moore. The defendant Krott did not appear, and was said to be under medical treatment. After some evidence the case was adjourned.

THE Board of Inland Revenue give notice that, except as hereinafter mentioned, they are prepared to remit the penalty, or penalties, payable on stamping instruments executed prior to the passing of the Customs and Inland Revenue Act, 1888 (16th May, 1888), which are presented to the Board for the purpose at any time before the 1st day of January, 1889. This concession, of course, does not extend to instruments which cannot in any case legally be stamped after execution, or which cannot legally be stamped after execution without payment of a fixed statutory penalty, nor is it to apply to instruments in respect of which personal penalties have been incurred, or to articles of clerkship. The Board reserve to themselves the right of refusing the benefit of this concession in any case in which it may appear that the instrument is not voluntarily presented for stamping, but is presented in consequence of other circumstances, such as, for instance, the necessity of producing the instru ment in Court, or of making good the title to property at the requisition of a purchaser. In the consideration of applications for relief from penalties payable on stamping instruments executed prior to the passing of the Customs and Inland Revenue Act, 1888, and not presented for the purpose until after the 1st of January next, the Board will have regard to the fact that the liability to the payment of such penalties might have been avoided had advantage been taken of the arrangement hereby notified.

WE wish to call the attenuon of the influential readers of PUMP COURT, especially those of them that play so im portant a part in the making of our laws, to the report of the Inspector of Prisons, read at the Salford Hundred Sessions, on Monday, as to the accommodation (!?) provided for prisoners awaiting trial-that is, for persons who might turn out to be innocent. The report showed that the two places distinguished by the greatest disregard of humanity and decency were the petty sessional courts of Hull and Manchester (City). At the Manchester City Court there were two rooms for men, about 21 ft. by 15 ft., and two for women, about 15 ft. by 14 ft. These were used for prisoners awaiting hearing. As many as thirty men were said to have been placed at once in each of the larger rooms, and twenty women in each of the smaller rooms. After the hearing is over, the prisoners sentenced, or under remand, are conducted to five rooms in the basement. There is a sixth, but it is so dark that it is never used. Three of these were used for men, and the two smaller ones for women. Those used for men are about 18 ft. by 15 ft., those for women about 18 ft. by 8 ft., and they are faced with open bars. "In one of these," says the Inspector, "I saw thirty-seven men huddled together, some sitting, others standing or leaning against the iron bars, looking out talking and muttering words to one another that sounded very like oaths. In the middle of this crowd was a soldier in uniform, standing as far from the others as he could. In the women's room there were eighteen associated. The whole scene reminded one of the barred cages at the Zoological Society's gardens occupied by the lions and tigers, with the difference that the wild animals were far better off. As many as forty or fifty men, and from twenty to thirty women, occupy these rooms at a time, whilst three other rooms close by were not occupied at all." The Court, in dealing with the report, said it was certainly a remarkable circumstance that some of the largest and wealthiest towns in the kingdom, including two cities, should be thus discreditably distinguished, Manchester, Liverpool, Hull, and Sheffield being the worst of all. If increased and adequate. powers were given to the Secretary of State, such scandals would be impossible. It was lamentable to think that such things as the worst of those above discussed should exist at the present day, and that for at least two years the attention of the local authorities should have been pointedly drawn to them with no result. The Court referred the matter to the Assize Courts Committee.

A YOUNG barrister, who hopes to practise in the Chancery Division, had to argue his first case, last week, in Court No. 3. His friends, in exhibiting the customary solicitude, enquired whether the ordeal of making a speech had proved em"the barrassing to him. "Oh! not at all," was his reply, whole thing was so chitty-chatty, don't you know; I never got a chance of making any speech."