104 law scattered over many a bulky text-book into a more accessible and readable form; and as it bears this year's date, the reader enjoys the advantage of having last year's legislature succinctly put before him. The book is a worthy companion to the same author's Common Law, both being distinguished for conciseness and clearness. Besides all these works the student has his own monthly organs, the pioneer of which was the Law Student's Journal, the first magazine to act as the monthly guide, philosopher, and friend of every student, whether he is a regular subscriber or not. There are other periodicals with the same object, but the distinctive features are not of much moment. Many of the Law Students' Societies have now regular classes for preparation for the examinations. The lecturers are eminent men in the profession, and the advantage of getting such excellent instruction at a small fee is appreciated more highly every succeeding year. We shall in time, perhaps, get to a law university similar to the American schools, but that may not be for many a year In the meantime, until then, provincial societies should pursue the advantageous course of having lecturers to superintend their studies. to come. SENTENCES ON PRISONERS. recurrence There has been much correspondence on the method of sentencing prisoners adopted by the Recorder of Liverpool. The principle which he adopts in regulating his sentences is to proportion the punishment to the offence, and not to give outrageous sentences, which strike with horror those who hear them for the first time, but gradually become natural and tolerable to those who hear them frequently. The reason for advocating this principle was the effect that such punishments had upon the moral nature of the criminal, it being stated that a woman who had been leniently sentenced after several previous heavy terms of imprisonment had not troubled the Recorder's Court again. Sir Henry James, in commenting on lengthy sentences, endeavoured to show that the recorder's address was in reality a call to society to arouse itself of lengthy barbarous and prevent the He stated that he was confident that the punishments. action of the recorder would establish that even the most hardened criminals could be more influenced for good by being afforded opportunities of amendment than by receiving severe sentences, now so often imposed. It is suggested that a Court for the review of sentences should be established, and be within the reach of all. The Lord Chief Justice has also expressed concurrence with the Liverpool recorder's views. On the other hand, the recorder of Manchester, Mr. Yates, referring to the question of short versus long sentences, said he could not altogether agree with the recorder of Liverpool in his recent remarks. In passing sentence he (Mr. Yates) thought that the past life and conduct of the offender should be taken into consideration, whether, if previously convicted, he had tried to amend or had committed a new crime as soon as he came out of prison. While he set his face against anything like vindictiveness, he thought, above all, the public should be protected, and the circumstances of each case carefully considered. It was easy to assume the part of critic, but those charged with the administration of the law ought not to forget that the claim of duty was the highest of all. NEW QUEEN'S COUNSEL.-Her Majesty has been pleased to approve, on the recommendation of the Lord Chancellor, of the appointment to the rank of Queen's Counsel, of Mr. Herbert Henry Asquith, M.P., who was called to the bar at Lincoln's Inn in 1876, and Mr. John Lawson Walton, who was called to the bar in 1877, both of the North-Eastern Circuit. OBITUARY. THE HON. SIR HENRY MANISTY died at his house, was driven home. The assistance of medical science had and remained in the building until seven o'clock, when he in August, 1831, Constantia, daughter of Patrick Dickson, Among The service was read in the chapel and at the grave by the Rev. E. Hoskyns. those present, besides the mourners, were-Mr. Ammembers of the Northern Circuit; Mr. Gully, Q.C., M.P., brose, Q.C., M.P., who attended on behalf of the Mr. Mylne Barker, Mr. Charles Cagney, Mr. Fuller-Maitof sympathy and esteem were sent by the members of the land, and Mr. A. D. Coleridge. Wreaths and other tokens North-Eastern Circuit, Baron and Lady Diana Huddleston, Lord Esher (Master of the Rolls), Mrs. Macrory, eldest Manisty's servants, Mr. and Mrs. Fuller-Maitland, Mrs. daughter of the deceased, Miss Fielder, Mr. Henry Forster, Mr. and Mrs. Alberto Randegger, Mrs. and Miss North, Mrs. C. W. Arathoon, Mr. John T. Crossley, Miss Wilson. A large cross from the deceased's children, a beautiful wreath from the grandchildren, and a cross from the children of deceased's first wife, were placed upon the coffin, which bore the following inscription: Sir Born December 13, 1808. Henry Manisty, Knt., a Judge of Her Majesty's High January 31, 1890.' Court of Justice. Died HONOURS AND APPOINTMENTS. Mr. Philip Joseph Canning (of the firm of Fardells, Dashwood & Canning), of Mitre Chambers, Temple, E.C., has been appointed a Commissioner for Oaths. Mr. Canning was admitted in 1868. Mr. Augustus Rolfe Hodges, of 57 Lincoln's Inn Fields, London, has been appointed a Commissioner for Oaths. Mr. Hodges was admitted in 1884. Mr. William Bottomley (of the firm of Darnton & Bottomley), of Ashton-under-Lyne, has been appointed Clerk to the County Magistrates at Saddleworth. Mr. Bottomley was admitted in 1872. SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 1. Regina v. Vestry of St. Pancras (appeal of defendants Regina v. J. B. F. Cowper, Esq., Deputy Judge of Croydon MONDAY, FEBRUARY 3. Regina v. J. B. F. Conper, Esq., Deputy Judge of Croydon Hudson v. Ferneyhough (appeal of plaintiff from the Lord TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 4. APPEAL COURT II. Before COTTON, L.J., LINDLEY, L.J., and Lores, L.J. THURSDAY, JANUARY 30. Searle v. Cooke (appeal of defendants from judgment of Strutt v. Tippett (appeal of plaintiff from judgment of Warren v. Jackson (appeal of plaintiff from judgment of FRIDAY, JANUARY 31. Smart v. Tranter (appeal of plaintiff from judgment of In re S. J. Hamilton, deceased. Bazeley v. Royal Na In re Newton Estates, Derbyshire, and settlement, disentail, SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 1. MONDAY, FEBRUARY 3. TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 4. M'Dougall v. Knight (appeal of defendant from the Lord Reilly v. Booth.--Part heard. Nixon's Navigation Co. (Lim.) v. Mountain Ash Local WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 5. WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 5. In re T. Blundell (dec.). Blundell v. Blundell. Bavarian Brewery Company v. Blundell (appeal of Messrs. Bower & Co. from order of North, J., dated December 20, for taxation and payment of costs out of fund in Court).-Allowed. Fry (otherwise Routh) v. G. Fry. In re An Application by E. S. Routh for appointment of guardian of E. S. Fry (formerly Routh), ex parte E. S. Fry (appeal of E. S. Routh from order of Butt, J., dated January 21, rescinding order for appointment of guardian ad lit.).— Dismissed. NOTICES FOR THE WEEK. ROTA OF REGISTRARS. MONDAY, February 10.-Court of Appeal No. 2: Mr. Lavie. Mr. Justice Kay: Mr. Leach. Mr. Justice Chitty: Mr. Beal. Mr. Justice North: Mr. Pemberton. Mr. Justice Stirling: Mr. Clowes. Mr. Justice Kekewich: Mr. Farmer. Tuesday, February 11.-Court of Appeal No. 2: Mr. Carrington. Mr. Justice Kay: Mr. Godfrey. Mr. Justice Chitty Mr. Pugh. Mr. Justice North: Mr. Ward. Mr. Justice Stirling: Mr. Jackson. Mr. Justice Kekewich: Mr. Rolt. Wednesday, February 12.-Court of Appeal No. 2: Mr. Lavie. Mr. Justice Kay: Mr. Leach. Mr. Justice North: Mr. Beal. Mr. Justice Chitty: Mr. Pemberton. Mr. Justice Stirling: Mr. Clowes. Mr. Justice Kekewich: Mr. Farmer. Thursday, February 13.-Court of Appeal No. 2: Mr. Carrington. Mr. Justice Kay: Mr. Godfrey. Mr. Justice Chitty Mr. Pugh. Mr. Justice North: Mr. Ward. Mr. Justice Stirling: Mr. Jackson. Mr. Justice Kekewich: Mr. Rolt. : Friday, February 14.- Court of Appeal No. 2: Mr. Lavie. Mr. Justice Kay: Mr. Leach. Mr. Justice Chitty: Mr. Beal. Mr. Justice North: Mr. Pemberton. Mr. Justice Stirling: Mr. Clowes. Mr. Justice Kekewich: Mr. Farmer. Saturday, February 15.-Court of Appeal No. 2: Mr. Carrington. Mr. Justice Kay: Mr. Godfrey. Mr. Justice Chitty: Mr. Pugh. Mr. Justice North: Mr. Ward. Mr. Justice Stirling: Mr. Jackson. Mr. Justice Kekewich: Mr. Rolt. BOOKS RECEIVED FOR REVIEW. CHITTY on Contracts. Twelfth Edition. By J. M. Lely and Nevill Geary, Barristers-at-Law. London: Sweet & Maxwell (Lim.). Elements of Mercantile Law (The). By T. M. Stevens, Barrister-at-Law. London: Butterworths. 1890. Emden's Complete Annual Digest of Every Reported Case, 1889. London: Wm. Clowes & Sons (Lim.). Summary of the Law of Companies (A). Fourth Edition. By T. Eustace Smith, Barrister-at-Law. London: Stevens & Haynes. 1890. THE NEW CHIEF SECRETARY OF THE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT.-Mr. George William Kekewich, who has been nominated by the Lord President of the Council as Chief Secretary of the Education Department, has been in the Department as junior and senior examiner for upwards of twenty years, and has a high reputation for ability in the Department. Among his colleagues the appointment will be extremely popular. Mr. Kekewich, who is a son of the late Mr. Kekewich, many years M.P. for North Devon, and a brother of Mr. Justice Kekewich, is nearly fifty years of age and a graduate of Oxford University. LORD COLERIDGE AND LIGHT SENTENCES.-The Lord Chief Justice has addressed the following letter to a correspondent who drew his lordship's attention to Judge Hopwood's address to the grand jury of Liverpool advo. cating light sentences to prisoners and asserting that the meting out of justice and mercy with discretion had had most beneficial effects in reducing the violence of many prisoners and the seriousness of their crimes: 1 Sussex Square, London, W., Jan. 18. Sir, I thank you for the paper. Without pledging myself to details, I think that Mr. Hopwood's principles of punishment are certainly right. Your obedient servant, COLERIDGE.' UNITED LAW SOCIETY.-The usual weekly meeting was held on Monday, Jan. 27, at the Inner Temple Lecture Hall. Mr. C. W. Williams moved: That this House approves of Leasehold Enfranchisement.' Mr. A. M. Lazarus opposed. Messrs. F. B. Moyle, J. L. V. S. Williams, M. S. Nathan, F. M. Voules, C. H. Le Maistre, H. W. Marcus, W. J. Bull, W. S. Sherrington, Stebbing Russell, and H. E. Miller also spoke. The motion was carried by the casting vote of the chairman.The next weekly meeting was held on Mr. Common in the chair. This being the first Monday Monday, February 3, at the Inner Temple Lecture Hall, in the month, the evening was devoted to business, which was unusually heavy, in consequence of which the House did not adjourn till 11.15. THE LATE MR. JUSTICE MANISTY.-Mr. Robert Hunter writes as follows to the editor of the Times: 'Many of those who were Mr. Justice Manisty's clients when he was at the bar will be disposed to think that, in your notice of to-day, you hardly do adequate justice to his powers as an advocate. In the protracted inquiry respecting the validity of the enclosures in Epping Forest, Mr. Manisty for several years before his elevation to the bench held the leading brief for the Corporation of London, and on their behalf I was in constant communication with him. I think it will be not my own opinion merely, but that of most persons interested in the proceedings, that the complete success which crowned the efforts of the Corporation was due, in no small degree, to the judgment and skill with which Mr. Manisty conducted their case. It is probably true that the late judge made "no pretensions to the arts of advocacy," but if the art of advocacy consists, not in making a speech which may excite admiration of the speaker, but in so speaking as to gain one's point, Mr. Manisty was surely no mean proficient in the art. Nor was Mr. Manisty as an advocate destitute of that breadth of view which, it is suggested in your columns, no one who has ever practised as a solicitor can attain unto. His strength consisted (so far as my experience serves) precisely in his power of appreciating the relative importance of various issues, of selecting from amongst many facts those which told strongly in his favour, and of steadily pressing these upon the consideration of his tribunal without allowing himself to be drawn into the discussion of what he deemed im material questions. It is unnecessary to add that his unfailing courtesy and great kindness of heart made it a pleasure to be associated with him in common work.' MARRIAGES. Solicitor, of Lower Clapton and Gray's Inn, to Seléna Mary (Lenna), On Jan. 27, at Christ Church, Brondesbury, Edward William Lewis daughter of the late William Gilbert Granville-Hogg, 3rd North Yorks Artillery. Moore Wood, M.R.C.S., L.R.C.P., London, late Government Medical On Jan. 28, at St. Luke's, Redcliffe Square, South Kensington, Percy Officer at Port Darwin, South Australia, son of the late Charles William Wood, Q.C., to Janet Sophie, younger daughter of Richard Willett Roberts, of 34 Redcliffe Square and Gray's Inn. On Jan. 30, at St. Mary's, Balham, the Rev. Thomas Bates, Vicar of St. Mary's, Balham, to Emily, widow of Major-Gen. Howes, R.E., and daughter of Francis Fladgate, Esq., Barrister-at Law. On Feb. 1, at St. George's, Bloomsbury, Thomas De Courcy Atkins, Barrister-at-Law, of the Middle Temple and Lincoln's Inn, to Florence, widow of the late E. C. Weeden, Esq. Temple. DEATHS. On Jan. 22, suddenly, at 3 Victoria Crescent, Jersey, Mary Anne, widow of the late John Evans, Esq., Q.C., Bencher of the Inner On Jan. 23, at Carriglass Manor, Longford, Mary, youngest daughter of the late Right Hon. Thomas Lefroy, Lord Chief Justice of Ireland. On Jan. 26, at North Street, Chichester, Edmund Peachey, Solicitor, aged 73. On Jan. 30, at Southgate, Maidstone, Edward William, third son of the late J. C. Stephens, Solicitor, of the same place. On Jan. 31, at 24A Bryanston Square, London, the Hon. Sir Henry Manisty, in his 82nd year. On Jan. 31, at the Park, Hull, Edward, eldest son of the late John Saxelbye, Solicitor, aged 44. Supplied upon application to THE PUBLISHER, 5 Quality Court, SCALE FOR ADVERTISEMENTS. Four Lines, or 40 Words, in Column.. .. 040 0 0 6 33 600 Public Companies' Announcements, 8s. per inch in Column, or 71. 4s. per Page. Auction Sales, 7d. per Line. 110 112 114 116 116 117 118 118 118 119 119 The Law Journal. SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 1890. 'OBITER DICTA.' LORD HERSCHELL is never seen to greater advantage than when he is discharging the functions of a moderator. In that capacity his lordship won golden opinions down East on Wednesday evening, when, under the auspices of the Toynbee Hall Debating Society, reinforced by a strong contingent of Hardwickians from the Temple, he presided over a debate on the burning question of strikes. After the speakers on both sides had exhausted, not their resources, but the time allotted for the debate, Lord Herschell discoursed for half an hour in a tone which was admirably calculated to send away even those who came as heated partisans with something more than a suspicion that the enemy had a good deal to say for himself. His apology for the lawyers, to whom somewhat bitter allusions had been made in the course of the evening, was very adroitly put. He suggested that, although several lawyers had spoken against the Dockers' strike, knowing that 'the other side' would be well represented by other speakers, yet many of those very lawyers, if they had been discussing this question in their own society with no strangers present, would not only have spoken in support of the strikers, but would have made out a very good case for their clients. A pretty compliment from a lawyer to the versatility of his brethren. THE short Merchant Shipping Bill, of which notice has been given for this session, will, if an opportunity arises for its discussion, reopen the fierce controversy which was waged round the Merchant Shipping Bill, 1876. That Act makes it compulsory for all owners of British ships, except small coasting vessels, fishingboats, and pleasure yachts, to mark their vessels with a load-line. The position of the load-line is left to the owner, and it merely indicates the maximum load-line for salt water to which the owner intends to load the ship (s, 26), in the case of a foreign-going ship, for the voyage for which he is entering her outwards, and (s. 27), in the case of a coasting vessel, until notice is given of an alteration to the collector or principal officer of customs of the ship's port of registry. A JUST a quarter of a century ago Sir Edward Vaughan penalty not exceeding 100%. is prescribed for neglecting Williams made way for Sir Montague Smith upon the to mark a ship, for removing, defacing, or concealing bench of the old Court of Common Pleas, and carried the mark, and for loading the ship so as to submerge it. with him into private life the reputation of a laborious The object of the proposed bill is to take away from the worker, a sound lawyer, and a kindly man. At that owner the power of choosing the level at which the time Mr. Justice Manisty's successor was a barrister of load-line is to be placed, and to enact that it shall barely six months' standing, but the mantle of his father be placed at such level as may be approved by surveyors fell upon him, and he speedily earned a name for hard appointed by the Board of Trade, and be in all cases work. The Bankruptcy Act, 1869, by overturning the below the deck-line. The subject is not free from diffiwhole of the previous practice, afforded an opening of culty. On the one hand, it is undoubtedly very desirwhich he promptly availed himself, and his work on able that every precaution should be taken to prevent Bankruptcy, which appeared in 1870, was completely overloading, and the testimony of Mr. Rothery, the successful, and pronounced not unworthy of its dedica- Wreck Commissioner, that the loss of 46 per cent. of tion to the eminent writer and ex-judge, his father. missing ships is due to that cause, should not be disreNearly twenty years of steady plodding in the interests garded. On the other hand, the Board of Trade already possess, under the Act of 1876, the power, subject to ruary 14, 1887, a report was submitted to an informal very careful and very proper provisions to guard against meeting of the members of all the societies showing its abuse (Thompson v. Farrer, 51 Law J. Rep. Q. B. that they were insolvent. Efforts were made to 534), of detaining ships which are unsafe by reason of reconstruct them, but they proved abortive, and overloading, and it is very undesirable that any trading on June 17 the societies in due form passed resoluinterest should be unnecessarily harassed. Moreover, tions in favour of winding-up under the supervithe proposed legislation would have the effect of giving sion of the Court, and on July 2 a winding-up order subordinate officials of the Board a power of interference was made. Before this occurred, however, a number with private property which might be very oppressively of members had, under a rule of the societies permitused, and from which no appeal is provided. In our ting them to do so, given notice of withdrawal. One opinion the tendency of recent legislation has been far section of these members was represented by the aptoo much in this direction. pellant King in the first case, who gave notice to withdraw on February 21, 1887, a few days after the report was made public showing the societies to be insolvent, MR. JUSTICE WILLIAMS's Court on Thursday morn- but before the winding-up order was made; another ing was naturally the attraction of the Law Courts. section by the respondent Oliver in the second case, who His Lordship, to say the truth, seemed as much at had, on October 8, 1886, given notice to withdraw in home upon the bench as if he had always sat there. six months' time, the notice being given before the We sincerely hope that, before he goes circuit, he will insolvency of the societies was notorious, but not exhave succeeded in making a serious inroad upon the piring until April 8, 1887, in the period between the Cause List. There ought to be a tertium quid between declaration of insolvency and the winding-up order. the two extremes of painful deliberateness and speedy Did these notices entitle the members who gave them execution. It may perhaps be useful now and then to to priority of payment over the other members? The remind our judges that the few litigants who still resort contention on their part was that, until the winding-up to the regular tribunals of their country are not satis-order had been actually made, they were entitled under fied with having their cases disposed of, and prefer to have them tried. We understand that Mr. Ford, in bringing forward his motion before the Law Society at their general meeting, on January 31 last (reported by us in last week's number), handed to the president at such meeting a letter from Mr. Justice Kay, dated January 29, 1890, as follows: Mr. Justice Kay begs to thank Mr. Ford for the copy of his book and his obliging communication. It would be much better that the members of his profession should themselves take measures to improve the practice of taking oaths to affidavits than that this should be done by Rules of Court. However, the opinion appears to have prevailed at the meeting that a rule of Court would be issued embracing the subject of Mr. Ford's motion, and on that ground the meeting resolved to pass to the next business on the paper. But it seems to us that the Law Society would do well to issue suggestions for the guidance of commissioners for oaths, such as those indicated in a new edition of Mr. Ford's 'Handbook on Oaths.' the rule to withdraw, and so constitute themselves creditors of the societies. The liquidator, on the other hand, insisted that the societies were known to be insolmembers would otherwise have had of quitting the vent on February 14, 1887, and that the right which societies was then at an end. Several authorities appeared at first sight, at any rate, to be in favour of the members' contention. In Brownlie v. Russell, L. R. 8 App. Cas. 235, 254, Lord Selborne, supporting the opinion expressed by ViceChancellor Wood in In re The Doncaster Permanent Building Society, 36 Law J. Rep. Chanc. 871; L. R. 3 Eq. 158; 4 Eq. 579, speaks of the winding-up order as taking away the option which otherwise, if the concern had been a going one, would have belonged to each member, and terminating at that date the account of each shareholder by substituting the compulsory withdrawal of all the members for the optional withdrawal of individuals. This language, if literally correct, would certainly bear the meaning that up to the date of the winding-up order the option of withdrawal remains. The case of Walton v. Edge, 54 Law J. Rep. Chanc. 362, appeared to be even more in point, for there the House of Lords decided that investing members of a building society who had given notice of withdrawal, and whose notices had expired before the THE WINDING UP OF BUILDING SOCIETIES. Winding-up began, were entitled to be paid out of the assets (after the outside creditors) in priority to those Is a member of a building society who gives notice of members who had not given notice of withdrawal. In withdrawal after its insolvency is generally known, but Auld v. The Glasgow Working Men's Building Society, before a winding-up order is made, entitled to priority 56 Law J. Rep. P. C. 57, again, the House of Lords over the other members for the repayment of the declared a resolution of a building society deducting amount of his subscriptions and interest? This was 7s. 6d. per pound from the amounts at the credit of all the question raised before the Lord Chief Justice and the members to be void, and held that, as no proceedMr. Justice Mathew in the cases of King v. Rawlings ings for the winding up of the society had been and another, the Liquidators of the Sunderland 36th commenced, the members who had given notice of withUniversal Building Society, and Rawlings and another, drawal after the resolution were entitled to be paid the the Liquidators of the Sunderland 32nd Universal Build- whole amount at their credit. The Middlesbrough, ing Society v. Oliver. These societies were two of a Redcar, Saltburn-by-Sea, and Cleveland District Pernumber of benefit building societies formed in Sunder-manent Building Society, No. 2, 53 L. T. 203, in which land on the terminating principle, which towards the members who had given notice of withdrawal prior to end of the year 1886 were found to have been mis- the commencement of the winding-up were held managed. An investigation took place, and on Feb- entitled to be repaid the amount of their shares in |