Page images
[ocr errors][merged small]

suance of this act, and the mode of keeping the register, and of making the index thereof, and of any other matters incidental thereto, as may he deemed expedient, may from time to time he made, altered, or varied as follows; that is to say, as regards the registration to be made in the Inrolment Office in the Court of Chancery in England, by the Lord Chancellor, Lord Keeper, or First Lord Commissioner of the Great Seal, and the Master of the Rolls jointly; as regards the registration to be made in the General Registry Office in Edinburgh, by the Lord Clerk Register and Lords of Council and Session jointly; and as regards the registration to be made in the Court of Chancery in Ireland, by the Lord Chancellor of Ireland and Master of the Rolls in Ireland jointly, (s. 19).

No Person entitled to share in profits till registered as a Member.—That no person becoming a member of any such company or body by the transfer of any share therein, or otherwise, shall be entitled to sue for or recover any share of the profits thereof, unless and until a return of the transfer or other fact whereby he shall so become a member shall be registered pursuant to the provisions hereinbefore contained, (s. 20).

Person ceasing to be a Member to continue liable tilt Transfer, ifc. registered.—That any person ceasing to be a member of any such company or body, whether by the transfer of any share therein, or by death or otherwise, shall be considered for all purposes of liability as continuing a member of such company or body until a return of the transfer or other fact whereby he shall have so ceased to be a member shall be registered pursuant to the provisions hcrein-before contained, (s.21).

Proceedings commenced in the Nome of Officer not to be abated by his death, tyc. or by Change of Members of Company.—That no action, suit, or proceeding, whether civil or criminal, commenced either by or against any such company or body (whether in the name of one of the officers appointed to sue and be sued as aforesaid, or of some member of such company or body, in the case and in maimer aforesaid), shall be abated or prejudiced by the death or by any act of such officer or person, or by the resignation or removal of such officer, either before or after the commencement of any such action, suit, or proceeding, or by any change in the members of such company or body by the transfer of shares or otherwise, but that the same shall be continued in the name of such officer or member (as the case may be) notwithstanding such death or act, or such resignation or removal, and notwithstanding such change in the members of such company or body. (s. 22.)

Evidence of Officer or of Member of Company admissible.—That in all such actions, suits, aud other proceedings, whether civil or criminal, the evidence of any such officer as aforesaid, or of any member of such company or body, shall he admissible in the like manner as if such officer or member were not an officer or member of such company or body. (s. 23.)

Effect of Judgments against Company.— That all judgments, decrees, interlocutors, and orders obtained in any such actions, suits, or other proceedings as aforesaid against such officer or member in manner aforesaid, whether such member or officer respectively be party to such actions, suits, or proceedings, as plaintiff, pursuer, petitioner, or defendant or defender, shall have the same effect against the property and effects of such company or body, and also (to the extent herein-after mentioned) against the persons, property, and effects of the individual existiug or former members thereof respectively, as if such judgments, decrees, interlocutors, or orders had been obtained against such company or body in suits or proceedings to which all the persons liable as existing or former members of such company or body had been parties, and that execution or diligence, or executions or diligences, shall be issued thereon accordingly: Provided nevertheless, that where the extent per share of the liability of the individual members shall have been limited by any letters patent as aforesaid, no such execution or diligence shall be issued against any such individual existing and former member of such company or body as aforesaid for a greater sum than the residue, if any, of the amount for which, by virtue of such letters patent as aforesaid, such individual member shall he liable in respect of the share or shares then or theretofore held by him in the said company or body after deducting therefrom the amount, if any, which shall appear by such regibtcr as aforesaid, to have been advanced and paid in respect of such shares or any of them by himself or herself, or any previous or subsequent holder of the same shares or any of them, or the representatives of any such holder, under or by virtue of any former execution or diligence, and not repaid at the time of issuing such subsequent execution or diligence (s. 24.)

Bankruptcy of Officer of Company not to affect Company or Liabilities of Menibers.—That the bankruptcy, insolvency, or stopping payment of any officer or member of such company or body in his individual capacity shall not be construed to be the bankruptcy, insolvency, or stopping payment of such company or body: and that the property and effects of such company or body, and the persons, property, and effects of the individual members or other individual members thereof (as the case may he), shall, notwithstanding such bankruptcy, insolvency, or stopping payment, be liable to execution or diligence in the same manner as if such bankruptcy, insolvency, or stopping payment had not taken place. («. 25.)

Service of Notice on the Company.—That in all cases wherein it may be necessary for any person to serve any summons, demand, or notice, or any writ or other proceeding at law or in equity, or otherwise, upon the said company or body, service thereof respectively on the clerk of the said company or body, or by leaving the same at the head office for the time being of the said company or body, or in case such clerk of the said office shall not be found

[merged small][ocr errors]

or known, then service thereof on any agent or officer employed by the said company or hudy, or by leaving the same at the usual place of abode of such agent or officer, shall be deemed good and sufficient service of the same respectively on the said company or body. (s. 26.)

Serviceof Notice by the Company.—That in all cases wherein it may be necessary for the said company or body to give any summons, demand, or notice of any kind whatsoever to any person or corporation, under the provisions or directions contained in this act, such summons, demand, or notice may be given in writing, signed by the clerk, attorney, or solicitor for the time being of the said company or body, without being required to be under the common seal of the said company or body, (s. 27.)

Determination of Company not to prevent the trinding up of their Affairs.—That in case of the determination of such company or body, such company or body shall nevertheless be considered as subsisting, and to be in all respects subject to the provisions of this act, so long and so far as any matters relating to such company or body shall remain unsettled, to the end and intent that such company or body may do all things necessary to the winding-up of the concerns thereof, and that it may be sued and sue under the provisions of this act in respect of all matters relating to such company or body. (s. 28 )

Duration of charters of incorporation may be limited for a term. (s. 29.)

Limitations as to Exemptions to be granted to Companies by Letters Patent.—That nothing in this act contained shall authorize or be construed to authorize her Majesty, her heirs and successors, by any such letters patent, to exempt any company or body of persons associated as aforesaid from the necessity of entering into a deed of partnership, from making the return of the patent to the Enrolment Office of the Court of Chancery, from the necessity of carrying into execution the provisions of this act in respect to change of name or style of the company or body associated, in respect to the cessation, or to the addition or to the change of name of any of the individuals of the company, or to the transfer of shares and to the notices to be given thereof, or to the payment of any sum by any shareholder on account of any preferment against such company or body, or to the returns to be made to the Enrolment Ollicc of such payment, or of the repayment thereof, or from making a return to the said office of the name of the officer appointed by said company to sue and be sued on its behalf, in case of the death, resignation, or removal of the one registered, or to exempt any company or body so associated from the provisions of this act in relation to the period at which its several members shall become entitled or shall cease to share in the profits thereof, the whole as required by the provisions of this act. (s. 30.)

Act not to affect existing privileges, (s. 31.)

Notice of application for letters patent to be inserted in the London Gazette, &c. (s. 32.)



To the Editor of the Legal Observer. Sir,

Finding your columns at all times open to communications relative to the welfare of articled clerks, and pertinent to their progress in entering the profession, I beg to call your attention to a grievance which I hope soon to sec removed: viz. that the Examiners refuse to examine a minor, because one of their rules is, not to grant a certificate until the exaininant is of age. 1 experience great hardship from this rule; because, being articled to a country attorney, and now in town for my last year, being out of my articles six months before I am of age, I must go down into the country, where I shall probably lose that knowledge which I already possess, besides the expense of journeys to and fro'; and commemorating my majority before the examiners in a timid mood, instead of a joyous one in the heart of my family. My object in writing this, is to lay bare a hardship in the power of the examiners to remedy, by allowing the clerk to be examined, and retaining his certificate until he is of age.

An Old Subscriber.

[Our correspondent is mistaken. The Examiners will examine a minor, if he is nearly of age, and the circumstances of his case require it; but as they cannot certify that a minor is a fit person to act as an attorney, they cannot be expected to take the examination a considerable time before the candidate will be of age. It is impracticable to meet the convenience of every individual. Ed.]



To the Editor of the Legal Observer.

In answer to the inquiry " of Clericus," in your journal of the 21st instant, it may, periiaps, be sufficient to state, that the mere fact of a person being admitted in any one of Her Majesty's Courts of Law or Equity, does not entitle him to swear affidavits. Any person, however, on being admitted in any one Court, may have commissions in that and the other Courts to swear affidavits, (or he may be made a Master Extra in Chancery) upon production of the usual certificates and affidavits.

W. G.


Notes on the approaching Term.



We have not yet been able to procure a copy of the proposed new Table of Fees to be paid after the end of this year at the Common Law Offices. We presume it will become known in time to afford some consideration of the items, before they are finally adjudged ; for though the Fee Commissioners best know the sum total which must be raised, the practioners may be able to suggest some mode of raising it, less burdensome than another, and yet equally effectual in the result. In the majority of cases it is calamity enough that a party is driven to a court of justice: as little expence as possible should be added to the misfortune of going to law. The day must come when the suitor will be no longer charged with the old legal sinecures, and in the mean time the official fees should be reduced as much as possible, consistently with the proper despatch of business.


The new chambers for the Judges which have been built on part of the Rolls Garden, are now open; but we regret to hear from several quarters that they do not give satisfaction in regard to their arrangement and construction. The old chambers which were low, dark, and confined, have been got rid of, but it does not appear that any persons of practical knowledge were consulted on the details of the new building. We hope, however, that the objections may be removed, when the further buildings for the new Law Offices are erected.


It does not appear that any material change will take place in the mode of conducting the examination of articled clerks in the ensuing term. The course hitherto adopted seems to have answered every useful purpose; and it would be manifestly unwise to make any material alteration without good reason. All the forms and modes of proceeding, from the first to the last step, are, we believe, accurately given

in the Second Edition of the Articled Clerks' Manual, published a few weeks ago.

We understand the number of candidates for examination in Michaelmas Term, is 127. The names are of course not published, as some of the parties may not be able to complete their testimonials, or be prevented from attending. The examination will take place on or about the 16th November. The testimonials must be left with the Secretary of the Incorporated Law Society on the 9th November.


The following is the only application for readmission as a solicitor in Chancery: William Robert Simpson, No. 8, Red Lion street, Clerkeuwell.


We are informed that persons who have been examined at the Rolls, or before the Common Law Examiners, will in future be admitted in Chancery without the usual testimonials of two Barristers and a Clerk in Court.

But that where the application is made by an attorney, who has not been examined, the usual testimonials will still be required.


We cannot permit the opportunity to pass of again calling attention to the great importance of building convenient Courts for such sittings as are held in vacation. We suppose there is still no prospect of having all the Courts on one site in the centre of the metropolis. Westminster Hall must not be deserted " during the time of Term." But in Vacation the Courts might surely be congregated in one convenient spot; and 'tis manifest that the Rolls Estate is above all other places the most eligible. There, also, as we have already pointed out, the Offices connected with the business of the Courts should all be located, whereby the convenience, as well of the Officers as of the Practitioners, would be promoted, and the administration of justice , materially facilitated.

[merged small][ocr errors]


i&ing'rf iacnrfj.

[Before the Four Judges.]


Before the passing <f the Municipal Reform Act, a borough tea* situated trithin the limits of it liberty. Each had justice! and a court of iIuartrr sessions. A nete courthouse was. under the authority of a local act, built for their joint use. Ihe liberty vas to pay two-thirds, the borough one-third of the expenee, and the money was to be raised on the rates made in the liberty and in the liorough respectively. The courthouse was built with money raised by loans. When the Municipal Reform Act passed, the borough ceased to hate quarter sessions, and its prisoners were tried at the quarter sessions for the liberty, the justices for which transacted alt the business for the borough. Held, that a mandamus would lie to compel the justices of the bberty to pay the whole of the interest on the loan, by a rate levied on the whole of the district now within their jurisdiction: Held also, that under the 111 th section of the Municipal Refi.rm Act as explained by the lA2il section, the word " county" in this Cime meant "liberty," and the justices of the liberty succeeded to the jurisdiction of the justices of the borough.

This was a rule to shew cause why a mandamus should not issue to the justices of the liberty of St. Albans, commanding them to pay a sum of 26//. 17*. l0rl., to a Mr. Porter, as money due to him upon a loan made by him, upon the building of a new court house, for the borough and liberty of St. Albans. It appeared by the affidavits on which the motion was founded, that on the I4tb of Ma), 1829, an act was passed for building a new court-house, for the liberty and borough of St. Albans. At that time there was a commission of the peace for the borough, which was situated within the limits of the liberty of St. Albans, by which it was completely surrounded. The court-house was partly for the benefit of the liberty, and partly for the use of the borough. It was therefore arranged between them that the liberty should pay two-thirds of the required expence, and the borough the remaining onethird. Sessions were at that time held in and for the borough, and there were borough rates. It was provided that the expenre of the building should be charged upon the rates of the borough and of the liberty. Mr. Porter advanced money to both, and it was provided that the loan should bear interest, and the principal be repaid by instalments. The instalments and interest of the one-third were regularly paid up by the justices of the borough till the 1st of May 1836, when the Municipal Corporation Reform Act coming into force, there ceased to be any justices for the borough of St. Albans. The separate jurisdiction of the borough was discontinued, and became

merged in the liberty of St. Albans; no further borough rates were levied, nor any borough sessions held, but the justices of the liberty had jurisdiction within the borough, and held sessions for the whole place. The act directed that the lands purchased for the purpose of the building should be conveyed to and vested iu the corporation, and the ju,tices of the peace for the liberty anil the borough, and that the sad court house should be for the use of the said corporation, liberty, and borough. The house was directi d to be used for the holding of the quarter sessions of the peace for the liberty and for the borough, and for the doing of the business of the borough, and the new building was to be called the Court House of the Borongh aud Liberty of St. Albans", and a room was to be set apart for the corporation.

Sir. IV. Follett and Mr. Rylawl shewed cause against the rule.—The act under which the new court house was built, does not give the least authority for an application like the present. The two jurisdictions of the liberty and the borough are kept distinct tluoughout. The act, after mentioning the proportions in which the money raised is to be paid, speaks of the rates to be rai.-ed within the liberty and borough respectively, by the justices of the peace for the liberty and for the borough respectively assembled in quarter sessions, and separate forms of obligations are given for the two jurisdictions. By the provisions o{ the Municipal Corporation Act, the functions of the old justices of the borough were entirely destroyed, and power was given to his Majesty to assign persons for justices for every borough, and uuou the application of the town council of such borough, to grant a separate court of quarter sessions of ihe peace for the same. No such borough sessions have been granted in this case, and there is no power in any body of persons to raise this money out of the borough rates. At all events, the remedy of Mr. Porter cannot be against the justices of the liberty: the liability was separate, and the securities were separate. But then it is contended on the other side, that under the 111th section of the Municipal Corporation Act, if no quarter sessions are assigned by the Crown for the borough, the justices of the peace for the county within which the borough is situate, are to have full jurisdiction within the borough. That section declares that "after the first day of May lb"36, the justices assigned to keep the peace for the county within which any borough is situate, to which his Majesty shall not have granted a separate court of quarter sessions, shall exercise ihe jurisdiction of justices of the peaie in and for such borough, as fully as by law they and each of them can do for the county." This rule however is not directed to the'justices of the county, but of the liberty. Then it is argued that under the I42d section, this is sufficient, for that it is there declared, '• that the word ' county ' shall be construed to mean comity, riding, parts, liberty, or division." That argument cannot be admitted here, for the effect of it would be to make the inhabitants of the county liable for the payment

[ocr errors][merged small]

of the debt incurred by the borough. Such an effect would he contrary to the intention of the local act, which seems almost to have anticipated this case, by directing that the burden of repairing the building shall be borne for ever, separately, in the same way in which the expence of erecting it was borne. If the justices of the liberty should pretend to make a rate on the borough for the payment of this debt, they would subject themselves to actions for so doing. This is, in fact, an application for one distinct body to pay the debt of another, and the Court cannot enforce it. The rule must therefore be discharged.

The Attorney General and Mr. Amos, in support of the rule.—This is a mandamus to pay, not to make a rate, and the case is free from the difficulties now attempted to be raised. There were quarter sessions for the borough and also for the liberty. It was thought desirable that there should be a court house for the whole district, and there would not have been a separation of the expences, but that there was then a separation ot the jurisdictions, and therefore no one rate en old then be made over the whole. The form of the security is, "on rates raised by the laws now in being, or to be raised by any laws hereafter to be made." Some change in the authority to raise them, seems therefore to have been contemplated at the time the security was given. While the jurisdictions remained separate, of course there were separate payments. On the 1st of ftlay 1836, the separate jurisdiction ceased, and the borough then became merged in the liberty. From that time the justices for the liberty have held sessions and tried borough prisoners for offences committed within the district, which was formerly subject only to the jurisdiction of the borough justices. And there is no doubt that they have authority to do so under the 111th section, as explained by the interpretation clause in the 142d section. Otherwise they are transporting beyond the seas persons over whom they have no jurisdiction, and the expences of trying these prisoners have been paid out of funds over which they have not by law any control; and they have paid these expences by one rate over the whole liberty, in the nature of a county rate, which according to their present argument, they never could have had authority to raise. The rate can only be raised by the quarter sessions. There is a court of quarter sessions for the liberty, and the borough is now parcel of the liberty, the court of quarter sessions, therefore, has jurisdiction over both, for the county in the statute, means, for this purpose, the liberty. (Lord Denman, C. J.—I think so; but my brother I Antedate entertains at present some doubt. How do you say the rate is now to be made?) On the whole of the liberty, including the borough. They have now for other purposes one rate on the whole, and they must pay this sum out of that rate. The interest and liability were joint from the beginning, but a particular mode of payment was then adopted on account of particular circumstances. Those circumstances are now at an end, and

both districts being united under one set of justices and one jurisdiction, the payment must be made from both, as forming one entire district. The accounts of the borough novf go to the treasurer of the liberty, and all documents nf the borough now go to the clerk of the peace of the liberty, and all the business of the borough is now transacted by the borough justices. The former mode of payment was mere matter of arrangement, for the sake of convenience, and the circumstances which occasioned it being now at an end, the partyentitled to payment must not lie kept out of his money, merely on account of that arrangement being no longer in existence.

The Court took time to consider.

On the last day of the term, Lord Denman, C. J., said, we have considered this case, and we are of opinion that the rule for the mandamus must be made absolute.

Rule absolute.— The King, on the application of Porter, v. The Justices of St. Albans, T. T. 1837. K. B. F. J.

luiifl'S JJnul) prntttre Court.


A defendant in debt, having pleaded a set off, goods returned, and payment of money into Court, to an amount exceeding that claimed by the plaintiff in his particulars; but having proved at the trial only the. amount claimed, the plaintiff trill be entitled to a verdict for the difference between the two sums.

Busby had obtained a rule, calling on the defendant to shew cause why a verdict should not be entered in this cause for 11. in favour of the plaintiff. It appeared from the affidavits that the action was in debt, and the declaration contained three counts, respectively, for mate* rials supplied, for work and labour, and on an account stated; the sum claimed in each count being 12/. 12*.; and the total amount sought to be recovered, therefore, being 37/• 1fi*. The plaintiff, in his particulars, however, claimed only 20/. 15j. The defendant pleaded three pleas, which were, first, as to 10/. 3s., parcel of the sums mentioned in the declaration, a set off; secondly, as to a further sum of 8/. 3s. 6rf. goods returned j and thirdly, as to the residue, a payment of 41. 8s. 6d. into Court, thus undertaking to answer for 22/. 15*. Issue was joined on the first and second pleas, and the plaiBtitf accepted the 41. 8s. 6d. paid into Court, in satisfaction of the residue. At the trial of the cause before the Judge of the Sheriff's Court in London, the defendant proved a set-off in support of his first plea, to the amount of 81. 3*.; and in respect of his second plea, he proved that goods were returned to the amount named. The amount of the plaintiff's demand in his particulars, was thus covered ; but the plaintiff contended that he was entitled to a verdict for 21., to which extent, in addition to the amount for which it had been proved, the plaintiff had had satisfaction, the defendant, by his first plea, had undertaken to prove a set;'

« PreviousContinue »