158 Coroners' Expenses.- On granting Degrees at the Legal Examination. and that several other acts and bills which the inquest (should the registrar's office even were first moved during the reign of his late be in his way back), it will in most cases be too Majesty are yet under the consideration of late to sign the register, as the office will be parliament and that in some of the said acts closed. The coroner must, therefore, make a and bills are recitals, references, and enact- second journey on purpose, perhaps fifteen or ments which in words refer to his Majesty and twenty miles, to comply with the formalities of to acts of his Majesty's reign, which recitals, the Registration Act, for which he will receive references, and enactments were proper at the no remuneration; for I contend, that the sum time when the said acts and bills were first of 6s. 8d. allowed by the Coroner's Expenses moved, but have become incorrect by reason Bill is for other duties. I am, therefore, led of the accession of our Sovereign Lady Vic-to believe that it is not generally known that toria, the Queen that now is: and it being the coroner must, on every inquest, sign the expedient to guard against any doubt which registrar's book, and therefore no remuneramay therefrom arise: it is proposed to be en-tion is provided for so troublesome a duty. acted by the Queen's most excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the lords spiritual and temporal, and commons in this present parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, That every act of this present session of parliament in which any act of parliament passed in the reign of his late Majesty shall be referred to, either by way of recital, reference, The Coroner's Expenses Bill is at present before Parliament, and allowing that the sum of 6s. 8d. extra is allowed, surely it is not sufticient to cover the extra duties imposed by that bill, and also a journey of perhaps fifteen or twenty miles, horse-hire, and expenses. Derby. A COUNTY CORONER. LEGAL EXAMINATION. enactment, or otherwise, as if his Majesty stili ON GRANTING DEGREES AT THE continued to reign, shall be taken to refer to every such last-mentioned act of parliament correctly as of the reign of his late Majesty, Sir, and that no such incorrect or mistaken refer- I entirely agree with your correspondent ence as is herein-before recited shall in any-"W. A.," in the propriety of allowing a series wise impeach or affect any act of parliament passed or to be passed in this present session of parliament, or any clause or provision thereof. CORONERS' EXPENSES.-REGIS- To the Editor of the Legal Observer. I have read with interest your remarks, and those of your correspondents, relative to the Registration Act, 6 & 7 W. 4, c. 86, and also the Coroner's Expenses Bill now before Parliament; but I submit with all deference that the principal grievance to the coroners has been overlooked. By sec. 19 of the Registration Act, it will be the duty of the coroner in every case in which an inquest shall be held on any body, to give the information required by such act to the registrar of deaths. Sect. 28 of the same act enacts, "That every person by whom the information contained in any register of birth or death under the act shall have been given, shall sign his name, description, and place of abode in the register. of degrees, according to the respective merits of those clerks who pass the examination. I think, with him, that there should be three classes. In the optime should be arranged, not only those who have answered the greatest number of questions correctly, but also those who, in answering a less number, perhaps, have shewn that they thoroughly understood the subject of such questions.-In the bene class should be arranged those who have answered next best;-and a sitis class for those who have answered sufficiently well to obtain certificates. I differ, however, with "W. A. ” in leaving it to the option of the candidates to stand for honours, (if he mean by honors, these proposed three classes). The classes above mentioned should include all who pass, and indeed be the only mode by which to pass. With regard to prizes, (which should be "Legal Works"), let the Examiners award prizes to the best and second best proficients in each branch. I think the Optime class, will be a sufficient distinction for the general course Besides, there is this advantage in the plan I propose, and which may reconcile, perhaps, those who have a respectful dread of the Satis class. A candidate may be perfect in one branch, but at fault in all the rest. He doubtlessly would be placed in the third class at all events. Now if he were to obtain a prize on some particular It therefore appears, that after the 1st of July branch, it would be satisfactory both to himself next, when the Registration Act is expected to and his friends to know that there was one come into operation, the coroner will be re-branch in which he was most perfect; and quired, on every inquest, to give the requisite information of the death of the person on whom the inquest is held, to the registrar, and sign the register. By the Coroner's Expenses Bill now before Parliament, a further allowance of 6s. 8d. on every inquest is made to the coroner (as I take it) for duties thereby imposed. Now, Sir, the coroner frequently travels out above twenty miles. On his way home from might it not also be reasonably supposed by the public that it was not from want of ability, or even attention, that he took so low a stand, but from a lack of practice in the other branches in his late master's office? With the submission of the above proposed Candidates who passed their Examination, Easter Term, 1837. mode to the consideration of the Examiners, I would beg leave merely to suggest that with respect to the questions, there have been some, particularly in the last examination, which I verily believe many gentleman, as able in the profession as the Examiners themselves, would have found it difficult to answer without reference. By the plan above submitted, not a single prize-man might be in the optime class, and this is no disadvantage. AN ARTICLED CLERK. CANDIDATES WHO PASSED THEIR EASTER TERM, 1837. Candidates' Names. Ainley, Edw. Hobson. Attorneys to whom Alfred Estlin. Charles Carter. man. John Finch. Candidates Names. ter. Flower, Edward. George, Thos. Shayle. Gorham, William. Holloway, James Tho- Arthur. by Drury. Lucas, Thomas. Marsh, Richard. Marshall, William. the Martell, Etwall He bard. Nicholas, Richard. Parkinson, John. Parsons, Edward. Corser, Henry. George Croft Vernon. John Gregory. ley. John Barber. Cottingham, Cursham, Arthur Jno. Cutler, Charles. Dolby, Jesse Hamer ton. Dunu, William. William Eaton Mous-Payne, Henry Adol Richard Parsons. Leonard Willan. Gill Mounsey. phus Septimus. Pearson, John. Pocock, George. Richardson, Robert. 160 Candidates who passed, Easter Term, 1837.—On the Burglary Bill. Candidate's Names. Roberts, Joseph, Roberts, Joseph, jun. Rodway, Rowland. Shattock, John. Simpson, William. Simpson, Palgrave. younger. Allorneys to whom ON THE PUNISHMENT FOR BUR GLARY BILL. To the Editor of The Legal Observer, ter. Richard William Welch Lea. Taylor, Benjamin the John and Willam, Taylor, Thomas. I, for one, could never approve of that law which would inflict a milder punishment on a burglar, who did not also assail your life in addition to breaking into and plundering your house; because I look upon the crime of burglary to be one of the most serious, next to murder, that can be committed against society, and I consequently consider the burglar as one whose dangerous and lawless principles are so fully developed, as one who has proved himself to be a wretch, whose removal from that society, the lawful security of which he has so greatly outraged, is imperatively required, and one who ought to be visited with the severest punishment the law can inflict, short of death. The favourite argument (full of compassion for the offender, the advocates of which seem altogether to forget the sacred right of the public to the protection of the law;)-the favourite argument in favour of a milder punishment being inflicted in cases of burglary without violence, is, that an inducement is thereby held out to the burglar to temper his crime with kindness! Such an argument, I contend, is one of a most dangerous tendency. In the first place, it positively requires the commission of two distinct, but enormous crimes; vis. robbery, and the endangering of one's life, before the robber can be adequately punished; and, in the second place, it absurdly supposes that because the burglar may not have offered violence in one instance, he will not in another. But I would ask, why was it that the burglar did not murder as well as rob you? Was it a humane feeling towards you which restrained his hand? Was it that he was aware that a milder punishment awaited him in case of detection? Was it not rather because plunder, and not murder, was his principal object, which he accomplished without any opposition, wherefore violence was unnecessary? Instead therefore, of at once giving the culprit credit for humanity in his criminal career, we should rather ask ourselves, whether, had he been resisted, he would have behaved in the same On the Burglary Bill. lenient manner? or whether he would not have used any degree of violence sooner than be defeated or captured. 161 retreat, or call in aid your pistols, and use personal violence and intimidation,' whereby you will forfeit the benefit of the mild provisions of that act by which you are entitled to the mitigated sentence now passed upon you. In conclusion, I would say a word with especial reference to the probable case of you or such characters committing robberies on the person, or at the dwellings of, old ladies or other defenceless individuals; and from what I have already said, I hope in such cases you will see the utter absurdity (not for their sakes, but for your own,) and how unnecessary it is, that you should use violence; they-poor, frightened, helpless creatures-will gladly give up all they have, with which you will quietly escape, and in case of detection, you will experience the benefit of observing my advice, in the mildness of the sentence to which you will What merit is there in the conduct of the wretch who makes a nocturnal entry into your house, and, finding its inmates overawed by his very presence, or perhaps perfectly defenceless-as defenceless as sleep, the image of death, could make them ;-what merit to be entitled to a mitigated punishment has such a wretch, who, under such circumstances, plunders your property, but spares your life? Last week a burglarious robbery was committed in the dwelling house of the writer, and it was either his good or bad luck not to be disturbed by the burglars, who helped themselves to whatever property they pleased to take. There was, therefore, no such violence or intimidation as, under the improved law," would deprive the offenders of a mitigated punish-be entitled !" ment; and should they become convicted under that law, one may expect the judge on passing sentence, to address the prisoners thus "You have committed an offence which, until lately, was punishable by transportation for life, but I must inform you that by virtue of a recent act of parliament, you will escape with a comparatively light punishment, viz. five years imprisonment. Now, prisoners, you will observe that you are entitled to this mitigated punishment in consequence of the mode in which you committed the burglary; in which there was so much suaviter, (you know best whether there lurked much fortiter in re); you were so humane, (as no one opposed you) to break into the house, and steal the property, without murdering or otherwise grossly illtreating the owner! Bear that in mind, as I am anxious that persons of your character should be generally acquainted with the provisions of the act to which I have alluded, in order that you may carry out its spirit into operation, by which means, in time, we may have a very humane and gentlemanly race of highwaymen and burglars. Bear in mind, I repeat, the importance which the legislature attaches to the mode of committing a burglary, | the observance of which will be of so much benefit to you, after the expiration of your five years of imprisonment; for I cannot suppose that imprisonment will purify your morals; I cannot indulge the hope that you will be discharged reformed characters, and abandon the practice of robbing, &c-Mind, therefore, in any future enterprise of this description, whatever part of the country you may visit,mind, I say, that you use no violence or intimidation to the party whom you may rob, either in his house or on the highway. You will doubtless go in numbers, and armed, but don't produce your pistols, as that might be considered 'intimidation; rather use some such language as this, 'My dear sir, or dear madam, favour us with your money, &c;' but should anything like resistance be offered, should the victim be bold enough even to say, 'I wish you may get it,' then, of course, it will be for you to determine whether you will take nothing by your motion,' and quietly With regard to the very great uncertainty which it has been supposed would be removed by defining the beginning and end of night, and which has the "ppearance of an improvement, I would observe that the alteration, to be good for anything, should have abolished the present subtle definition of the crime of burglary, in order to constitute which, the offence must be done in the night, or, under the " improved law," between nine in the evening and six in the morning. In the name of common sense, why should not the crime (as is the intent) be the same, whether cominitted ten minutes before or ten minutes after nine in the evening-at half-past six in the morning, or half past five? How is the very great uncertainty removed by the "improved law," "when the burglary is not discovered until after day light," say ten o'clock in the day? Might not it be as uncertain as ever whether the burglary was committed before six or after? I therefore say, let housebreaking be burglary, (in accordance with the etymology of the word,) whether done in the day or the night; and then, but not otherwise, you will effectually remove the very great uncertainty which it is the object of the "improved law," to get rid of. A man can always prove that his house has been forcibly entered, though possibly he could not prove whether the entry was effecte during the night, according to the legal defi nition of that portion of time. It is considered that a nocturnal breaking open of your house, is a more serious offence than if done in the day. So it may be; but, surely, both offences are as atrocious as they well can be, and should be punished with equal severity. The day housebreaker prefers the day for some good reason of his own, not because it is less criminal in the eye of the law; and, at all events, he is the most impudent of the two characters, inasmuch as he does that in broad daylight which other more modest vagabonds would do in the dark. But wherefore should it be deemed essential to burglary, that it should be committed in the night? Why should it signify which hemisphere the sun is shining upon? What should we think of a legislator who gravely proposed that it should be essential to 162 Superior Courts: Lord Chancellor. constitute highway robbery, that it be committed in the night? To determine the nature of the crime according to whether it was light or dark, is a manifest absurdity, as the day housebreaker developes a character and principles quite as depraved as the night housebreaker, to which class he clearly belongs, and doubtless, should opportunity offer, would not hesitate to rob by night as well as by day. I suspect that those legislators who chiefly reside in the metropolis, or large towns, or, if in the country, have a house which is literally, as well as figuratively, "a castle" to reside in, and protected as such, do not sufficiently bear in mind the lonely and unprotected state of thousands of country habitations,-the solitary cottage, or farm house, where it often happens that all the property is left unprotected during the day, the occupiers having gone to their labours in the field; or it is perhaps left in the care of an old or infirm person. Is not such property more exposed to depredation in the day than in the night, when the owner and his servants have returned home, and have a chance of protecting it? Should it not be burglary, forcibly to enter and rob that house in the day time? SUPERIOR COURTS. T. P. Lord Chancellor's Court. PRACTICE IN BANKRUPTCY.—RIGHT OF MISSIONERS. unless for some sufficient cause to the contrary. There was a list of seven,-two barristers and five solicitors, for executing fiats in the united districts of Kidderminster and Stourbridge, and to them in the first instance was directed a fiat against a bankrupt of the name of Evans, residing in Kidderminster. The direction of that fit was afterwards changed to the commissioners of the Worcester list, on the ground that the majority of the commissioners of the proper district list were creditors of the bankrupt, and that the majority of the creditors resided at Worcester. The town agent of the country solicitor made the usual affidavit of these facts, upon the instructions received from the country solicitor, who did not venture on such an affidavit himself, when he had bespoke the fiat a few days before in London. The facts, besides, were not true, for only two of the seven commissioners of the Kidderminster and Stourbridge list were creditors of the bankrupt in a trifling amount; and the only creditor living at Worcester was the country solicitor himself. But it seemed to be more convenient to that solicitor to prosecute the fint at Worcester. This was only one of several instances that had lately occurred of this improper practice. Mr. Wigram and Mr. K. Parker, for the country solicitor, and Mr. J. Russel, for the town agent. The country solicitor himself, the petitioning creditor, was the largest creditor of the bankrupt, and therefore it was true that the principal creditor lived at Worcester. It was admitted, that two of the seven commissioners were disqualified, according to the orCOM-ders of the Court of 1817, by being creditors of the bankrupt, and five of the seven lived at Stourbridge, which was seven miles from Kidderminster. One of the commissioners was interested in supporting a deed, which it would be for the benefit of the estate to set aside. There was nothing in the Act of Parliament rendering it imperative to direct a fat to any particular commissioners, and the directing of it was always to be governed by circumstances, and by ascertaining what was most beneficial for the estate. The town agent was, at all events, free from all blame. They cited the order of Court of the 25th of July, and the cases Ex parte Ward,a and Ex parte Hill. A fiat against a bankrupt in the country was directed to commissioners, not in the list for the district within which the bankrupt traded, on the ground that the commissioners in that list, were creditors of the bankrupt, which was not the fact. The Court superseded that fiat, and ordered another to be issued, directed to the proper district list of commissioners. This was a complaint on behalf of country commissioners of bankrupt, of an irregularity on the part of a solicitor in the country and his town agent, in obtaining a fat in bankruptcy, against a trader who carried on business in The Lord Chancellor. The 14th section of Kidderminster, and became bankrupt there, to the act 1 & 2 Wm. 4, c. 56, enacted, that the be directed to commissioners of the Worces- fiats be directed to the commissioners of the ter district list, instead of those of the Kidder-district, and to no other person. It appeared minster and Stourbridge district. to him that the fiat in this case was directed Mr. Bethell said, he was instructed to state to a different list, to suit the convenience of the complaint of the commissioners of the lastmentioned list. The Court was aware that the Judges of assize, soon after the passing of the Court of Bankruptcy Act, made out for the Lord Chancellor, by his directions, lists of barristers and solicitors properly qualified for executing flats in bankruptcy in the country, within the districts in which they and the bankrupts respectively resided; and there was a clause in the act 1 & 2 W. 4, c. 56, providing, that to those only should all fiats be directed, the solicitor in the country, and that, too, on a misrepresentation of facts. He acquitted the town agent of any intention to state in his affidavit what he did not believe to be true; but he should say that he acted rather inconsistently in stating facts of which he had no knowledge, except from the instructions of the country client, and which turned a 2 Mont, & Ayr. 219. b 3 Mont. & Ayr. 56. |