States Senate, and has been for the last two years Attorney General. He has a high, though not the highest reputation,

at the bar.

The English Solicitors are moving to secure an amendment of the law in a matter so obviously demanding amendment as to render it somewhat astonishing that the desired result has not long ago been achieved in England and in Canada. The various law societies there are about forming a scale of charges for payment of conveyancing work by commission on the value of the property in question, with a view to secure its general adoption and its ultimate sanction by statute. The profession in Ontario should unite to secure a similar result, and should not cease from their exertions till unlicensed practitioners are prohibited from drawing instruments relating to the transfer of lands. This would be a boon not only to the profession, but to the public. It is a matter of frequent remark from the bench that many expensive law-suits have originated in the blunders of rustic conveyancers, whose knowledge of legal drafting has come to them by nature. If that man be a fool who has himself for a client, certainly he does not much mend his folly by taking his lay-neighbour as his solicitor. It is now full time that the profession should assert its rights and protect the public from themselves in this matter of irresponsible conveyancing.

We trust we shall not shock the sense of propriety of members of the profession by devoting some space in our columns to the lighter and more entertaining part of legal literature. We shall occasionally mingle with the purely legal what has been called the "literary legal ;" in other words that which aims at entertaining more than instructing, in the belief that the dignity of the law does not necessarily mean dullness of the law. In this de

partment we promise that the same severe meditation and conscientious labour will be employed as is spent upon our profoundest articles, and we hope that the severest criticism will see nothing to offend a refined taste, or to wound the feelings of the most susceptible.

We dare to say that, although dryness is supposed to be the special attribute of law, in no association of men is there more wit and humour displayed than in the courts of law. The jeux d'esprit of the bench and bar in other countries are carefully recorded, and a most interesting and characteristic collection of witty sayings is thus preserved. Is our legal community deficient in a sense of humour? Are "good things," which are worth preserying, never said in our courts? On the COLtrary, we confidently affirm that in our own courts the tedium of a trial or argument is constantly enlivened by some bon mot or playful sally, from bench or bar, which is worthy of record--the brilliant wit and clever repartee of at least one distinguished present member of the bench (not to speak of many of those who have heretofore meted out justice in Osgoode Hall) has seldom been excelled by the most ready of his brethren in Great Britain. Thinking then, with Sterne, "that every time a man smiles-but much more so when he laughs-it adds something to this fragment of life," we invite our friends to note carefully everything that bears a semblance to a joke in relation to legal matters, and send it to us. It will be received with thanks, and if we recognize therein anything valuable in the line of humour, we shall give it to the world, and we feel sure that the world. will be none the worse for reading it.

The following observations of President Grant in his recent message touching the repeal of the bankrupt laws are worthy of being placed on record in our pages, at this juncture, having regard to the agita

tion during a former session of the Dominion House for a repeal of the Insolvent Act. He says and recommends as follows:

an

66

"I have become impressed with the belief that the act approved March 2, 1867, entitled Act to establish a uniform system of bankruptcy throughout the United States," is productive of more evil than good. At this time, many considerations might be urged for its repeal, but, if this is not considered advisable, I think it will not be seriously questioned that those portions of said act providing for what is called "involuntary bankruptcy" operate to increase the financial embarrassment of careful and prudent men, who very often become involved in debt in the transaction of their business, and though they may possess ample property, if it could be made available for that purpose, to meet all their liabilities, yet, on account of the extraordinary scarcity of money,

aminer, by the objection that the answer would tend to render them liable to a criminal prosecution: Spragge, C., in his judgment observed: "I cannot help expressing my strong conviction that the law is not upon a sound footing in this respect; and that it would be in furtherance of justice that the rule with us should be the same as it has been made by statute in some cases in England, that parties and witnesses should be compellable to answer, but that their answers should not be admissible on evidence in any criminal proceedings that might thereafter be instituted against them:" Keith v. Lynch, 19

Gr. 505.

II. "The conduct of insurance com

obligations as they become due, in consequence of which they are liable to be prostrated in their business by proceedings in bankruptcy at the instance of unrelenting creditors. People are now so easily alarmed as to money matters, that the mere filing of a petition in bankruptcy by an unfriendly creditor will necessarily embarrass and oftentimes accomplish the financial ruin of a responsible business man. Those who otherwise might make lawful and just arrangements to relieve themselves from difficulties produced by the present stringency in money are prevented by their constant exposure to attack and disappointment by proceedings against them in bankruptcy; and, besides, the law is made use of in many cases by obdurate creditors to frighten or force debtors into a compliance with their wishes, and into acts of injustice to other creditors and to themselves. I recommend that so much of said act provides for involuntary bankruptcy on account of the suspension of payment be repealed."

JUDICIAL AND OTHER SUGGES

TIONS FOR THE AMEND

MENT OF THE LAW.

I. Where the father of children who had been abducted filed a bill for the purpose, among other things, of ascertaining the place to which they had been removed, and was baffled in his examination of the defendants before a special ex

conditions, has often been complained of by the courts-by reason of the number and nature, and difficulty of the conditions they introduce into their policies; and the time perhaps has come when the Legislature should interfere to stand between them and those they insure, or pretend to insure, in other words, the public, by limiting them to such conditions as the courts shall determine to be reasonable."

"The only way to force upon companies a proper mode of doing business is by the Legislature enabling the courts to prohibit and restrict such conditions :" Per Wilson, J., in Smith v. Commercial Union Ins. Co., 33 U. C. Q. B. 90, 91.

III. Having reference to the Registry Act of Ontario, 31 Vict., cap. 20, sec. 67, Hagarty, C. J. C. P., remarks. in Millar v. Smith, 23 C. P., p. 54, as follows: I have no doubt that the Legislature, if their attention were called to it, would correct a very serious effect which this 67th section may have. The intention was evidently to protect an innocent purchaser who had not actual notice when he effected his purchase; but the

section is worded so as to refer the notice to the time of the registration, instead of the time of purchasing or paying his money."

IV. In view of the assembling of the Ontario House during this month, we may here be permitted to call attention. to a curious blunder in "amending" the law which has had the effect of wiping out of our statute book that most valuable provision to be found in C. S. U. C., cap. 90, sect. 11, whereby contingent, executory and future interests in land may be seized and sold in execution by the sheriff. This most unfortunate result was blundered into by the following cunning manipulation. The above section was repealed and a new section to much the same effect substituted therefor by 24 Vict., cap. 41, sec. 8. But by 29 Vict., c. 24, sec. 2, the act 24 Vict., cap. 41, was repealed from and after the 31st Dec., 1865; and no subsequent enactment has restored the beneficial provision, to which we have called attention.

THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE ACT.

On the first day of January there comes into force that most important enactment "The Administration of Justice Act." It will effect great and necessary improvements in the administration of justice in civil cases, and would seem to be the first step towards a more complete system of procedure, enabling suitors to obtain full justice in a direct way from the tribunal to which they resort, unencumbered by needless technicalities, and unembarrassed by questions of jurisdiction.

The "Law Reform Commission," appointed to enquire into the present system, with especial reference to the "fusion," as it is called, of law and equity, were at first disposed, it is believed, to suggest a measure of a partial character, but it was understood that the

then administration, in which Mr. Crookswas Attorney General, objected to anything partial or incomplete, and desired immediate and thorough "fusion." A bill with this end in view was prepared by two of the commissioners, and printed as a basis for discussion by the commission. This bill covered a large portion of the work necessary to a complete procedure, but, before the day appointed for the meeting of the commissioners to discuss. it, the commission was, for some reason, rescinded.

We think the first view of the commissioners, or of some of them, to effect the desired improvement by gradual changes, was the safer and better course, and it is the one which the present Attorney General, Mr. Mowat, has adopted. A complete change revolutionizing the whole. system could not have been made without the greatest embarrassment to the judges and to the profession, and, what is not less important, great loss and inconvenience to suitors. If based entirely on common law views, the chancery judges and practitioners would have been at fault; if the whole common law practice and rules were at once abrogated, and chancery procedure pure and simple, enacted in their stead, the whole business of the courts must necessarily have fallen into the hands of the chancery practitioners at Toronto, and two-thirds of the judges would be at once required to administer an entirely new and unfamiliar code of procedure. And it is obvious. that confusion, delay, and an enormous increase in law costs must have followed. Such a change would have been a great evil, and would not long be tolerated by the profession at large.

Mr. Mowat has taken the middle and, as we think, the safer course. He has not ignored the condition of things in the country; he has not lost sight of the fact that, probably, three-fourths of the Bar of Ontario are only exercent in one branch of

procedure, that they have little acquaintance with the details of chancery practice. His act, while correcting some admitted defects in the law, and in procedure, and modelled with a very decided equity expansion, does not disturb the existing tribunals, does not abrogate any existing system, nor unduly favor either; it apparently is designed to familiarise those having the conduct of business in the courts, with the application of equitable doctrines and rules by means of an ordinary common law procedure for the most part; in a word, it is not a revolutionary measure, but a safe reform, educating for a more complete change. No doubt it is in a certain sense experimental, and one quite understands there is more or less repulsion to change in the well ordered legal mind; and with those educated in a particular practice, and familiar with it for many years, a prejudice not unnatural is fostered by the indisposition to enter upon the labour required to master a new one; but we are sure that all whose duty it will be to administer the new law will be willing to encounter what is necessary and disposed to give the new law a fair trial. practical value must depend a good deal on such favourable disposition.*

Its

One thing is certain, that the strong and general feeling in favor of radical reform in our system of procedure, will find

*The English Judicature Act is also entering on trial. A paper recently read before the Metropolitan Law Association, speaking of the Act, says: "It was a great experiment. Whether

it will turn out for the next twenty years, until a new race of men are the Bar and the Bench, a blessing or a curse would depend on the temper in which the common law judges interpreted and adopted it." The English Act no doubt works a complete change, and almost wholly in the common law practice, while Mr. Mowat's Act deals with the subject only in part, and in a fairer spirit we think to the practitioners in Ontario; but still there can be small doubt what the result will be if the judges receive it in a captious, hostile spirit.

vent in some way, and if cautious and gradual changes are not accepted large and sweeping ones will be rashly and recklessly urged forward in their stead. We have endeavored, in former numbers, to assist to a proper understanding of some of the leading provisions of the new Act, and, as they come to the test of actual practice, we shall endeavor to keep our readers early advised of the cases and decisions as they occur, for we wish to see the new law fairly tried and candidly judged.

CURIOSITIES OF LAW.

The island of Jersey has long been. notable for its singular system of law and the still more unique manner in which it is administered. Cases occasionally crop up which inform the outside world of the progress of jurisprudence in its insular peculiarity under the presidency of the sage jurists of Jersey. Such was the petition of The Jersey Bar heard before the Privy Council and reported in 13 Moo. P. C. C. 263, from which it appears that the six advocates who practiced in the Cour Royale objected when the Bar was thrown open by the act of 1859, and in any event claimed compensation for the loss of vested rights. Notwithstanding their exceeding pluckiness in bringing the hardship of the case before the Privy Council, yet they took nothing by the appeal.

There is at present another case pending in appeal before the same august tribunal from the decision of the ten judges of the Royal Court of Jersey. From time whereof the memory of man runneth not to the contrary the jurists of Jersey have been wont once in each year on the opening of the Court of Heritage to dine together in a hotel at St. Heliers. records of the Court are said to contain entries so far back as the year 1616 regarding dinners "being provided as

The

theretofore," so that the right by prescription appears to be well founded.

However, this custom does not merit the fine commendation that we can bestow upon a like observance as perpetuated in the borough of Chippenham, Wilts. The Record Commissioners, some years ago, issued circular questions to the municipal corporations of England and Wales requesting various items of information. Among such questions was the following:-"Do any remarkable customs prevail, or have any remarkable customs prevailed within memory, in relation to the ceremonies accompanying the choice of corporate officers, annual processions, feasts, &c., not noticed in the printed histories or accounts of your borough? Describe them, if there be such." Whereunto the response came from the borough of Chippenham: "The Corporation dine together twice-a-year, and pay for it themselves!" Report of Record Commissioners: 1837, p. 442.

The Jersey jurists claim that Her Majesty's treasury has hitherto defrayed the expense of these judicial revels, and that such liability is by prescription eternal. However, the officer of the Treasury for the last few years has refused to pay, and the landlady of the Royal Yacht Club Hotel commenced her suit for £95 11s., the cost of six dinners, against the Attorney General of the island, the Viscount or Sheriff, and the Queen's Receiver. The ten judges who sat upon the case, being the recipients of the dinners in question, had no difficulty in finding that the defendants were liable for the amount, with costs of suit. The Crown could adduce no evidence of a time when these dinners had not been furnished forth as manifested by the records of the Court, and prescriptive right triumphed. The Attorney General of the Island has appealed to the Privy Council, where this new doctrine of prescription will be fully discussed.

We are able to recall but one authority which the Jersey Bench can possibly cite on the question of prescription, and that will unfortunately make against them. It is to be found in an Ahonymous case reported in 2 Leon. R. p, 12, which was an action on the case under the statute of Winton (13 Eliz. I. of Winchester), making the men of the Hundred liable to make reparation for a robbery committed within their bounds. And in the course of the case, Manwood, Justice, said: "When I was servant (serviens ad legem), to Sir James Hales, one of the Justices of the Common Pleas, one of his servants was robbed at Gadd's Hill within the hundred of Gravesend in Kent, and he sued the men of the hundred upon this statute; and it seemed hard to the inhabitants there that they should answer for the robberies done at Gadd's Hill, because robberies are there so frequent, that if they should answer for all of them they should be utterly undone. And Harris, Serjeant, was of councill with the inhabitants of Gravesend and pleaded for them that time out of mind, &c., Felons had used to rob at Gadd's Hill and so prescribed; and afterwards, by award, they were charged."

THE OFFICE OF COUNTY JUDGE IN ONTARIO.

By His Honour JAMES ROBERT GOWAN, Chairman of the Board of County Judges.

The office of County Judge in Ontario is one peculiar to this Province, and of great importance-whether regarded in respect to the extended and varied range of subject, or the large powers given to be exercised by the judge, for the most part in a summary manner, and without appeal. The duties of the Local Judge in Upper Canada, at first confined to a single court of civil, and very limited jurisdiction, have been gradually extended by Legislative enactments, so that the