in the course of his employment, the Master of the Rolls saying "There must come a time after a man has been suspended from work when he could not any longer be said to be acting in the course of his employment. It might be difficult to draw the line, but it was a question in each particular case." In most of the cases just cited in which the facts are given the question whether the workman was "on or in or about" the place where he was employed was an element in the case, and that element, while not raised by the actual terms of the present Act, will, it is thought, still require to be considered, as a workman, for instance, walking along a street on his way to work could hardly be said to be within the Act because of the omission of the words quoted and on the authority of some of the cases cited. Lord M'Laren, in Mackenzie v. The Coltness Iron Company, supra, said-"I think, on a fair construction, it (the Act) includes the case where he (the workman) is going to his work or returning from his work, but, of course, he must be on or about the premises, otherwise he is not within the scope of the Act of Parliament." But that opinion must be read along with what his lordship said in Menzies v. M‘Quibban, supra. If employers voluntarily provide a means of conveyance for taking workmen home, and it is in their option to take it or not, the employers are not liable in compensation for any accidents happening on the journey home (Davies v. Rhymney Iron Company, 1900, 16 T.L.R. 329). In some cases the accident is caused by what might be called an agency external to the employment. For instance, in Andrew v. Failsworth Industrial Society, 1904, 20 T.L.R. 429, a bricklayer was employed upon the construction of a building, and, while working on the scaffolding at a height of 23 feet above the ground, he was struck by lightning and killed. It was proved that the fact of the workman being at said height increased his danger. Held that the accident arose out of and in the course of his employment. In that case Falconer v. The London and Glasgow Engineering and Iron Shipbuilding Company, supra, was referred to in which Lord Trayner expressed the opinion that a workman struck by lightning while in the course of his employment would have no claim to compensation under the Act. Lord Trayner's opinion was, however, obiter, and it may be that, looking to the broad interpretation put upon the Act by decisions subsequent to the judgment in the last-named case, his view would not now be upheld. On the other hand, it might be argued that the case of Andrew did not raise the question in a pure form, and that, unless there is something in the nature of the employment which increases the risk of

being struck by lightning, Lord Trayner's dictum remains unchallenged. In Challis v. London and South-Western Railway Company, 1905, 21 T.L.R. 486, an engine driver was injured while driving his train and passing below a bridge, by a boy who intentionally threw a stone at the driver. Held that it was an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment.

It may be that, in some cases, the question whether the accident arose out of and in the course of the workman's employment falls to be considered solely a question of fact, and, in that case, there is no appeal from the decision of the arbiter (Henderson v. Corporation of Glasgow, 1900, 2 F. 1127, 8 S.L.T. 118). In that case Lord Kinnear said "I think the Sheriff is quite right in saying that it is only a question of fact, if he has treated it as a question of fact. It has occurred in several cases which have come before us that questions of law have been stated in terms of fact, and in those cases, if we had looked at nothing but the exact words of the question of law, we might have been obliged to say, 'There is nothing for us to consider.' But, then, it sometimes appears that the Sheriff or arbiter has come to his conclusion of fact upon a ground of law, because he has considered himself constrained by a construction of the statute, or by some rule which he supposed to be a rule of law, to adopt a certain construction of the facts, and, in a case of that kind, it is quite right and necessary that this Court should entertain an appeal." JAMES D. WYLLIE.

Obituary.

At Kirn, on 28th August, Mr. William Wright, Sheriff-clerk depute of Lanarkshire. The deceased official, who was over seventy years of age, had been in rather poor health of late, but continued at his duties in the County Buildings, Glasgow, until the day of his death. His experience of Commissary work, of which department he was head, extended over a period of more than forty years, and long before the office of Commissary clerk was merged in that of the Sheriff-clerk. He received his training in the office of Mr. Colin Donald, upon the death of whom the work devolved upon the Sheriff-clerk of the county (Mr. George Sellar), who appointed Mr. Wright as one of his deputes, with charge of the department. To the intricate and varied work of the department he brought to bear great judgment and intimate legal knowledge, and his opinions in this regard were highly valued by the bench and bar. Mr. Wright was a bachelor, and leaves a sister.

At Glasgow, on 31st August, Mr. Donald Fisher, solicitor, of the firm of Messrs. Logie & Fisher, Glasgow, in his eightysixth year. Mr. Fisher, who was a native of Inveraray, left

his native town when eighteen years of age, entering the office of a law agent and factor in Greenock. Later he entered the office of Sheriff Logie, who within a year assumed him as partner. Mr. Fisher was a member of several public bodies in Glasgow, and, with a few other gentlemen, was instrumental in founding the congregation of what is now known as Belhaven United Free Church. Last year the Town Council of his native town conferred the freedom of the ancient burgh on him in. recognition of his work and unremitting remembrance of the town. Up till within a week of his death he was regularly at business.

Notes from Edinburgh.

PARLIAMENT HOUSE, 31st August, 1907. SINCE the rising of the Court a remarkable change has come over the aspect of the Parliament House buildings. Outside, the square is almost impassable through the digging of trenches for a new drainage system, while within doors the stripping of roofs and gutting of apartments, especially behind the Second Division, have made such a turn-up that it would seem to be an impossibility to have things put in order for the meeting of the Court in October. Some sort of temporary roofing is talked of, however, and if it be of a thoroughly waterproof quality the several apartments may suffer no damage from the rigours of winter. A much-needed extension of the telegraph office is being pushed forward, and the new office will be ready some time before the 15th of October. Its erection has necessitated the doing away with the old hall fireplace, which was a favourite resting spot for very tired clerks, who were wont to drag their weary limbs thither, where the solace of tobacco would be sought. Everywhere inside dust and powdered plaster lie almost an inch deep, and when Lord Kinnear sat in the Vacation Court he had to make use of the new Court room, which, since its construction, has been, in a sense, regarded as a Court of last resort, for it is, of all the chambers, the most inconvenient, un-get-at-able, and cheerless.

The rolls published on first box-day show a satisfactory supply of cases pending, but, on the other hand, the number of new causes is very much lower than usual. The First Division has the large number of 99 actions pending before it, of which 7 stand in the summar roll, 74 in the short roll, 6 in the jury cause roll, while 12 "shelved" causes stand in the long roll. The Second Division has even a larger supply, there being 6 causes in the summar roll, 90 in the short roll, 6 in the jury roll, and 21 in the long roll. It is well that both Divisions, have a plethora of work, as the new papers boxed to the Inner

The

House in vacation have been far below the average. second box-day may see an increase in these, but this is scarcely likely, as the first box-day is generally the busier of the two.

In the Outer House 70 new summonses were called, and of these 20 were disposed of as being undefended at the Vacation Court. As usual, we find a very unequal allocation of the new actions, for of the 70 summonses called Lord Salvesen had 29, Lord Guthrie 14, Lord Mackenzie 10, Lord Johnston 9, and Lord Dundas 8. Lord Salvesen, besides having the largest number of new actions initiated before him, has also the lion's share of actions standing in the procedure roll or awaiting proof, there being 37 of the former and 20 of the latter. Lord Guthrie comes next in order with 25 procedure roll cases and 20 set down for proof, trial, or hearing on evidence; Lord Johnston follows with 18 causes in the procedure roll and 12 proofs; Lord Dundas has 12 actions in his procedure roll, 1 hearing on evidence in cross actions, and 16 cases set down for proof or trial; and Lord Mackenzie comes last with 13 procedure roll cases and 10 set down for proof or trial. The winter session will certainly start with plenty of work in hand, but the supply of new work does not look very promising.

The Vacation Court held by Lord Kinnear on 19th August lasted exactly two hours, from 11 a.m. till 1 p.m., and expectations as to an increase of work through the operation of the Act of Sederunt recently passed were not realised, as the number of motions brought before his lordship was much the same as one usually looks for at such Courts. The decrees in absence which were granted, as before mentioned, numbered 20, and one of them brings back memories of a cause célèbre of five years ago, when a lady sued an elderly Glasgow contractor for damages for breach of promise of marriage. A verdict in her favour carried an award of £5000, but, on a new trial being granted, the second jury only brought in a verdict in her favour for £500. The name of a defender against whom decree in absence was granted in favour of an Edinburgh haberdashery firm was that of the lady in question, who seems to have joined herself in wedlock to a Victoria Cross hero since the proceedings referred to.

That man of many parts, Lord Rosslyn, did not see fit to defend the divorce action against him at the instance of the Countess, but since decree was pronounced in her favour he has evidently reconsidered his position, as he presented a reclaiming note to the First Division on the box-day. Whether or not his procedure has been proper in doing so may be open to doubt, as the usual practice is for a non-compearing defender in a divorce action to move to be reponed before extract of the

decree is ordered. Anyhow, the reclaiming note which has been lodged has, until it be disposed of, the effect of holding the decree in abeyance; and the Countess, being still his lordship's wife, has been erroneously referred to by certain newspapers as 66 the ex-Countess Rosslyn." The absurd statements in an American journal, in which an alleged interview of the lady appeared, will be read by our judges with amusement-if they are given to reading fiction. Lady Rosslyn was said to have had the judges in for tea on a Sunday afternoon, when congratulations on her legal success were showered on her. Supposing for a moment that such congratulations were offered her, they were certainly premature, as the presentation of the reclaiming note shows.

Another reclaiming note of public interest has been lodged, and that is one by certain members of Glasgow Town Council against an order pronounced by Lord Johnston ordaining them to produce a detailed account, with vouchers, instructing an item charged against the Common Good in respect of expenses incurred in connection with the promotion of the bill for Taxation of Land Values. Certain burgesses brought a petition and complaint against the Council before Lord Johnston as Exchequer Judge, alleging that the item as charged was illegal, the bill being a public parliamentary bill applicable to the whole of Scotland. Being an Exchequer cause, the reclaiming note will be disposed of in the summar roll early in the winter session. It seems that, although answers had been lodged for the whole members of the Council, 20 of these lodged a minute wherein they disclaimed all connection with the defence, and they were let out of the case with expenses against the remaining respondents.

The Lord Advocate has agreed to meet in the autumn representatives of the Sheriff-clerks depute, who have asked that their claims to be ranked as permanent officials should be considered in connection with the Sheriff Courts Bill. As that bill seeks to extend the jurisdiction of the Sheriff Courts, it seems but right that the Sheriff-clerks depute should have their position carefully considered, and when in the Court of Session we find that the various subordinate officials enjoy fixity of tenure of office, there is reason in the claim of the subordinate officials in the Sheriff Courts when they ask that their position be made. equally secure. A letter which appeared in the Scotsman of 23rd August, signed "Fairplay," while belittling the position of Sheriff-clerks depute, drew attention to what might be regarded as a bad feature of the proposal for fixity of tenure. "Is it not the case," said "Fairplay," "that a large number holding such positions are merely clerks in said offices, and only act in the