« AnteriorContinuar »
£ s. d.
To each commissioner, where the distance required shall exceed three
miles, besides his reasonable travelling expenses .. .. ..220
To the clerk of the peace, or his deputy, for every search .. ..010
To the same, for every copy of a list of commissioners, provided such list
shall not exceed the number of 100 names .. .. '• .. ?'.'.' 0 5 0
Jto the same, for every further complete number of 50 names, an ad- '.'.''
. ditional .. .. .. :. • .. 0 2 6
To the officer, for every search .. .. .... ..010
To the same for every official copy of the certificate .. ..' '0 2 6
To the same, for every official copy of a list of commissioners, provided
such list shall not exceed the number of 100 names .. ..050
To the same, for every further complete number of 50 names additional 0 2 6 To the same, for preparing every special commission, including a fee of
5s. to the clerk of the Chief Justice or other Judge for the fiat .. 0 15 0 To the same, for examining the certificate and affidavit, and filing and indexing the same, as required by the said act of the 3d and 4th William 4, cap. 74 0 5 0
And it is hereby Further ordered, that the fees and charges to be paid for the entries of deeds required by the said act to be entered on the court rolls of manors, and for the indorsements thereon, and for taking the consents of the protectors of settlements of land held by copy of court roll, where such consents shall not be given by deed, and for taking surrenders, by which dispositions shall be made under the said aqt, by tenants in tail of lands held by copy of court roll, and for entries of such surrenders, or the memorandums thereof, on the court rolls, shall be as follows:—
£ s. d.
For the indorsements on trie deed of the memorandum of production, and memorandum of entry on court rolls, to be signed by the lord steward or deputy steward, each indorsement of memorandum 5s., together .. 0 10 0
For the entries on the court rolls of deeds, and the indorsements thereon,
at per folio of 72 words .. .. .. .. .. ..006
For taking the consent of each protector of settlement of lands.. .. 0 13 4
For taking the surrender by each tenant in tail of lands .. .. 0 13 4
For entries of such surrenders, or the memorandums thereof, on the court
rolls, at per folio of 72 words .. .. .. .. .. 006
Form of Affiduvit verifying the Certificate of Acknowledgment taken in pursuance of the Act of Parliament, to be made by tome practising Attorney or Solicitor, and to be sworn before a Judge of the Court of Common Pleas,or a Commissioner appointed for taking Affidavits in the said Court,
In the Common Pleas.
A. B. of , in the of , gentleman, one of the attornies [or solicitors]
of the Court of , maketh oath and saith, that he knows , the wife of ——
in the certificate hereunto annexed mentioned, and that the acknowledgment therein
mentioned was made by the said , and the certificate signed by the Judge [or
Waster, or by A. B. of &c. and C. D. of &c., the commissioners in the said certificate mentioned] on the day and year therein mentioned, at , in the of
, in the presence of this deponent, and that at the time of making such acknowledgment the said was of full age and competent understanding, and that the
said knew the said acknowledgment was intended to pass her estate in the
premises, respecting which such acknowledgment was made. [And this deponent further saith, that to the best of this deponent's knowledge and belief, neither of the said commissioners is (or the said A. B. or the said C. I), one of the said commissioners is not) in any manner interested in the transaction giving occasion for such acknowledgment, or concerned therein as attorney, solicitor, or agent, or as clerk to any attorney, solicitor, or agent, so interested or concerned].1 And this deponent
f 1 The lines within brackets to be omitted, when acknowledgment taken by a Judge or Master.
further saith, that previous to the said (the married woman) making the
said acknowledgment, he this deponent inquired of the said (the married
woman) or if more than one, of each of them the said and (the married
women) whether she intended to give up her interest in the estates, in respect of which such acknowledgment was taken, without having any provision made for her in lieu of, or in return for, or in consequence of her so giving up her interest in
such estates, and that in answer to such inquiry the said (the married woman)
declared that she did intend to give up her mterest in the said estates, without having any provision made for her in lieu of, or in return for, or in consequence of her so giving up such her interest; of which declaration of the said (the married woman) this deponent has no reason to doubt the truth, and verily believes the same to be true, or declared that a provision was to be made for ber in consequence of her giving up such her interest in the said estates. And this deponent lastly saith, that, before her acknowledgment was so taken, he was satisfied, and does now verily believe that such provision has been made by deed or writing, or that the terms thereof have been reduced into writing, and that such deed or writing has been produced to the said Judge, Master, or Commissioners. And lastly, this deponent saith, that it appears by the deed acknowledged by the said (the married woman) that the premises wherein she is stated to be interested are described
to be in the parish or place of , or parishes or places of and ——, in the
county of [or counties of , as the case may be.]
N. B.—When the whole of the facts cannot be spoken to by one deponent, variations may be made to enable more than one deponent to state their respective parts of the affidavit.
TRINITY TERM, 4 WILL. IV.
It is ordered, that from and after the last day of this term, where such parts of the affidavit, verifying the certificate of acknowledgment, taken in pursuance of the late act of parliament, respecting fines and recoveries, as slate " the deponent's knowledge of the party making the acknowledgment, and her being of full age ;" cannot be deposed to by a commissioner, or by an attorney or solicitor, the same may be deposed to by some other person, whom the person before ,whom the affidavit shall be made shall consider competent so to do.
And it is further ordered, that where more than one married woman shall at the same time acknowledge the same deed, respecting the same property, the fees directed by the said roles to be taken shall be takeu for the first acknowledgment only.
And the fees to be taken for the other acknowledgment or acknowledgments, how many soever the same may be, shall be one-half of the original fees, and so also, where the same married woman shall at the same time acknowledge more than one deed respecting the same property.
And where, in either of the above cases, there shall be more than one acknowledgment, all such acknowledgments may be included in one certificate and affidavit.
In every case the acknowledgment of a lease and release shall be considered and paid for as one acknowledgment only.
EVENTS OF THE QUARTER.
On the present occasion we have little more to do than to enumerate the principal Bills 'relating to legal matters, which have recently occupied the attention of the legislature; for these constitute the only events within our jurisdiction, and our reasons for or against almost all of them have been fully stated in former numbers of this work.
Bills have been introduced for the Registration of Births and Marriages, by Mr. W. Brougham; for the Amendment of the new Election Law, by Lord John Russell; for the Abolition of Capital Punishment, and for allowing Counsel for PiUoners to address the Jury, by Mr. Ewart; for the Abolition of the Practice of Hanging in Chains, by Mr. Ewart; for Mitigating the Punishment in Cases of Arson, by Mr. Lloyd; for rendering more effectual Proceedings before Justices of the Peace, by Lord Howick; for Improving the Administration of Justice in Boroughs; for rendering uniform and regulating the Execution of Wills of Real and Personal Property; for Facilitating the Exchange and Sale of Settled Estates; for the Abolition of Imprisonment for Debt and otherwise altering the Law of Debtor and Creditor, by the Attorney-General; for the Abolition of Arrest on Mesne Process for Debts not exceeding £20 and not secured by writing &c., by Mr. Pollock; for Assimilating the Practice of the Common Pleas at Lancaster to the Practice of the Superior Courts at Westminster, also by Mr. Pollock.
Most of these bills will pass, or have already passed, the House of Commons, which is now too much under the influence of popular prejudice for legal reforms to be properly discussed in it. The House of Lords is our only hope on such occasions, and there, we doubt not, all the crude and ill-considered enactments of each of them will be lopped off. There are a few, however, which ought not, in our opinion, to be permitted to pass at all. Of this number are both the bills for the abolition of imprisonment for debt; and, with the highest respect for Mr. Pollock's authority, we should be glad to see his bill for improving the practice of the Court of Common Pleas at Lancaster thrown out. All the objections urged against the provincial courts of Wales are equally applicable to the provincial court in question; it forms, moreover, a most inconvenient check on the proceedings of the superior courts, so far as its jurisdiction extends.
The General Register Bill has been thrown out by so large a majority as to render its reproduction for some time to come unnecessary; for the present, therefore, we shall take leave of the measure with a single observation: one of its immediate objects was, as its ultimate effect must have been, to curtail the profits of the conveyancing portion of the bar; yet no sooner were the object and anticipated effect made known to them, than, as a body, they strenuously and perseveringly supported it.
Chancery Reform is again at a stand-still, notwithstanding the laudable exertions of Mr. Lynch, whose eiposi was unfortunately cut short by the sudden disappearance (perhaps not exclusively attributable to ennui or exhaustion) of his auditors. So much of the amended equity system as is thought to have succeeded is about to be adopted in Ireland; which by thus following, hand passibus trquis, in our train, has secured the important advantage of trying more than one hazardous experiment in legislation, at our cost.
A Committee of the House of Commons, appointed to consider Mr.W. Brougham's bill for investing money lying in the Bank of England belonging to bankrupts' estates, recommend that this money shall be invested, and that the interest, instead of being appropriated to the creditors, shall be applied to discharge the general expenses of the Bankruptcy Court. The Committee further recommend, amongst other matters, that the assignees shall in future pay all unclaimed dividends into the Bank of England, to be kept for the claimants; they also give, unasked, their opinion in favour of the court; though they think that one chief registrar and one deputy registrar should be abolished, and that a new officer, to be called the accountantgeneral of the Court of Bankruptcy, should be appointed in their stead.
The Report of the Criminal Law Commissioners has been printed, and will be reviewed in our next Number. They recommend a Digest, and accompany the recommendation by a specimen, which has been lauded by Lord Brougham as one of the most wonderful productions of genius. To us the whole Report, including the specimen, appears as common-place a composition as we ever remember to have read. It seems, from the Chancellor's speech, that the labours of these commissioners are not to terminate, as was originally expected, with the suggestion of a code, but that they are to produce another report, and that some of the bills relating to the criminal law, now pending, are to be referred to them.
The shifting of places amongst the Judges, anticipated in our last Number, has taken place. Mr. Justice James Parke and Mr. Justice Alderson have become Barons of the Exchequer; Mr.Baron Vaughan, a Judge of the Common Pleas; Mr. Baron Williams, a Judge of the Court of King's Bench. We earnestly hope that this is the last time the game of ¥uss in the Carner will be introduced upon the bench: it harmonizes ill with the gravity of the judicial character, and must scandalize the spectators exceedingly. The comparative incapacity of particular judges may havo been well known to the profession, but it surely was not politic to make so public and formal an avowal of it. Besides, these things are never managed without a good deal of intrigue and trickery; and if what was universally credited be true, the negotiation between Mr. Justice Vaughan and Lord Brougham was anything but creditable to the Chancellor, whose memory, judging from a few little incidents that have recently transpired, appears to be exceedingly treacherous. To borrow a Morning Post pun—the learned judge very narrowly escaped being Horned.
Toujours perdrix: toujours Lord Brougham—will soon, we fear, be the cry of our readers; yet, so long as his zigzag career lasts, noleutes voltntes, we must follow it; and in the present instance it is our duty to record the facts of one. of his most remarkable displays—the case of Solarte and Palmer, in which a dry question of law, by a singular coincidence, has been converted into the subject of a furious personal and political dispute.
The action was brought upon a bill of exchange: the only question was, whether a letter threatening legal proceedings in default of payment amounted to notice of dishonour: the House of Lords held that it did not: and the Chancellor, in delivering their judgment, thought proper to comment in the strongest terms on the conduct of the professional men who had advised or conducted the appeal, declaring with every possible variety of expression (as is his wont), that he never saw a case more free from all manner of doubt: "My Lords, I feel very great displeasure at this writ of error being brought. I think your Lordships ought not to have writs of error brought merely for tire purpose of subjecting parties to costs. I think that this is wrong, and I think that your Lordships are bound to visit it with your just displeasure; for it is not because it is competent to a party to appeal —for in every case it was competent for them to do so; it is not because a certificate of counsel can be obtained in support of an appeal—for this, in the hurry of business, may inadvertently be given—that parties are justified in coming here, exhausting the suitors' money and the time of your Lordships; and if your Lordships do not visit the parties with your displeasure in something more than an affirmance of the judgment of the court below, it might be well and truly said, that this court of appeal, which was intended for the benefit of suitors, was not a court of redress, but a court of vexation. I consider that no counsel of common law ought to have certified that this was a case for appeal. Every counsel, before putting his hand to such a certificate, ought to have known the case of Hartley and Case, in the last edition, and not the fourth, or it might be the first, of that learned judge's [Mr. Baron Bayley's] work referred to. My Lords, I hold this case to be one in which there is not a shadow of pretence for appealing; and I will venture to express a hope that if there be any other cases of appeal of a similar description set down, that the parties who have brought them will withdraw them in time, otherwise they may repent of their pertinacity. I move, my Lords, that the judgment of the court below be affirmed, with costs not exceeding £350.",
There is no department of knowledge in which (with some few modifications) the maxim that" fools rush in where angels fear to tread," is more applicable than in law. Ignorance proceeds rashly and recklessly, where learning stands hesitating amid doubts. It is now admitted—nay, proved to demonstration—that the point in question was the very opposite of clear: that Lord Tenterden, on the trial of the cause, expressly invited the appellant to take the steps necessary for carrying the question before the highest tribunal, because the highest tribunal alone could properly reconsider the case,' which he felt to be imperative on himself: that Sir James Scarlett, Mr.F. Pollock, and Lord (then Mr.) Brougham, united in advising the appeal to the Exchequer Chamber, through which alone the case could be brought before the House of Lords. Sir James Scarlett and Mr. Pollock have both declared subsequently, that, if applied to, they should have considered themselves fully justified in recommending the ultimate appeal: and Lord Denman candidly avowed that even subsequently to the argument before their Lordships, he had. entertained considerable doubts upon the point. It is therefore clear that, in his eagerness to curry popular favour by declaiming against the supposed abuses of the law, Lord Brougham was guilty of a gross act of injustice to the plaintiff and his solicitors,—to say nothing of the discredit brought upon the House of Lords by this new exhibition of the intemperance of its head. Unfortunately, the Morning Post was equally intemperate in its exposure of him; and he has thus been enabled to come oft' with the semblance of victory, where, in reality, he richly merited, and would otherwise have been encountered by, defeat. The judgment of the House of Lords was affirmed with heavy costs, but by a (not well-known) practice of that House, it was entered on the printed journals as "postponed sine die." The discrepancy attracted attention, and was a frequent subject of discussion on the evening preceding the appearance of the article in the Morning Post; which at once brought the question to an issue, by boldly imputing the variation between the judgment and the entry to Lord Brougham, who, it was supposed, might have adopted this mode of securing himself a locus paenitentia, in case he should sub
1 Hardy v. Case. The stress laid upon it by Lord Brougham is irresistibly ridi-. culous; no one can fail to see that it was quite new to him, though familiar in all its bearings to every one else.