HEEL, ISAAC, labourer, Barrow-in-Furness. Pet. Feb. 26. Reg. & J. A. Postlethwaite. Sol. Relph, Barrow-in-Furness. Sur. March 18 HOLLAND, HENRY, and HOLLAND, GEORGE, butchers, Hastings. Pet. March 3. Reg. & O. A. Young. Sol. Philbrick, Hastings. Sur. March 20 HOWLES, THOMAS, cabinet maker, Manchester. Pet. March 4. JACOBSEN, SVENDBJORN, merchant. Liverpool. Pet. March 6. Pet. LUDLOW, THOMAS, out of business, Birmingham. Pet. March 3. MOUNSDON, EDWARD, horse collar maker, Crediton. Pet. RAW, JOSEPH, bookkeeper, Blackburn. Pet. March 3. Reg. & Pet. Sur. Reg. SALT, HERBERT, out of business, Liverpool. Pet. March 5. SENIOR, HENRY, joiner. Huddersfield. Pet. Feb. 17. Reg. & O. A. SHORT, THOMAS, sen., and SHORT, WALTER, timber merchants, SMITH, GEORGE, farmer, Chollerton. Pet. Feb. 19. Reg. & O. A. Cook. Sol. Swan, Morpeth. Sur. March 19 SMITH, JOHN, licensed victualler, Liverpool. Pet. Feb. 26. O. A. Turner. Sols. Bateson, Robinson, and Morris, Liverpool. Sur. March 22 STONE, WILLIAM, dairyman, Barnstaple. Pet. March 4. Reg. & O. A. Bencraft. Sol. Bencraft, Barnstaple. Sur. March 19 TAVERNER, ROBERT, Crediton. Pet. March 6. O. A. Carrick. Sol. Floud, Exeter. Sur. March 24 TINDAL, THOMAS, Commission agent, Lewes. Pet. March 2. Reg. &O. A. Blaker. Sol. Murray, Great St. Helen's. Sur. March 19 TOWERS, THOMAS, wheelwright, Sheffield. Pet. March 5. Reg. & O. A. Wake and Rodgers. Sols. Messrs. Binney, Sheffield. Sur. March 24 WALTON, BRINSLEY MARCIUS, physician, Minchinhampton. Pet. UNDERHILL, SAMUEL, builder, Birmingham. Pet. March 4. Reg. Hill. O. A. Kinnear. Sols. Saunders and Bradbury, Birmingham. Sur. March 24 BANKRUPTCIES ANNULLED. TRUEMAN, CHARLES WILLIAM, jet ornament manufacturer, Gazette, March 5. NOTTINGHAM, ROBERT, music master, East Retford. Oct. 16, 1868 SMITH, EDWIN, sen., and SMITH, EDWIN, jun., Aldimore and East Guldeford, farmers. Nov. 3, 1868 Dividends. BANKRUPTS' ESTATES. The Official Assignees are given, to whom apply for the Dividends. Authony, E. B. currier, first, 3s. 62. Carrick, Exeter.-Bennett, E. T. jeweller, further, 2. Carrick. Exeter.-Challen, B. S. cattle dealer, first, Is. S. Parkyns, London-Feehan, J. tailor, further, 34. Carrick, Exeter.-Frances, W. L. surgeon, first, 4. 11. Parkyns, London.-Gerrard, J. auctioneer, first, 1. 73d. Carrick, Exeter.-Hendy, C. W. railway clerk, first, 48. 11. Parxyns, London-Lewis, H. tobacconist, first, 9. Turner, Liverpool.Mc Kinnell, J. engineer, second, 17. Parkyns, London.-Pearce, F. D. farmer, first, 24. Carrick. Exeter.-Pulsley, R. H. farmer, further, 104. Carrick, Exeter.- Ror, G. M. grocer, first, 2s. 2jd, Parkyns, London.-Smith, F. hairdresser, further, 44. Carrick, Exeter.Stevens, G. builder, further, on new proofs, 1s. 1d. Carrick, Exeter. -White, J. C. grocer, further, 1. 7. Carrick, Exeter.-Willis, S. widow, second, 18. 3d. Parkyns, London. INSOLVENTS' ESTATES. Apply at the Provisional Assignee's Office, Portugal-street, Lincoln's-inn-fields, between 11 and 2, on Tuesdays only. Hewitt, F. P. of Sneinton, second, &d.-Jadis, V. clerk in the Colonial Office, seventh, 18, 9, The Registrar is given, to whom apply for the Dividend. Jarrett, G. surveyor, 1s. 4d. Reg. Vines, County Court, Newbury. Assignment, Composition, Jaspectorship, and Trust Deeds. Gazette, March 5. ANDERSON, DANIEL, surgeon, Carlisle. Feb. 6. In full, by nine equal instalments, in 3, 6, 9, 12. 15, 18, 21, 24, and 27 mos from Jan. 15 BALLANS, JAMES NOAH, tea dealer, Sheffield. Jan. 26. 88. Gd. by two equal instalments, on March 26 and May 25 BANKA HENRY, victualler, Screddington. Feb. 5. 68. 8d. in 1 mo BARNES, WILLIAM CHARLES, jun., engineer, Enfield. March 1. 1. on May 31 BISSELL, JOHN, fronmonger, Barking. Feb. 22. 48. by three BRAILSFORD, TOM, machinist, Leicester. Feb. 20. Trusts. J. COMPTON, BOSTON, market gardener, Potton. Feb. 24. 10s. by two equal instalments. on Jan. 1, 1870 and 1871. Trust. W. Smith, grocer, Potton CREWE, JOHN GIBBS, grocer, Pontefract. Feb. 15. 48. by two equal instalments on April 29 and July 29,-guaranteed. Trust. S. Gillgrass, attorney's clerk, Leeds CROSS, EDWARD, builder, Lewis-pl, Richmond. Feb. 17. 88. in 1 mo. Trust. J. Munro, timber merchant, Richmond DEY, CHARLES, draper, Walsall. Feb. 19. Trusts. J. Shannon, wholesale draper, Walsali, and J. S. Eveleigh, accountant, Bristol DIXON, MARGARET, and DIXON, WILLIAM JAMES, cotton spinners, Preston." Jan. 18. Trusts. J. Brancker, broker, Liverpool; W. Fleming, machinist, and A. Murray, accountant, both Manchester EASON, GEORGE WILLIAM, grocer, Grosvenor row, Pimlico. Feb. 3. Trusts. A. B. Neame, Eastcheap, and T. Conway, Mincing-la, both sugar merchants EASTWOOD, WALTER, chemist, Ashton-under-Lyne. Feb. 22. 58. Trust. A. Webster, grocer, Ashton-under-Lyne ECCLESTONE, JOHN, marine store dealer, Gainsborough. Feb. 3. 48.-28. 64. on demand, and 1s. 6d. on Aug. 3. Trust. J. Barnaby, joiner, Gainsborough FISHER, JAMES CHARLES, mantle manufacturer. Westmorlandbldgs, Aldersgate-st. Feb. 5. 178. by three equal instalments, in 4, 8, and 12 mos GERRARD, WILLIAM, cabinet maker, Lyndhurst. Feb. 15. Trust. G. Wolfe, bootmaker, Lyndhurst GLOVER, SAMUEL, victualler, Leicester. Feb. 17. 38. 4d. on March 1 GOOD, JOHN HENRY MORRIS, and GUEST, JAMES, manufacturers, GREGORY, WILLIAM TOMLIN, hotel keeper, Rupert st, and HARRIS, ROBERT, builder, Trowbridge. Feb. 2. 35. 6d.-2s. in 10 days, 1s, in 3 mos, and 4. in 5 mos HICKS, WILLIAM BAKER, grocer, Wimborne. March 3. 10s. in 14 days HOBBART, JOHN, cartman, Newcastle. Feb. 22. 4s. in 6 mos HOLME, JORS, Huline; and HOLME, HENRY, Nantwich, leather merchants. Feb. 13. 15s. by three equal instalments, in 3, 6, and 9 mos HORROCKS, SAMUEL, corn dealer, Bolton. Feb. 1. 58. by pay- JACKSON, JOSHUA, cabinet maker, Bradford. Feb. 10. Trust. W. KING, THOMAS, lodging-house keeper, Whitby. Feb. 8. Trusts. LE CHEVALIER, HARRIET, furniture dealer, Bristol. Feb. 3. Trusts. E. Fenner, chair manufacturer, Bristol, and E. Shipman, cabinet manufacturer, Wilson-st, Finsbury PALMER, JAMES, warehouseman, Basnett grove, Battersea. Feb. 15. 18. in 3 mos PARKIN, JOSEPH, chemist, Sunderland. Feb. 23. 78. in 21 days PIPER, WILLIAM HENRY, dealer in toys, Clifton. Feb. 6. Trust E. Fowell, fancy goods factor, Bristol REES, DAVID, victualler, Mumbles. March 2. 48. in 7 days ROBINSON, GEORGE, butcher, Wolverhampton, and Coven. Feb. 3, Trusts, R. H. Masfen, Pendeford, and J. Sidney, Wollaston, farmers ROBINSON, JOSEPH THOMAS, wholesale grocer, Liverpool. SPILLER, JOHN, upholsterer, Swindon. Jan. 27. In full, by instalments of 75, 6d. on March 15 and June 15, and 5s. on Sept. 15. Trusts. W. V. Edwards, ironmonger, and J. Goodwin, innkeeper, both Swindon STEWART, JAMES HINTON, Leeds. Feb. 2. 5s. 6d. by three instalments of 2s. 21., and 18. 6. in 3, 6, and 9 mos, from Feb. 14secured. Inspectors-J. Robinson, worsted spinner, Horbury; J. Folson, yarn spinner, Dewsbury; and M. Peacock, merchant. Leeds,-secured TAYLOR, JOHN, retail brewer, Birmingham. Jan. 15. 1s. 6d. on March 25 THOMAS, SAMUEL VOSPER, accountant, Wimborne Minster. Feb. 13. 10%, on March 25 UPTON, MARTHA, and UPTON, SARAH, schoolmistresses, Lansdowne crescent, Notting-hill. Feb. 13. 2s. 6d, in 7 days WILKINSON, FRANK, lace manufacturer, Nottingham. Feb. 3. 5s, by two equal instalments, in 2 and 3 mos WOOD, GEORGE, jun., brick merchant, Lyme-st, Camden-town. Feb. 19, 68. by three equal instalments on April 20, June 20, and Aug, 20 WRIGHT, JAMES, draper, Preston. Feb. 17. Trusts. P. Sproat, draper, Preston, and D. Calverley, merchant, Huddersfield WRIGHT, JOHN, fishmonger, Brighton. Jan. 25. Trusts. F. Richardson, fish salesinan, Billingsgate, and T. Tugwell, accountant, Brighton. Sol. English, Moorgate-st Gazette, March 9. BOTTOMLEY, GEORGE, draper, Middlesbrough. Jan. 26. 118. by three equal instalments, in 4, 8, and 12 mos from Jan. 15 CHIPCHASE, JOSEPH, boot manufacturer, Hackney rd, and Bedford pl, Commercial-rd. Feb. 8. 5. by two equal instalments, in 3 and 6 mos from Feb. 1.-last secured. Trusts. J. Barratt, St. John's-pk, Upper Holloway, and B. Nicholson, accountant, Gresham-st CLARKE, THOMAS ALFRED WILLIAM, machine maker, Leicester. Feb. 19. 5. by two equal instalments, in 2 and 4 mos from registration,-secured. Trusts. N. Davidson, gentleman, and A. Bromwich, accountant, both Leicester CORNES, CORNELIUS, joiner, Hanley. Feb. 8. Trusts. H. Palmer, timber merchant, and T. Hampton, brick manufacturer, both Hanley COWARD, JAMES ALBERT, schoolmaster, Mansfield-vils, Wimbledon-hill, March 1. 2s. 6d. in 10 days from registration DAWSON, CHARLES ALFRED, gentleman, Bute-villa, Twickenham. REES, JOHN ROGER, grocer, Caerphilly. Feb. 8. Traza? Herbert, Pontypool, and T. Pritchard, Cardiff, both grocers SHACKLETON, GEORGE HENRY, confectioner, Sander and Feb. 9. 48. SIMPSON, CHARLES EDWIN, stationer, Birmingham. Feb. 2 Trust. W. G. Dixon, accountant, Birmingham SMART, STEPHEN, and SMART, THOMAS, shoe man Leicester. Feb. 22. 15 by four instalments, 4., 4. 6, 45M) and le. 6d. in 2, 4, 6, and 8 mos from registration-secured. Troel H. Weston, shoe manufacturer, and A. Bromwich, akutti both Leicester STANDEN, JOHN, miller, Consley Wood. Feb. 19. 2. days TAYLOR, DECIMUS, factor's clerk, Birmingham. Feb 18 47 days from registration TODD, JOHN, grocer, Barton-upon-Humber. Feb. 11. Tres L Bygott, miller, Barron Mere, near Barton-upon-Humber) Dalton, wholesale provision merchant, Kingston-upon-H TOWNSEND, EDWARD, tailor, Kingston-upon-Tiruses. 68. by two equal instalments, on May 1 and Aez 1-e secured. Trust. W. M. White, licensed victualler, pp Marylebone-st FERGUSON-CARY.-On the 8th inst., at West Teignmouth C GELL-EVERSHED.-On the 9th inst, at the Parish Chen LINFIELD TRIBE.-On the 6th inat, at Holy Trinity. In t ADLINGTON. On the 5th inst., at Stratford, Essex Williamina Stone Adlington, only daughter of Willas Spine Woollery, of Midgham, and Long Pond, Westmoreland, Juta Esq., and widow of the late Thomas Ellis Adlingt để the Courts of Exchequer and Chancery, Esq. BOUSFIELD.-On the 3rd inst., at her residence, Warbonat Oxon, aged 77, Rebekah, widow of the late W. C. Bousfeli, Es, of Chatham-place, solicitor. BURN-On the 10th inst.. at 26, Willes-road, Kentish two as cocoa. BREAKFAST A SUCCESSFUL EXPERIMENT. -The C Service Gazette has the following interesting remarks"There are very few simple articles of food which e boast so many valuable and important dietary properthe While acting on the nerves as a gentle stim lant, it provides the body with some of the pare elements of nutrition, and at the same time cires and invigorates the action of the digestive organs. T singular success which Mr. Epps attained by s homœopathic preparation of cocoa has never been passed by any experimentalist. By a thorough k ledge of the natural laws which govern the oper of digestion and nutrition, and by a careful appl of the fine properties of well-selected cocca, Mr. Fj has provided our breakfast tables with a delicte flavoured beverage which may save us many bear! doctor's bills.-ADVT.] HAMBERS to LET opposite Lincoln's-in Gateway (Chancery-lane).-A Barrister is destros LETTING one large ROOM (with use of Clerk's rom furnished or unfurnished. The chambers are quite ex lighted with gas. Rent to a desirable tenant would be t moderate. Apply to H. W. C. REYNELL, Esq., H, Cirosity lane, W.C. OFFICES to be LET, in a first-class Jan. 27. 2s. 6d. in 1 mo from registration. Trust. A. D. Boyd, Apply to J. P. and Son, 34, Walbrook. Cannon-street Station, varying from Sol, the suite, upwar gentleman, Inverness-vils, Hammersmith DEAN, CHARLES, hosiery manufacturer, Nottingham. Feb. 13. Trusts. G. Bridrett, yarn doubler, and W. McCraith, commission agent, both Nottingham DIXON, JOHN, grocer, Hardingswood. Feb. 11. Trusts. J. Gibbons, wholesale grocer, Tunstall, and J. Summer, wheelwright, Bunbury Locks, near Tarporley EDWARDS, JOSEPH, bootmaker, Carnaby-st, Golden-sq. March 5. 18. on June 5 GREGG, PATRICK HAMILTON, printer, Redditch. Feb. 8. 6. by HALL, JOHN, brick inanufacturer, Newcastle-upon-Tyne. Feb. 27. JENKINS, WILLIAM, innkeeper, Aberavon. Feb. 11. 38. 4d. on LEWRY, EDWARD RUSSELL, iron merchant, Stoweport. Jan. 30. MOSELY, CHARLES, brush manufacturer, Manchester. Feb. 8. FFICES. LINCOLN'S INN-FIELDSPART of a FLOOR, 357. per annum-Az R. F.," Mr. Maude's, Law Stationer, Quality an Chancery-lane. the chain. He was anxious to recommend that such chains should be painted white-at present 119 they were snares to both horses and riders. 120 WE stated recently that the new County Court Bill proposed to allow creditors to sue in their own district. In Parliament on Wednesday, it was said that the limit is to be where the debtor resides within twenty miles. Even in that case the plaintiff will be required to give security for costs. The Bill stands postponed until the 1st May, and before that time we shall offer 381 some suggestions, and invite the same from correspondents. 381 381 381 382 382 383 384 386 388 389 383 WE are glad to see that in the debate on the Habitual Criminals Bill, Lord HOUGHTON took the view which we have frequently urged in 386 favour of submitting bills affecting judicial pro387cedure to the Judges. He said, "he thought it most unfortunate that Bills of this character were not submitted to the ministers of justice in this country. He ventured to say that this 390 Bill had not been advised upon by any of the 300 Judges; indeed, he doubted whether they were aware that such a measure had been proposed. He certainly believed that this was the only country in the world where such a state of things would be tolerated." 390 COUNTY COURTS: Leeds County Court THE NEW BANKRUPTCY LAW: Notes of New Decisions Leeds County Court CORRESPONDENCE OF THE PROFESSION NOTES AND QUERIES ON POINTS OF PRACTICE.. 396 LEGAL OBITUARY: John Wray, Esq. 397 LAW SOCIETIES: Law Students' Debating Society.. 397 IN Iowa, we are told, a married lady is practising as an attorney. We are not surprised to learn further that she is very successful with juries. 398 WE have a strong objection to nibbling at great questions. Consequently, we cannot welcome a 398 paper issued by Mr. LORD, a barrister of the Inner Temple, upon the subject of the Irish Church Bill. This paper comprises a short analysis of the Bill, with parallel comments. Some of these comments are original, but Mr. LORD is in a great measure indebted to the Times, the Daily Telegraph, and the speeches of prominent members of Parliament. As an example of the original comments we will take the first, which deals with the statement in the preamble that it is expedient to dissolve the £ s. d. 176 011 0 171 union. The comment is, "We join issue here" -i.e., Mr. LORD joins issue with Mr. GLADSTONE. This may be an important fact, but does not help the opposition to the Bill. Nor is the matter mended by the subsequent statement that Mr. LORD considers the proposition contained in the Bill equivalent to confiscation. Whilst, however, thoroughly disapproving of this process of dealing with the Bill, we may state that there are some few interesting calculations in Mr. LORD's paper, tending to show that the surplus of seven or eight millions will be to a very large extent absorbed by the Roman Catholics. "A SOLICITOR," writing to the Times, suggests the re-enactment of an usury law to hold moneylenders in check. He points out that so thoroughly has the trade of money-lending been systematised, that the professional money-lender has now his bills of exchange ready printed, even to across the paper. Recent the word "accepted revelations of the courts of equity justify "A Solicitor" in his concluding remark that "as there exist laws to regulate the carriage of gunpowder and petroleum, to prevent the sale of poisons and public betting in the streets, to compel the muzzling of dogs, and so forth, I may not unreasonably claim it as a sound principle of legislation that the weak and helpless should, to some extent at least, be protected against the crafty and designing." TRADES UNION S. RMOUR says that the Trades Union Commission cannot agree upon a report. They are divided into at least three parties, each having its own scheme, and all mutually and irreconcileably hostile. The Government will, therefore, experience the greatest difficulty in redeeming the pledge given to Mr. Serjeant Cox, when questioned about it in the House, to legislate for these societies without delay. Under the circumstances, we understand it to be the intention of Mr. Serjeant Cox to publish the measure he has constructed for the better regulation of Trade Societies for the consideration of the Trades Unions generally, previous to its formal introduction to the House of Commons by a friend who has taken a great interest in the question. DEFECTS IN THE BANKRUPTCY BILL. APPROVING the main features of the ATTORNEYGENERAL'S Bill, it now becomes our duty to pick holes in it. Its author, indeed, invites criticism, and will be thankful for suggestions, his desire and design being to make it as perfect as the combined counsels of all who have given thought to the subject may enable him. The foremost and gravest defect appears to us to be the entire exclusion of penalty of all kinds from the law of bankruptcy. The Bill is based upon the assumption that bankruptcy should be nothing more than a machinery for facilitating the collection of an insolvent's property and dividing it equally among his creditors. According to this theory, it matters not how or why he became insolvent, whether he was merely a good man suffering from unavoidable misfortunes, or a reckless rascal but one degree removed from a swindler, who has run into debt never intending to pay. The law is not to smile upon the one nor frown upon the other. It is to seize such property as each has and distribute it so far as it will go among the creditors, leaving to them the cost and anxiety of prosecution, a plan which experience teaches us is equivalent to impunity, and consequently encouraging the growth of that species of roguery already too rampant among us- -the robbery of creditors, as being at once an easier and a safer pursuit than highway robbery. Sir ROBERT COLLIER would, perhaps, be right in this if the law made adequate provision both for the prosecution and for the punishment of bankruptcy offences. But it does not do this. The Criminal Law of Fraud is totally inadequate to meet the various kinds of fraud that are practised by bankrupts. Crimes and misdemeanours are definite acts, capable of being described in an indictment, so that they may be proved at law; but bankruptcy offences do not consist in one or even a few acts, but in a series of acts, each venial in itself, making in the aggregate an offence, which it is for the public welfare to visit with punishment. The old bankruptcy law did this with more or less of efficiency, and the penalty was appropriate. Being designed to protect the upon the question, and concludes that head by sibly in another Bill make further provisions for But its author intimated that he might posextending the criminal law of fraud so as to embrace the offences that now attend bankruptcy. Nothing could be more desirable; but he will find nothing more difficult. The present writer has more than once essayed to frame a new definition of fraud, which should include the many cases of that crime which now escape through the very wide meshes of the net which the law has spread. We are satisfied that the difficulty will not be met by any practicable alteration in the existing law of fraud. The subject must be dealt with, as hitherto, by special and exceptional law. A new category of crimes must be created, with new definitions and a new procedure, if not a new tribunal. Certain wrongs in the contraction of debt must be made punishable; the act of accusation must be in a special form, and the rules of evidence must be largely relaxed as respects the debtor and the creditor alike. The burden of prosecution must not be cast upon creditors; it should be conducted at the public cost, and it should always follow upon a report by the liquidator that the bankrupt had been guilty of the offence stated. Thus accompanied, the Bankruptcy Bill might be shorn of penal clauses without causing a saturnalia of roguedom; but then only if the one accompanies the other. EVIDENCE IN ACTIONS FOR MESNE IN the case of Pearse v. Coaker, which we re- It was contended, on the one hand, that the effect of the procedure given by the Common Law Procedure Act of 1852 makes a judgment by default of the same effect as under the old practice in ejectment. The 168th section of that Act requires the writ to be directed to the persons in possession by name, and the 170th section directs that it shall be served in the same manner as an ejectment has heretofore been served. And by the 112th rule of Hilary Term 1853 no judgment in ejectment for want of appearance or defence shall be signed without filing an affidavit of the service of the writ according to the Common Law Procedure Act 1852. The effect, it was contended, was that the judgment is primâ facie evidence of the defendant's possession in the absence of any evidence to rebut it. On the other hand it was submitted that the judgment was no evidence of possession at the date of the writ in the ejectment, but only evidence of title. The question is altogether novel, and at present it is more advisable to let the Judges speak than for us to offer any independent comments. The Lord Chief Baron discusses the matter fully. He says, "I am myself clearly of opinion that these proceedings in ejectment are no evidence of possession at all. Mr. Roscoe lays it down that the defendant's liability by reason of possession must be proved, and he says at page 579, speaking of what must be proved under that head, The possession and length of time during which the defendant has been in such possession is in issue on not guilty. The duration of possession must, it seems, be proved where the defendant lets judgment go by default.' He then cites various cases bearing form under the old practice. In the olden time the form was that the plaintiff do recover the term mentioned in the declaration, and, therefore, of course, comprising the plaintiff's interest in it but the modern form is, tha the recover the premises, and that may make a difference." Having thus examined the judgments on the main question of evidence, it will be seen that the question of damages in the action opens no field for further discussion, as it rests upon the evidence as to possession. BANKRUPTCY LAW REFORM. ANOTHER of our contributors, writing on this all engrossing subject says:-- In a remarkably lucid speech, the ATTORNEYlaw of bankruptcy. He has gone to the work in GENERAL has introduced to the House and the country the latest scheme for a reform in the the right way by making a clean sweep of the present law and creating and building up a fresh structure, untrammelled by the difficulties that always attend an attempt to fit a new plan to an Baron Channell differed from the Chief Baron, old one. He begins to rebuild upon a foundation being of opinion that the judgment by default strange to England, but long recognised in Scot is per se evidence of the defendant's possession land and elsewhere, that bankruptcy, as hitherto at the date of the writ in ejectment. He, how-understood in England, is not a subject for legisever, makes these observations as to the differ- lation at all; that it is a question simply of ence between the old and new practice. "I debtor and creditor, with which the law should agree," he says, "that under the old practice in interfere as little as possible, and then only to ejectment a plaintiff was bound to prove his title prevent positive injustice by securing the equal from the day of the demise, upon which very distribution of the debtor's estate, and giving nice questions have arisen, which are familiar certain facilities for the process of liquidation. to many of us, but into which I need not now Beyond this, says Sir R. COLLIER, bankruptcy law enter; and I also agree that though under the has properly no concern. If the bankrupt has been old practice judgment in ejectment by default a rogue or deals fraudulently with his property, proves title as from the day of the demise laid in his offence is the proper subject of criminal law, the declaration, or the day named in the writ, and if the criminal law is not sufficiently yet that it does not now prove possession for a stringent to punish such offences, it must be like period, and that a plaintiff in an action of made so. trespass for mesne profits, who seeks to recover damages for a period anterior to the date of the writ of ejectment, must establish the length of time of the defendant's possession of the premises before he can so recover." Bearing in mind the principle of the Bill, it will be seen that its provisions are well adapted for their object. The creditors are expected to take care of themselves; and if they do not profit by the facilities provided for them by the law, they will have to blame themselves alone. The machinery is given to them by the Bill, and, doubtless, in the course of the discussions that will attend its progress through Parliament, many improvements will be suggested by the combined experience of the mercantile men and lawyers who will take part in it without refer ence to the side of the House from which it comes; for this is no party question, and there is a general desire to deal with it effectually during the present session. to his creditors, and they will deal with it by electing a liquidator and appointing a committee of creditors to superintend, with an official auditor of the court to pass the accounts ultimately. The liquidator will be paid by commis sion or otherwise, as may be agreed, and the business will be identical with that of the official liquidator in winding-up: he will get in the estate and distribute it. Baron Pigott did not think it necessary to discuss the matter, but he said that had it been necessary he should have taken time to consider it. Baron Cleasby on the other hand did discuss the question learnedly, and came to the conclusion arrived at by Baron Channell that the judgment was evidence of possession at the date of the writ. Ejectment as it now exists," said his Lordship, "is the creature of a modern Act of Parliament (the Common Law Procedure Act 1852), which has enacted that instead of the previous proceedings, a writ shall be issued di- When a debtor is declared bankrupt-or, as rected to the persons in possession by name." If we should prefer, being a more accurate term there is one defendant only, then he is the person-insolvent-his entire estate will, as now, lapse to whom it is to be directed. We have then here a juddment setting out that writ, and directing that the plaintiffs shall be entitled to recover possession of the premises in question. We have then a judgment of this court upon a writ directed to the tenant in possession, and I am of opinion therefore that such judgment is evidence that that person is in possession as otherwise it would be no valid judgment of the court. The defendant is not estopped from showing that he was not in possession at the time, but it lies upon him to prove that. The question now before the court is, whether we are to give effect to our own proceedings and the record of the court so as to make them valid, at any rate primâ facie. If the judgment is not evidence of the defendant's possession, he being the person in possession to whom the writ was directed, how is it evidence of the plaintiff's title? But it cannot be disputed that it is evidence of title. The proceedings are evidence against all who are parties to them in the sense of being effectual. There was, therefore, in my judgment, evidence of the defendant's possession at the date of the writ without the aid of extrinsic evidence, and that is sufficient to carry the verdict to the extent to which it was settled to be reduced, namely, by the profits of the premises from the date of the writ in ejectment to the execution of the writ of possession, and the costs of the actual ejectment to which, as defendant, he was a party, and which I think are recoverable under this declaration. I decline to express any positive opinion as to how far a judgment in ejectment by default in modern practice is evidence of the plaintiff's title from the day mentioned in the writ, nor is it necessary in the present case to do so. There is a difference between the form of that judgment now and the The greater portion of the Bill consists of details of the machinery by which this work of realising and dividing is to be conducted, all of them being designed to facilitate the operation or to prevent abuses. It will be for the most part merely administrative work, which an ordinary accountant can perform, so that few officials will be required. It is to be consigned entirely to the County Courts in the country, and one Judge will amply suffice for the decision of legal questions. This duty is to be confided to the Election Judges, whose business, though great now, will never again be what it is, and then only periodically, after the fury of a general election. Separated from its details, this is really the outline of the measure, so far as it relates to the principle of the Act. The consequences of bankruptcy are a subject for distinct consideration, and will be open to more question. Sir R. COLLIER proposes that it shall operate as an absolute discharge of the debtor if the estate pays 10s. in the pound; but if it pays less than that sum, it shall not free him from liability until after the expiration of six years. It must be remembered that imprisonment for debt is abolished by the Bill, so that the credi tor will have no remedy against the bankrupt unless he possesses property. We would suggest a further provision, that if at any time after he should come into the possession of property, a certain proportion of that property, say onefourth, should pass to the creditors. members of society." We unhesitatingly con- lished on the outskirts of their cities for the purposes of trade; they are now insisted upon in favour of communities numbered by thouIt would also be an improvement to require sands living in their midst. They say also that that the creditors' committee and liquidator the original treaties and capitulations are merely should in all cases certify to the court specifihooks from which a vast construction of extra cally whether the bankrupt had in their judgfavours conceded or extorted, hang. And this ment dealt fairly with his creditors and with is true; but we must view the other side of the them, and if he had or had not been guilty of question. It cannot be disputed that a nation, fraud or improvidence in the contracting his The long and short of the matter is that the like an individual, may part with its rights if it debts, and what was the cause of his insolvency. only persons who would be directly benefited by pleases to do so. Turkey was a grand power Moreover, they should state if anything had the abolition of the law of primogeniture are when it signed most of those treaties and capituappeared calling for a prosecution; which certi- those members of families who are not eldest lations. It is on record how a British ambasficate should be sent to all the creditors, and the sons. To them, of course, the benefit is pal-sador was obliged to crawl on his knees into the court should make order upon it accordingly. pable and immediate. But, as admitted by Mr. presence chamber of the Sultan. The most Even if such a document led to no action, the HARRIS, these younger members would not recent of the capitulations-that with the United knowledge that a kind of judgment upon their become owners of the land. It would, in nine States-made long after the others had begun to conduct would be passed, and which, if adverse, cases out of ten, be found necessary to sell the be extended, grants greater privileges and immight lead to grave penal consequences, would land and divide the proceeds, so that the final munities than the rest. It may be said that certainly have a very deterring effect upon result of the abolition of the existing law would Turkey only granted by treaty to the United fraudulent debtors, and upon that larger class be the more frequent purchase and sale of landed States what she had already conceded to other who tread upon the verge of fraud by an estates. Whether this would be desirable we nations. No matter. She ratified those concesimprovidence which is morally, and ought conceive is open to the gravest doubt. sions with a full knowledge of how far they had to be legally, criminal. A certificate of good Without at present discussing a matter which gone, and gave other nations with whom she had conduct would, on the one hand, though at no distant day must, in one shape or another, treaties a treaty right to them because she had still having no legal consequences, be of receive the attention of the Legislature, we agree bound herself to grant to them "the same privigreat value to the honest but unfortunate with Mr. MOZLEY, who spoke first in the dis- leges and exemptions which by treaty or condebtor, by securing for him assistance in his cussion which followed the reading of Mr. cession" she should grant "to the most favoured efforts to begin the world again through the con- HARRIS's paper. He said there are two ques-nation." Nor can it be said that our original fidence it would inspire. By requiring a certi- tions which ought to be kept quite apart-First, treaties were granted out of respect to our ficate in every case, the creditors, assisted by the what should be the devolution of a man's pro- greatness as a nation, for the time in which they liquidator, would be compelled to inquire into the perty in the event of an intestacy? second, were ratified was the merry days of CHARLES conduct upon which it professes to report; and whether there should be any forcible interfer- THE SECOND, when the Dutch were merrily burnthe knowledge of this would, we are satisfied, ence to compel the division of a man's property ing our ships in the Medway, when our trade exercise an immense influence over that class of among his children? And he expressed the and credit were at their lowest ebb, and our dishonest debtors who comprise at least two-opinion which we hold when he said that he king an out-of-door pensioner of the French thirds of every bankrupt list. was most strongly opposed to any interference monarch. with the power possessed by all subjects of the realm to leave their property to whom they How the criminal law should be amended to meet this new state of things must be the subject of a separate article. THE DESCENT OF REAL PROPERTY. We have already discussed in these columns the arguments for and against the abolition of primogeniture, but it would appear that we had not anticipated the extent to which ingenuity may go in devising plans for the settlement of this vexed question. Up to the present time Parliament has been asked to go no farther than to sanction a Bill causing the real property of intestates to descend in the same manner as their personal property, and even that measure has been opposed by some of the most enlightened lawyers of the present generation. The Jurisprudence Department of the Social Science Association have, however, approved of a paper read by Mr. GEORGE HARRIS, in which he soberly considers whether the proper plan would not be to prohibit entirely the settlement of landed property upon any one member of a family to the exclusion of others. If this were adopted it is quite clear that the ultimate result must be the cutting up of the land into small portions, the total destruction of territorial influence, and probably an extensive diversion of investment from real to personal property. Mr. HARRIS appears to agree with those who think that the ownership of land should not be extensive unless absolutely necessary for the proper maintenance of hereditary titles. "Indeed," he says, "if an aristocracy is to be maintained in any country, it is almost, if not absolutely, necessary that a certain concentration of property, more especially of land, in their hands should also be maintained." Now it strikes us as somewhat remarkable that gentlemen of culture and sagacity cannot see that if a reservation were made in favour of the aristocracy there would be an immediate outcry that there was one law for the rich and another for the poor; that the aristocracy being the barrier to an uniform law, it would form an inviting object of attack, and that the final consummation would be the conversion of the nation into a nation of small proprietors having no dignities to sustain and liable in a dangerous degree to the influence of State patronage. Mr. HARRIS, however, recognises a principle as true which we conceive to be entirely false. He says, "Regarding the matter as a question of State policy, it is on many accounts extremely desirable that the land of the country should be much more generally distributed among the people than it now is. This, as I have already stated, would give the people a direct interest in the welfare of the country; besides which, by having something at stake, they would be more likely to become good citizens and useful would. Again, let us consider how it has come about that foreign communities and foreign trade have so much increased in Turkey? We are trying to establish commerce with China, Japan, and CONSULAR COURTS. Siam. How do we set about it? By creating THE knowledge of law and politics, which every an imperium in imperio for the protection of our ordinarily well read man possesses, without being merchants, the very twin brother of that we are either a lawyer or a politician, is enough for the asked to discontinue in Turkey. If this be the discussion of this question, if only the facts only way to deal with eastern nations, and it upon which argument must be based are faith- kick down the ladder which has raised them? seems to be so, have the Turks any right to fully presented. And when we find that even Secretaries of State have hazy and impractical Have they the right to say, "Thanks to the ideas of these facts, we may be excused for con- capitulations we have a thriving and numerous cluding that they are not generally understood. foreign connection through which to dispose of We start with the fact known to all, that our goods, and import what we have learned to throughout the dominions of the SULTAN, are require, therefore rescind those capitulations?" officers called Consuls, who administer justice in If they could add, "We have so far reformed the name, and under the commission of their our law and our mode of administering it, that respective Sovereigns. Let the reader try and you have no fear of getting justice at our hands," realise a state of things under which every it would be something to the purpose; but they foreigner resident in the city of London, and any cannot say so, or their best friends for them. If Londoner who had lived abroad and come back we English take the initiative, as we are asked with a foreign passport, was independent of our to do, in getting the other powers to abandon courts of civil or criminal jurisdiction, and their capitulation rights, what guarantee are amenable only to justice as administered by his we to give to those merchants and others who Consul. Nay, we must ask him to do more. He have sunk millions of capital in Turkish trade must realise a state of affairs which would on the faith of those very capitulations? If we forbid our police to follow even a murderer into accept the judgments of the Turkish, so called, a foreigner's house or property without the pre-into the Gazette. If we exercise a supervision courts, our fellow countrymen may at once go sence of a delegate from that foreigner's Consu- So much for the principle involved. When we over those tribunals, and try the cases after our own lights, it will be only the capitulations over again in another form. It is urged that our Consular Courts exercise an arbitrary and excessive jurisdiction, and the leading journal, quoting from some articles published fifteen years ago by a gentleman who has certainly not contributed credit to the service he satirised, has recently stated that a British Consul may imprison, fine, deport, and dishonour a British subject at his pleasure. The present writer has no knowledge of what was done in the Levant fifteen years ago, but he can answer for it that no Consul has now, or has had for the last ten years, any such power. He can imprison for twelve months, fine up to 100%, but he cannot deport an offender until he has been twice convicted of felony, and has failed to obtain securities to be of good conduct. Even then the sentence cannot be carried out without the approbation of the Supreme Consular Court at Constantinople, to which all the previous convictions must be referred. As for "dishonouring," it is not clear what that means. The word was probably put in for effect. If it means that the Consul may express his opinion of such and such a man, under such and such circumstances, he exercises just the same right as every man and every newspaper possesses. If he be correct, society benefits, if he be wrong, public opinion corrects the mistake. A Consul in the Levant is placed in a very difficult position. He has generally had no legal training, and yet is often set to decide questions which would divide the Court of Exchequer Chamber. But I am not going to appeal for him ad misericordiam. I have heard of freaks on the Consular bench. I have heard of freaks on the bench nearer home; and I am not at all sure that the decisions of Consuls in the Levant will not bear comparison with those of many courts of petty session, or even of County Courts at home. And the Consul has no attorney sitting under him as his clerk to give him the law, no library to consult, no friends at the Bar near at hand to ask for an opinion. One grievance urged against our Consular Courts speaks volumns in their favour. British merchants complain that they are compelled to do justice, whilst others heard in other courts are not held to do justice to them. This shows that our Consular Courts, as a rule, do their duty, and what is the consequence, simply this, that foreigners and natives prefer to do business with a British subject than with anyone else. Under Secretary HAMMOND who has the reputation of being a strict disciplinarian, bore the following testimony to the efficiency of our Consuls in the Levant before a Parliamentary committee, which sat in the year 1858 :— All I contend for on the part of the British Consuls is this, that as a body of men they perform those duties well and efficiently; and perhaps I may be allowed to say, with respect more especially to the Consuls in the Levant, that I believe there is no country possessed of a more efficient, a more zealous, or a more attentive body of public servants than we possess in the Levant, and have possessed there for many years. In the time of the war the conduct of those men was most exemplary. I know that they have been run down and ridiculed, that it has been the fashion for travellers to talk of their going about with janisaries and dragomans and assuming airs, but those men during the war exerted themselves most zealously and most efficiently to promote the public interests. I asked a person who had been on the spot, and who had the best means of knowing, his opinion of the conduct of our Consuls on the Black Sea, and he said it was most exemplary. We knew what our Consuls in the Levant did during the war; they collected from far and near provisions and cattle and forage, and in many cases men for the public service, and in every respect they did their duty wonderfully well. I am glad to have an opportunity of saying what do now of our public servants in the Levant. And as regards what is said by travellers of their ostentation, we must remember the country in which they live; that ostentation which is ridiculed by travellers is essential for the protection of those travellers in the country through which they pass, for it has weight with the authorities and people who are accustomed to estimate the importance of persons rather from what meets the eye than from intrinsic merit. and even natives, to submit their differences to the maligned British Consul, because of the confidence which his swift and honest administration of justice has inspired. The injustice, the costliness and delays (injustice under other names) of some foreign Consular Courts, and the reckless manner in which some foreign ministers press the questionable claims of their subjects against the Porte, are the real causes of similar acts by the Turks. A real Turk is not naturally dishonest and false, as some pretend. It is only when brought into contact with the scum of the Levant, and the unfair pressure of diplomatists, that he becomes so in self-defence. The lex talionis being his guide, he cannot understand that two wrongs do not make a right. He sees how foreigners stand together to get the better of him, and he follows their lead. The Government acts in the same way. They contest every claim made against them to create, by refusal and delay, a sort of insurance fund to provide for the unjust demands which diplomacy forces them to acknowledge. Take the following as an example of the sort of claims that are sometimes made: Said Pasha, Viceroy of Egypt, when a boy of fourteen, went to visit some windmills which a speculator was erecting for irrigating purposes, and insisted on seeing the machinery work before it was quite fixed. In moving it something broke, but no complaint was made at the time. But when the Viceroy died, nearly thirty years afterwards, the speculator (who had failed in his scheme) made a claim amounting to 21,000l. against his estate. There was the value of the concession (which had proved valueless), the sums it might have produced, and interest and compound interest at the rate of 2 per cent. a month on the profits. Had the astute claimant been a Greek or a Russian, his case would certainly have been pressed in the hope of getting something; but being an Ionian, and (at that time) under British jurisdiction, his petition (which had to pass through the Consulate) was sent back to him with some observations which he doubtless considered as "dishonouring." It is from Egypt that the cry against Consular Courts has been raised, and there is no part of the SULTAN'S dominions in which greater difficulties are presented against their abolition. In the first place, the treaties and capitulations have been there supplemented by concession and custom more extensively than in any other part of the Levant. And here, again, it must be remembered that such privileges were not extorted from a weak Government; they were freely granted by MAHOMMED ALI at a time when, but for our intervention, he could have chased the SULTAN from Stamboul, and become master of Turkey. He saw that a poor and thinly-inhabited country like Egypt required foreign capital, and hands for the development of its latent resources, and he said, in effect, "Establish yourselves in my cities, cultivate my lands, and settle your affairs in your own way." So now in Egypt every case in which a foreigner is a defendant or a prisoner-even if the plaintiff or complainant be a native-is tried in the Consulate of the former. This is no doubt an abuse, but no one who knows the country will undertake to say It is hardly fair after such evidence direct and that it has not its bright side. In Egypt, indirect in favour of our Consuls, that the system foreigners have long been allowed to buy houses they administer should be attacked on the and lands, and to hold them in their own names, ground of their arbitrary acts and incompetence, a privilege withheld in every other part of the based only upon a passage from the pen of an Turkish empire, notwithstanding the Hatti amusing, but certainly untrustworthy, contri-Humayum of 1854. Enabled thus to establish butor to Household Words, published fifteen years ago. Do the opponents of Consular Courts imagine that a British subject will be safer from fine, imprisonment, deportation, and dishonour, in the hands of a Turkish Pasha, than he is under the jurisdiction of such men as Mr. Hammond describes ? The committee before which this was said, invited complaints against Consuls, and one or two were made, but turued out utterly unfounded, Having gone deeply into all branches of the subject before it, the committee reported: "The administration of justice in the Levant under the Order in Council of 1844, and the appointment of Mr. (now Sir Edmund) Hornby as Judge of the Consular Court at Constantinople, leave little to be desired." Our procedure is simplicity itself. Cases under the value of 20l. are commenced by summons as in an English County Court; those of higher value by petition-a written narrative of the facts in English, French, or Italian, such as a traveller would write to his friend, or a merchant to his correspondent. Evidence is taken vivâ voce. But, unfortunately, all Consular Courts are not like our own. Many are shops for the sale of protection and injustice, and the encouragement of advocates who spin out the proceedings to a disgraceful length, and leave their fleeced clients in the lurch at the end. So well is this known that it is not unfrequent for foreigners, themselves on the land, to expend capital upon it, and patiently to await the development of their plans, in comparative security, a class of merchants has arisen in Alexandria and Cairo of standing, solidity, and repute, and far more useful to the country than the adventurers who resort to other less liberal places with the object of enriching themselves in a few years. A reversal of the present system would therefore be much more seriously felt in Egypt than elsewhere. In the second place, Egypt is less prepared to administer justice towards foreigners than any other part of the Turkish dominion. Its Viceroy must have learned a good deal during his visit to this country, and, probably, was most surprised by what some well-intentioned corporations, and deputations from societies, which ought to have known better, told him about his having done such wonders for trade and commerce. Were it possible for a Turk to do such a thing, he would have laughed at their beards. For, since he came to what is now a throne, his policy has been to make Egypt one huge farm, all the appliances of which should be in his hands, and all the profits in his pocket. Except in the case of a few firms, whom he has allowed to make fortunes out of him, he has placed every possible obstacle in the way of trade and com merce. Well might Mr. AYRTON (who has special and correct information on this head) say that if he were to tell honourable gentlemen what was going on in Egypt, he would "make their hair stand on end." So rooted is the fear of offending the Viceroy or his creatures, so well known the impossibility of succeeding in what is contrary to his or their private interests, that if he were to make his newly created parliament of sheiks a reality, open his railways and his canals to public use, retire from business, and give his judges and governors absolute immenity from control, it would be years and years before any change for the better could be effected. It is possible now that the succession has been secured for his son, instead of passing, according to Mahommedan law, to his eldest male relative, that his Highness may pause in his race for wealth, sure that his wives and children will not be persecuted and despoiled after his death, as he persecuted and despoiled the wives and children of the Prince he succeeded. It will not be necessary for him to leave behind a million, in the hope that they may be allowed to retain a hundred thousand. The goose of the golden eggs may be permitted to live and lay. This, however, applies only to Egypt. The Pashas who govern other important centres of trade, such as Smyrna, Beyrout, Adrianople, &c, pay heavy sums for their places, and hold them only for a few years. They must recoup themselves in some way, and, as dog does not prefer to eat dog, they will naturally deem the Giaours fair game as soon as they are at their mercy. Consular Courts to be indefensible, and we We started by admitting the principle of have shown that we English, at least, have made the best of a bad system. The question now to be answered is, How are they to be got rid of? Mixed tribunals are suggested; but this is only a minor phase of the old evil. What right could a Frenchman or a German have to insist upon adding a French or a German Judge to the Court of Queen's Bench? Besides, mixed tribunals have been tried for the settlement of municipal cases at Constantinople and Alexan dria, and they do not work well. The only safe and efficient course, as it appears to us, is to provide for the gradual extinction of the consular jurisdiction, and the gradual amelio ration of the local law and its tribunals. And the first step in this direction should be for all foreign powers having capitulations to engage to protect none but such as are boss fide their subjects. At present a Syrian goes to Trieste, comes back with an Austrian passport, and, depositing it in the Austrian Chancellerie, becomes thenceforth a subject of the KAISIR, and so on. Existing rights should be respected, but it would be no hardship to say that all persons born in the country, or establishing themselves therein for their own pleasure or profit, after a certain date, should be answerable to the country's law. And a period (sufficient to enable established firms to realise their capital and depart, if they desired to do so) might be fixed; after the expiration of which all exemptions should cease. That the result of such a plan would be highly detrimental to the commercial interests of Turkey, no one acquainted with it can doubt; but as the Turks desire to be inde pendent of the tutelage under which those inte rests have been fostered, they must pay for the luxury they seek. our own, to As well wishers of Turkey, we are sorry that the question has been raised. It is doubly to be regretted that pressure has been put upon our Government to initiate the change, because it is almost impossible that we can persuade the French, the Italians, and the Greeks, who have interests at stake as great as approach the subject from our point of view. The integrity of the Turkish Empire is not a pet theory with France, and though, if she agreed to our proposal Greece and Italy might have to do as they are told, there is a formidable power due north that would be glad of an oppor tunity of creating dissensions. The Turkish Empire has often been compared to a ruined house, which the labourers dare not attempt to repair lest the whole structure should come |