498 New Bills in Parliament.- Practical Points of lieneral Interest. into any agreement for that purpose under the provisions herein after contained. Provided that for the purposes of this act no other than the party for the time being in possession of such lands shall be deemed proprietor thereof, the same being a body politic, corporate, or collegiate, or tenant in fee-simple, or in tail or for life, or by the curtesy of England, or other estate of freehold, or for years deter minable on life or lives. Provided further, that where such proprietor shall be an infant, feme covert, lunatic, or under any other legal disability, such agreement may be made with consent of the guardian, trustee, feoffee for charitable or other uses, husband, committee, or attorney of or for any such proprietor, and not otherwise; and that in all cases of agreements under this act the consent of the person next in reversion or remainder, or of the lessor, as the case may be, shall be testified thereto under the common seal of any corporate body, and under the hand of any other consenting party. 2. Agreements to be in writing. Consent unnecesssary for exchange of lands held in right of a church, &c. 3. Agreements to be accompanied by a schedule containing particulars, which shall be deposited with the Clerk of the Peace, and notice thereof published in some news-paper. 4. Persons having any objections to such exchanges, &c., to deposit them with the clerk of the peace fourteen days before the assizes at which the agreement is to be taken into consideration. 5. Clerk of the peace to cause the agreement, &c. to be laid before a Judge of Assize, who shall appoint a barrister to take it into consideration. 6. Barrister may summons witnesses. False swearing to be deemed perjury. 7. Barrister to examine witnesses and determine objections. 8. After enquiry the barrister to certify as the case may be. 9. In case of an agreement in which there shall be a difference in value, the barrister to insert a provision for the payment thereof; but no agreement to admit a difference of more than one-fifth. 10. The certificate, with the agreement, &c. and statement of objections, to be laid before the Judge, who shall make order thereupon. The Judge may institute further enquiry. 11. Remuneration of barrister in the discretion of the Judge. 12. Costs and charges of proceedings to be certified by the barrister, and decided by the Judge. 13. Lands given in exchange, to be exonerated from the uses affecting them at the time, and to become subject to such uses as affected the lands taken. 14. Eviction. 15. General saving. 16. Signification of words. PRACTICAL POINTS OF GENERAL INTEREST. PRIZE FIGHTS. In the following case, the correct rule as to prize fights is laid down, and which it is material to state, as affecting all those who are present, as well as the principals and seconds. See also Rex v. Bellinghum, 2 Car. & Pay. 234. The indictment charged the murder of Edward Thompson to have been committed by Michael Murphy, in Frien Barnet; and that the prisoner and others were present aiding and abetting. It appeared that there was a fight between Michael Murphy and the deceased, at which a great number of persons were assembled; and that in the course of the fight the ring was broken in several times by the persons assembled, who had sticks, which they used with great violence. It appeared that the deceased died in consequence of blows he received on this occasion; and the witnesses for the prosecution spoke to the prisoner's having acted as one of the seconds in the fight: but it was proved that he had not any stick. For the defence, several witnesses werec a lled, who proved, that though the prisoner was present during the fight, yet that he did not act as second; and that he did nothing, and did not even say anything. Littledale, J. (iu summing up).-If the prisoner was at this fight, encouraging it by his presence, he is guilty of manslaughter, although he took no active part in it. My attention has been called to the evidence of those witnesses who have said that the prisoner did nothing; but I am of opinion, that persons who are at a fight in consequence of which death ensues, are all guilty of manslaughter, if they encouraged it by their presence-I mean, if they remained present during the fight. I say, that if they were not casually passing by, but stayed at the place, they encouraged it by their presence, although they did not say or do anything. This is my opinion of the law of the case. However, you ought to consider whether the deceased came by his death in consequence of blows he received in the fight itself; for if he came by his death by any means not connected with the fight itselfthat is, if his death was caused by the mob coming in with bludgeons, and taking the matter as it were out of the hands of the combatants, then persons merely present encouraging the fight would not be answerable, unless they are connected in some way with that If the death occurred particular violence. from the fight itself, all persons encouraging it by their presence are guilty of manslaughter; but if the death ensued from violence unconnected with the fight itself, that is, by blows given, not by the other combatant in the course of the fight, but by persons breaking in the ring and striking with their sticks, those who were merely present are not, by being present, guilty of manslaghter; then, as there is no professional man knows that the attendance at proof that the prisoner had any thing to do the Judges' Chambers almost invariably occuwith this latter violence, he ought to be ac-pies two hours, and frequently more. The quitted. The case is, at most, one of manslaughter only; and the charge of murder is not at all supported. Verdict, guilty of manslaughter.-Rex v. Murphy, 6 Car. & Pay, 103. SELECTIONS FROM CORRESPONDENCE. No. LI. NEW SCALE OF COSTS. To the Editor of the Legal Observer. : I have read your remarks on the subject of the reduced scale of Common-Law costs, and I believe, the profession generally coincide with you, that the costs for recovering sums of money under 207. should be reduced to a fixed amount, as far as practicable, and that to a certain extent, the new schedules of fees are satisfactory but at the same time, it is to be regretted that the Judges should have framed these schedules, without consulting, as they evidently have not, the taxing officers, or some practical man on the subject. One of your correspondents points out that the search for plea is omitted; and so is the affidavit of the service of the writ, if the defendant should not appear; and also the appearance to be entered for him, according to the statute; also the "warrant and docket" unless they mean the item, "Paid Judgment Fee and Docket, as usual," to be it; also the copy of the particulars to annex to brief; ditto of set off, and the notice to produce, and copy to annex to brief; also marking the postea 6d. The remanets are altogether omitted. We must therefore presume that all those things not mentioned, are to be charged as heretofore, and that the summons for trial is only meant to govern the charge, and not the number of summonses. same remark applies to the attendance to tax; will any dispassionate person contend that 38.4d. is an adequate remuneration for, we will say three hours occupation? for if the Attorney lives at a distance it will take him that time to go, attend the summons, or taxation, and return. I am not contending that the charge is too small, but am merely pointing out the rate of remuneration, because I know it will be answered, individually the charges are small, but collectively they are great, compared with the sum recovered. I sincerely hope, that if any attempt is made to reduce the salaries of the Judges, it will be successfully resisted; no set of men so hardly earn the money they receive; and unless the Judges of the land are liberally paid, there will be no inducement for men of eminence at the Bar, who make large incomes by their practice, to accept seats on the Bench. We have had enough of hypocrisy and economy, and attempts to subvert our institutions, and implant foreign law, and theoretical absurdities, neither congenial to our wants or tastes, nor applicable to the genius or circumstances of Englishmen, When Great Britain is reduced to the same state of poverty as those nations whose institutions it is wished to impose on us, and to the same influence they hold in the scale of nations, then let us have their laws, but not till then. J. W. C. To the Editor of the Legal Observer. Sir, A greater injustice could not be committed upon the profession, than the intended mode of cheapening Law at the expense of the laborious practitioner; or rather, with more aptness it may be called, the bar to justice. Whilst the measure reduces full one half the emoluments and fees of the profession, it does not in the least lessen the responsibility and anxiety of its members; and the same fees are still to be payable at the public offices. Is it likely that the suitors will be able to induce a respectable attorney to take their causes in hand when half the amount of his bill is actually money advanced out of his pocket? The cry which has been set up, for cheap law, has deluded the credulous, who suppose this method, and others of a similar nature, will give it them; but, as for every other valuable commodity, you must pay the fair price, this law at half price, which at first sight seems so attractive, will Some short time back the fee for at-lead to consequences, which must sooner or tendance before a Judge at Chambers was raised from 3s. 4d. to 6s. 8d; and the fee for the attendance to tax was also raised to 6s. 8d.; they are now both reduced to 38. 4d. Every 1 would be most inconvenient and arbitrary, to bind an attorney down to attend the first summons, served perhaps at nine o'clock at night, to go before the Judge the next morning at eleven, when he might be obliged to be elsewhere; with a second summons, he has an opportunity of making arrangements to attend it. a These reductions apply only to cases not exceeding 201. and not to them if the Judge certifies that the action was properly tried at Nisi Prius.-ED. later shew the superiority of the old method of obtaining justice. I am well aware but one feeling and sentiment pervades the whole profession relative to these impositions upon the credulity of the non-professionals; and why do not they give expression to their minds, and, at all events, endeavour to remove so wrong an impression. Let me in conclusion ask, is there any reduction in the expense necessary to be 500 Sixth Report of the Common Law Commissioners, on the Inns of Court. come a lawyer; and when the profession has THE SIXTH REPORT OF THE COM- ADMISSIONS OF LAW STUDENTS, AND CALLS In support of these positions, a variety of passages are cited from Dugdale's Origines Juridiciales, which clearly shew that, in former times, the Judges and the Benchers made regulations to be observed by the Inns of Court, not only respecting the admission to the Bar, but generally regarding the conduct of the Members of the Inn, and the admission of Students. Many instances will be found in the Appendix of such orders, sometimes made by advice of the Privy Council and Judges, and sometimes by the Judges only, and sometimes by the Benchers, by advice and direction of the Judges, and proceeding To the King's Most Excellent Majesty, in from the King's suggestion. his High Court of Chancery. There does not appear to be an instance modern times in which the Judges have interfered with the internal regulations of the different societies, though there are several in which they have acted as Visitors, upon appeals to them from decisions of the Benchers respecting calls to the Bar. WE, your Majesty's Commissioners appoint-in That in obedience to your Majesty's commands, communicated to us by your Majes. ty's Secretary of State for the Home Department, we have proceeded to inquire into the regulations and practice of the four Inns of Gourt, respecting the admission of persons to be Students, or to be called to the Bar, and now humbly submit to your Majesty the result of our inquiries. The four Inns of Court-the Inner Temple, the Middle Temple, Lincoln's Inn, and Gray's Inn,-severally enjoy the privilege of conferring the rank of Barrister at Law: a rank which constitutes an indispensable qualification for practice in the Superior Courts. No other means of obtaining that rank exist, but that of becoming inrolled as a Student in one or other of these Inns, and afterwards applying to its principal officers (or Benchers) for a call to the Bar. The origin of this privilege of the Inns of Court appears to be involved in considerable obscurity. It was observed by Lord Mansfield, in the case of The King v. Gray's Inn, Doug. 354, that the original institution of the Inns of Court nowhere precisely appears; but it is certain that they are not corporations, and have no charter from the Crown. They are voluntary societies, which for ages have submitted to government, analogous to that of other seminaries of learning; but all the power they have concerning the admission to the Bar is delegated to them from the Judges; and in every instance their conduct is subject to their controul as Visitors. In the late case of Mr. Wooler, reported as the case of The King v. The Benchers of Lincoln's Inn, 4 B. & C. 855, it was held that the Judges had no power, as Visitors, to interfere with the regulations of the Inns of Court respecting the admission of Students; and also that the Court of King's Bench could not, in such case, interfere by mandamus. It was observed by Mr. Justice Littledale, that the Court was called upon to controul the Society in the admission of their Members; but that, as far as the admssion of Members is concerned, those are viluntary Societies, not submitting to any government. They may in their discretion admit or not, as they please; and the Court of King's Bench has no power to compel them to admit any individual." He added, that "the interference of the Judges at the instance of those Members of the Societies whom the Benchers had refused to call to the Bar, was perfectly right; because a Member, who had been suffered to incur expense with a view to being called to the Bar, thereby acquires an inchoate right to be called; and if the Benchers refuse to call him, they ought to assign a reason for so doing; and if there be no reason, or an insufficient one, then the Member who has acquired such inchoate right is entitled to have that right perfected." With respect to the regulations and practice now in force in the different Inns of Court, relative to the subjects referred to us under the present Inquiry, we find them to be as follows: Sixth Report of the Common Law Commissioners, on the Inns of Court. 1st. As to the Admission of Students. The following rules appear to have been adopted by all the four societies: Before any person can be admitted a Member he must furnish a statement in writing, describing his age, residence, and condition in life, and comprising a certificate of his respectability and fitness to be admitted, which must be signed by the party, and a Bencher of the Society, or two Barristers. No person is admitted without the approbation of a Bencher, or of the Benchers in Council assembled. The applicant must, before he can enter into commons, (and in some Societies on admission) sign a bond with surety conditioned to pay the dues. Every person applying to be admitted a Member of any of the Inns must sign a declaration that he is desirous of being admitted for the purpose of being called to the Bar, and it is required by all the Societies that he shall not, without the special permission of the Society, take out any certificate as a Special Pleader, Conveyancer, &c. under 44 G. 3. c. 98, and such permission is not granted until the applicant has kept such commons as are necessary to qualify him to be called to the Bar, and it is given for one year only at a time. Besides these regulations, we are informed, that at the Inner Temple, and at Gray's Inn, no person is admissible while engaged in trade. It has also been a rule at the Inner Temple, since the year 1829, that no person shall be admitted without a previous examination (by a Barrister appointed by the Bench for that purpose) in classical attainments and the general subjects of a liberal education. Such examination is to include the Greek and Latin languages, or one of them, and such subjects of history and general literature as the Examiners may think suited to the age of the applicant. 2d. As to the Call to the Bar. 501 dining in the Hall at least three times in each term. He must have been a Member of the Inn for five years, unless he has taken the degree of Master of Arts or Bachelor of Law at the Universities of Oxford, Cambridge, or Dublin, or (at Lincoln's Inn) is a Member of the Faculty of Advocates in Scotland, in which case he may be called after he has been a Member of the Inn for three years; but this exception does not extend to honorary degrees. A Student, previously to his keeping any of the terms requisite for his call, must deposit with the Treasurer of the Society 1007., to be returned, without interest, on his being called to the Bar; or in case of death, to his personal representatives; but this rule does not apply to any person who shall produce a certificate of his having kept two years terms in any of the Universities of Oxford, Cambridge, or Dublin, or (at Lincoln's Inn) of his being a Member of the Faculty of Advocates in Scotland. No person can be called to the Bar until he is twenty-one years of age. The call to the Bar is by an act of the Benchers in Council or Parliament, &c. assembled. The being called to the Bar must be hung up in name and description of every candidate for the Hall a fortnight before he is to be to the Bar must make application to a called. Any person applying to be called Master of the Bench to move for the same. And the list of applicants to be called to the Bar at any Society, is always transmitted, before the call takes place, to the other Societies. At the Inner Temple, Middle Temple, and Lincoln's Inn, no Attorney, Solicitor, or Proctor, can be admitted to commons for the purpose of being called to the Bar, until his name shall have been struck off the Roll. called to the Bar must read his exercises at In Lincoln's Inn, a person wishing to be the Bar Table, and the Barristers at that table have a power of rejection, subject to an appeal to the Benchers. If not rejected by the Bar Table, it is still necessary that he should be approved by the Bench. At Lincoln's Inn, it is a rule that no perThe following regulations appear to be in son in trade is permitted to do exercises to force in all the Societies: No person in enable him to be called to the Bar; and Priests or Deacons Orders can be called to there is the same prohibition as to any perthe Bar. No person can be called to the Bar son who has been in the situation of Clerk while he is on the Roll of Attorneys, Soli- to a Barrister, Conveyancer, Special Pleader, citors, or Proctors. Before a person can or Chancery Draftsman, and has done the be called to the Bar, he must keep commons offices and received the perquisites of such for three years, that is, twelve terms, by clerk. 502 Sixth Report of the Common Law Commissioners, on the Inns of Court. 3d. As to the case of rejection upon an application to be admitted Student, or to be called to the Bar. The general state of practice in all the Societies appears to be as follows: If a person be refused admission as a Student by any of the Societies, he has no means, either by appeal to the Judges or otherwise, of bringing under revision the propriety of the rejection, [so decided in the case of The King v. Lincoln's Inn, before referred to, which is in accordance with the state of the practice] and a certificate of the rejection is transmitted to all the other Societies. Where any of the Societies refuse to call a person to the Bar, the Benchers will hear him personally or by counsel, and allow him to give evidence to rebut the charges made against him; and if he be dissatisfied with their decision, he may appeal to the Judges. On such appeal, the Benchers send to the Judges a certificate stating the reasons of their refusal to call such person to the Bar. It may, however, be right to remark, that we are not informed of any positive rule or order regulating the mode of proceeding in cases of appeal; and it deserves particular notice, that there is not any specific regulation to insure a full and correct report of the evidence, as taken before the Benchers, for the information of the Judges. The remarks which have occurred to us on the review of the whole subject of inquiry, are as follows: It appears that there is vested in the Benchers of the several Inns of Court an uncontrolled and irresponsible power of debarring any person from admission into their Societies, though that admission forms the first entrance into a profession occupying a most prominent and important rank among our Civil Institutions; and even when this entrance has been gained, and the party has consequently been led to devote himself for a period of three or five years to the studies which are to qualify him for practice, the discretionary power of refusing that Call to the Bar, without which his further progress is impossible, is again vested (subject indeed to appeal) in the same bodies of persons. It should be remarked, too, that the Benchers derive from those privileges, not only the means of excluding from the Bar any particular individual whose admission there they disapprove, but the right also of laying down such general regulations as from time to time they may think fit applicable to the case of all of becoming Barristers. persons desirous This state of things does not appear to us to be satisfactory, though the probity and honor of the persons who now fill the benches of the different Societies are well known, and though the number of rejected candidates has within the last twenty years been extremely small, yet we cannot think that a power, in the right use of which society is so deeply interested, ought to be left without control in the hands of persons whose functions are not of a public and responsible kind. As to the decision in the case of The King v. The Benchers of Lincoln's Inn, to which we referred at the commencement of this Report, it suggests in our judgment no satisfactory reason for continuing to the Benchers the privilege of deciding on the admission of a Student, without appeal. That case considers the Inns of Court as placed upon the footing of other voluntary societies, with respect to the admission of Members. Without presuming to question the correctness of this decision, in point of law, we may be permitted to remark that in point of expediency, the ordinary immunities of a voluntary society ought not to be allowed to any body of persons claiming to be the medium of admission into one of the learned professions. If the body is to enjoy this privilege, it is no longer a private association, but one in which the public has a deep interest, and the proceedings of which, if not adapted to the purposes of general utility, ought to be made so by the interposition of law. Under these impressions, we deem it right humbly to recommend, in the first place, that either by act of Parliament, or by authority of your Majesty in Council, the Societies be enjoined to allow, and the Judges of the Courts at Westminster to receive, an appeal from any act of the Benchers of any Inn of Court, rejecting an application for admission into their Society. It would be right also, in our opinion, to establish, by way of positive regulation, that in all cases where an application is rejected, whether it relates to admission as a Student, or to the call to the Bar, the party applying shall have notice in writing of the cause of rejection-shall be allowed to clear himself from any charge of misconduct which it may involve, and for that purpose shall be at liberty to make his defence, either in person or by counsel, and to produce evi |