32 Tables as to Enfranchisements. their having now to serve warrants and notices on solicitors residing perhaps in London, Westminster, and Southwark, instead of the services being all effected in the Six Clerks' Office. I am sorry also to see that the parties and solicitors are doomed to a like surprise and disappointment by the recent orders issued in Lunacy. The great complaint there, was of enormous fees paid at the office of Clerk of the Custodies, which office is now done away with, but, alas! not the fees; for I observe the 7th order directs that the like fees are to be paid to the Clerks of the Commissioners as were heretofore received in the office of Clerk of the Custodies. So much for the benefit gained by the recent orders; but I have already trespassed at too great length, and will conclude by expressing a hope that some steps may be speedily taken to remove the evils so generally complained of. Your's, truly, 15th Nov., 1842. R. P. TABLES AS TO ENFRANCHISEMENTS, PUBLISHED BY THE COPYHOLD COMMISSION. THE Copyhold commissioners have recently made the following publication. The copyhold commississioners find very many parties anxious to enfranchise or commute copyhold incidents, but unable to make up their minds as to proper terms on which to base their bargain. The commissioners are hardly yet in a position to give distinct and positive opinions on the precise value of the respective rights of lord and tenant, in answer to all the applications made to them from different parts of the Kingdom, and from manors very differently circumstanced. Under these circumstances they think it may be desirable to print the following tables, as likely to assist persons anxious to avail themselves of the act for enfranchising or commuting copyholds, but doubtful as to the terms they ought to propose or agree to. The tables are so arranged as to indicate the separate value of each copyhold incident, and have been compiled, as far as they go, from authentic sources of information. The commissioners have not felt themselves justified in giving the names of manors or parties, but the terms given may be relied on as having been acted on in enfranchisements made previous to the existence of the commission. The commissioners are fully aware that the information which they have here given is incomplete. They propose therefore, hereafter to arrange and publish the additional materials which are still coming into their hands. In the case of quit rents, arbitrary fines, and heriots, the following tables may perhaps be found generally useful. There are cases of copyholds paying small fines certain, in which the incidents have little or no value, and in which therefore the sum paid on enfranchisement is obviously the consideration for the mere change of tenure. Two years' purchase of the land has been usually given in many cases in the Southern Counties of England. TABLE I., Relates to the terms on which lands subject to quit rents, were enfranchised. We need not give it at length. 66 It appears, (say the commissioners) that in thirty-five cases, twenty-five years were taken; but in some cases a higher average was taken, never exceeding thirty years, and in one case twenty years only was taken. We extract TABLE II. TERMS ON WHICH COPYHOLDS OF INHERITANCE WERE ENFRANCHISED FROM ARBITRARY FINES. We add Tables as to Enfranchisement.—Examination of Attorneys. TABLE VII. TERMS FOR WHICH LANDS WERE ENFRAN 53 NEW ORDER FOR THE EXAMINA- 2nd November, 1842, WHEREAS by an order made by the Right Honorable the Master of the Rolls, with the approbation of the Masters of the High Court of Chancery, on the 27th day of July, 1836, it was (amongst other things) ordered that every person who had not previously been admitted an attorney of the Courts of King's Bench, Common Pleas and Exchequer, or one of them, should, before he be admitted to take the oath required by the statute 2 Geo. 2, c. 23, to be taken by persons applying to act as solici tors of the High Court of Chancery, undergo an examination touching his fitness and capacity to act as a solicitor of the said Court of Chancery, and that four of the sworn clerks of the Court of Chancery and twelve solicitors of the same court, to be appointed by the Master of the Rolls on the 28th day of July, 1836, and on the first day of Easter Term in every succeeding year, be examiners for the purpose of examining and enquiring touching the fitness and capacity of every such applicant for admission as a solicitor, and that any five of the said examiners (one whereof to be one of such sworn clerks) should be competent to conduct the examination of such applicant. And whereas, by an order made by the Right Honorable the Master of the Rolls, on Friday the 15th day of April, 1842, it was ordered that Richard Mills, George Gatty, John Wainewright, and Henry Ramsay Baines, sworn clerks in Chancery, together with Edward Archer Wilde, Thos. Adlington, Robert Riddell Bayley, Michael Clayton, George Frere, Bryan Holme, William Lowe, Philip Martineau, Edward Rowland Pickering, John Teesdale, William Tooke, and Richard White, solicitors of the Court of Chancery, should be examiners until the last day of Easter Ierm, 1843, to examine every person not having been previously admitted an attorney of the Courts of Queen's Bench, Common Pleas, and Exchequer, or one of them, who should apply to be admitted a solicitor of the said Court of Chancery, touching his fitness and capacity to act as a solicitor of the said court. And whereas, by an act of parliament passed in the 5th and 6th years of the reign of her present Majesty, intituled for Abolishing certain Offices of the High 66 an act These appear to us the most useful of the Court of Chancery in England," the said tables published. office of sworn clerk was abolished. 54 Michaelmas Term Examination.-Selections from Correspondence. Now, therefore, the Master of the Rolls, with the approbation of the Masters in ordinary of the High Court of Chancery, doth hereby discharge so much of the said order of the 27th day of July, 1836, as directs that four of the sworn clerks of the said court appointed by the Master of the Rolls shall be examiners for the purpose in the said order mentioned, and doth also hereby discharge so much of the said order as directs that one of such five examiners as therein mentioned, shall be one of such sworn clerks, and doth hereby order and direct that such examination as in the said order is mentioned, touching the fitness and capacity of any person not previously admitted an attorney, as in the said order is mentioned, who shall apply to be admitted a solicitor, shall hereafter be conducted by the solicitors appointed or to be appointed examiners by the Master of the Rolls, pursuant to the said order, or any five of such solicitors. And doth hereby further order, that the said order of the 27th July, 1836, so far as the same is not hereby discharged or varied, shall be and the same is hereby in all respects confirmed. THE examination took place at the Law Society's Hall, on Friday the 18th instant. Although no less than 148 candidates gave notice of their intention to be examined, only 110 completed their credentials. We are not able at the time we go to press, to state the result, but shall do so in our next Number, and give the usual report of the questions. An improvement has been made in the mode of placing the candidates during their examination. It appears that when the number was unusually large, it was difficult, according to the former plan, to place them sufficiently apart, to prevent the papers of some of the candidates from being (no doubt unintentionally) seen by others. A sufficient number of separate tables has now been provided to prevent this inconvenience. These tables also serve the purpose of taking notes at the Lectures, which are delivered in the same Hall every Monday and Friday evening, at 8 o'clock. SELECTIONS FROM CORRESPONDENCE. NEW BANKRUPTCY ACT.-CERTIFICATE. I have examined the act attentively, and cannot find any provision made for the case of a certificate having been signed by the commissioner, and advertised before the commencement of the act, although the period necessary to wait before its final allowance by the Court of Review, does not expire till after that event. It is a point which, it seems to me, is of so much importance to bankrupts, not only that it requires immediate attention, to point in point of time, but also in point of expense, out some way of obviating the difficulty occasioned by the loose framing of the act. The sections of the act bearing upon the case are the 37th and 39th. AN OLD CORRESPONDENT. AMOUNT OF PETITIONING CREDITOR'S DEBT. By the New Bantruptcy Act, 5 & 6 Vict. c. 122, s. 9, it is enacted, "That the amount of the debt or debts of any creditor or creditors petitioning for a fiat in bankruptcy," shall be for a single person 50l., und so on. It appears to me that a question will arise, whether a party proceeding to make a trader a bankrupt under the provisions of the 1 & 2 Vict., c. 110, s. 8, will be still bound to have a debt due to him of the amount specified in that act, viz.—for a single person 1001., and so on, or whether such case would come within the 9th section of the new act, and his debt would be sufficient if of the amount of 50. I think there is room for doubt on the subhave the doubt removed. If there is any one ject, and it is important to practitioners to to whose mind the question may seem clear, I should be obliged by his enlightening me on the subject. R. W. S. HOLIDAYS AT THE ACCOUNTANT-GENERAL'S OFFICE. As the grievances and reform of the Court of Chancery are now pretty much before the profession and the public generally, allow me to point out one of the former. At the commencement of the long vacation, the Lord Chancellor made an order for the closing the Accountant-General's Office; and observe, it was to be from the 20th Aug. to the first seal before Michaelmas term. Now, there has been no such seal, to the great grief of many suitors, and the office might, if the terms of the order year. Selections from Correspondence. 55 only required by patronage-hunters, and I do hope that no measure for their establishment will be allowed to pass without the strenuous opposition of the independent members of the profession. While on the subject of fees, might I ask why a rule to plead is required to be entered, unless for the sake of the fee attached to it? Is the rule of any utility? If of none, ought it not to be abolished? for though the expense were literally obeyed, continue closed till next | perplexing unpatronised lawyers with a new and expensive jurisdiction. The general opinThe public were paid their October divi-ion of the profession is, that local courts are dends on the 13th of that month. The suitors were not paid till the 2nd of November-the first day of term-near three weeks afterwards. Why should the large sum of money which these dividends consist of lie dormant for three weeks? If the Lord Chancellor was aware of the vast injury thus created, he would have directed a seal before Michaelmas term. The expectation that there would be one, brought several persons to town, alas! in vain. Notwithstanding the long holidays at the Ac-is small, that is no reason for its being incurred. countant-General's Office, it was closed on the 5th of November, being the fourth day after it opened; and is, I declare, again closed for Lord Mayor's day, as the long faces of those who descend the stairs, re infecta, sufficiently betoken! It was said that holidays were to be done away with. AMBIDEXTERITY OF ADVOCATES. P. S. A gentleman of some standing at the Chancery bar has a case laid before him to advise upon. He gives his opinion that the line of conduct complained of is a very flagrant one, and he would advise a bill to be filed forthwith. He is then instructed to draw the bill, which he declines doing, on the ground that he has a press of business, and cannot give that attention to the case which it deserves. The papers therefore, with this gentleman's opinion, are laid before another barrister to draw the necessary bill; that done, the case comes on for hearing, when the gentleman first consulted, gets up in Court as the advocate of the other party. Is this consistent with the honour and dignity of the bar? [The barrister has no choice, if a retainer has not been given by the first client. This practice has long been settled. ED.] LOCAL COURTS.--ENORMOUS FEES. The extraordinary schedule of fees annexed to the Chancery Orders of October has called general attention to the subject of the expences of conducting the administration of justice in this country, and to the impropriety of their being borne by the suitors. As last session it was proposed to establish local courts throughont the country, and as the system then suggested would have been of no benefit to any except the numerous parties who would have received pensions and salaries under it, while it would have operated most materially to the disadvantage of the profession, I hope you will watch vigilantly the progress of any simi I hope that ere long a plaintiff or defendant will only have to pay his counsel and solicitor, and that all other judicial expences will be LEGALIS. borne by the state. INSOLVENCY.-NEW ACT. How are the following words in 5 & 6 Vict., c. 116, (the New Insolvent Act,) to be understood, viz." That if any person, not being a trader, within the meaning of the statutes now in force relating to bankrupts?" The New Bankrupt Act, 5 & 6 Vict., c. 122, was not then passed. Are the traders created by that act within the construction of the Insolvent act? A READER. EXAMINATION OF COPYHOLD TITLE. Is it usual for the purchaser of copyhold property to examine the abstract with the court rolls as well as with the surrenders, &c. in the vendor's possession? And what charge do stewards of manors make for permitting such inspection? Is it necessary for all wills and other documents (not surrenders or admittances) to be entered on the court rolls; and how has the purchaser, without an examination of the rolls, an opportunity of knowing that they are so entered? Is it usual in all cases, or only where the property is considerable, to have a deed of covenants for title, &c. prepared; and who furnishes the steward of the manor with the requisite information for preparing the surrender and admittance, and entering the same on the rolls? Is the completion of a purchase usually settled at the next general court, or at the office of the vendor's solicitor? and, if the former, do the attorneys of both parties usually attend; and what is necessary to be observed or done on such completion? All the works on the subject I have access to do not contain any hints on the method of conducting the practical part of a copyhold purchase or mortgage. AN ATTORNEY'S CLERK. ! lar measure through parliament in the next [See Mr. Rouse's Copyhold Practice.-ED. session. I would suggest that many reductions ought to be made in the fees payable at common law, particularly in actions under 20., and surely such deduction ought to be made, and the COPARCENERS.-SURVIVORSHIP. VOL. 24, p. 428. On reference to the act 3 & 4 W. 4, c. 106, effect tried, before burthening suitors and s. 2, it will be found that D.'s pedigree need 56 Selections from Correspondence.- Attorneys to be admitted. not be traced further back than B., unless it be proved that she (B.) inherited, and even in the latter case, I presume C. would not be entitled to more than her original moiety of A.'s property, as, being real property, the succession would be per stirpes, and not per capita, D. standing in the place of B. See Co. Litt. (164 b), article Coparceners. Also if a man hath issue two daughters, and the eldest hath issue divers sonnes and divers daughters, and the youngest hath issue divers daughters, the eldest son of the eldest daughter shall only inherit, for this descent is not in capita, but all the daughters of the younger shall inherit, and the eldest son is coparcener with the daughters of the youngest, and shall have one moietie, (viz.) his mother's part," &c., &c. D., therefore, by Coke's dictum, is clearly coparcener with C., and as such is entitled to his mother's moiety, neither more nor less. In Stewart's Blackstone, Vol. II., p. 136 (208 of the original) it is laid down that "inheritances shall lineally descend to the issue of the person who last died actually seised, in infinitum," and that only on failure of issue shall the collateral branches come in. Again, in page 119 of the same valuable work (188 of the original) it is expressly declared that" there is no jus accrescendi between co-parceners," so that not even on that ground could it be claimed by C. I therefore take it as proved that D. can claim the moiety, or one equal half-part of his grandfather's estate, which B. inherited in co-parcenary with C. A CONSTANT READER. SEPARATE ESTATE OF A FEME COVERT. In answer to your correspondent Y., Vol. 24, p. 509, it will be only necessary to draw attention to two or three of the leading cases, to satisfy him of the liability of the wife's separate estate. At common law, a feme covert is, generally speaking, considered incapable of entering into any valid contract, so as to render either her estate or her person liable. Marshall v. Rutton, 8 Term Rep. 545. The maxim" equitas sequitur legem" applies fully here, for courts of equity, following the analogies of the common law, do not deem the separate property of a feme covert either liable for the payment of her general debts, or of her general personal engagements. So, if a feme covert should, during the coverture, contract debts generally, without demonstrating any intention, or doing any act indicating an intention to charge her separate estate with the payment of them, courts of equity will not enforce payment out of such separate estate, during her life. But although her separate estate will not be liable for her general engagements, it will be held liable for all debts, charges, incumbrances, and other engagements which she expressly or by impli cation, charges thereon. A feme covert being considered incapable of contracting, courts of equity look upon engagements binding her separate estate, not in the light of a contract, but rather as an appointment out of her separate estate. It appears, however, that there must be an intention of charging her estate, and this intention may be sometimes even inferred. Mr. Justice Story, in his 2d vol. on Equity Jurisprudence, comes to the following conclusion on this subjecɩ,—viz. “ If a feme covert gives a promissory note, or an acceptance, or a bond to pay her own debt, or if she joins in a bond with her husband to pay his debts, the decisions have gone the length of charging it on her separate estate, either as a contract, or as an appointment without any distinct circumstances establishing her intention." In Standford v. Marshall, 2 Atk. 69, a father by deed directed the rents and profits of his real estate to be paid to his daughters, whether sole or covert, for their separate use; they joined in bonds for money lent to their husbands, the Court (upon a bill filed by the creditor) ordered the trustees to pay the rents and profits of the real estate to the creditor. This was also well laid down in Hulme v. Tenant, 1 Bro. Ch. R. 16. In the case of Stuart v. Kirkwall, 3 Madd. 387, a married woman separated from her husband, and, having a separate estate, accepted a bill of exchange; Vice Chancellor Leach decided that her separate estate thereby became liable. In the case of Field v. Sowle, 4 Russ. 112, a feme covert having a separate property, joined her husband in a promissory note for securing money advanced to the husband; the Court decided that it was a charge on her separate estate, and that the death of the husband after the filing of the bill, but before hearing, made no difference. And in Bullpinv. Clarke, 17 Ves. 360, a feme covert having separate property, borrowed a sum of money, and gave her promissory note for the sum of 250/., with lawful interest upon demand, dated the 4th Oct. 1806; the Court ordered the payment of it out of the property to her separate use. See also Power v. Bailey, 1 B. & Beatt. 49; Wagstaff v. Smith, 9 Ves. 520; and Master v. Fuller, 4 Bro. Ch. R. 19. ATTORNEYS TO BE ADMITTED, QUEEN'S BENCH. [Continued from p. 28.] Clerk's Name and Residence. Crossland, Robert, Bolton-on-le-Moors. Cunningham, Sam., the yr., 41, Harley Street. Calver, James Charles, Kenninghall; and 11, · George Street. B. P. To whom articled, assigned, &c. James Winder, Bolton-on-le-Moors. Frederick Cutler, 16, Furnival's Iun. Daniel Calver, Kenninghall; assigned to John Henry Bolton, New Square. |