The Foreign Canon Law, the Legatine Constitutions, and the Provincial Constitutions. Its authority depends upon the 29 Henry VIII., c. 19, which directed that (inter alia) the canon law then in force should so continue until reviewed, which review has never been made. These canons which have not been confirmed by parliament are not binding on the laity, but probably they are on the clergy. (Burn's Ecclesiastical Law, vol. I., p. 30; Smith's Eccles., p. 6.)

10. A. In what ways can civil and criminal suits respectively be commenced in the Ecclesiastical Courts?

A. Both kinds of suits may be commenced in three ways by citation, by decree, and by monition. There is also a fourth way, by act on petition, but which is practically applicable only to civil suits. (Smith's Eccles., p. 82.)

THE SOLICITORS' HONOURS EXAMINATION IN JANUARY, 1883.

(These Questions and Answers will be published in our next month's number.)

EXAMINATIONS AT THE INCORPORATED LAW SOCIETY IN THE YEAR 1882.

SPECIAL PRIZES OPEN TO ALL CANDIDATES. Scott Scholarship.-Ernest Edwin Meek being, in the opinion of the Council, the candidate best acquainted with the Theory, Principles, and Practise of Law, they have awarded to him the Scholarship founded by Mr. John Scott, of Lincoln's Inn Fields, London. Mr. Meek served his clerkship with Mr. James Matthew Meek, of Darlington, and with Messrs. Hanhart and Gillman, of London, and obtained the Clement's Inn and Daniel Reardon prizes at the Final Examination held in January, 1882.

Broderip Prize.-Frederic William Emery having shown himself best acquainted with the Law of Real Property and the Practice of Conveyancing, having passed a satisfactory Examination, and obtained honorary distinction, the Council have awarded to him the prize, consisting of a gold medal, founded by Mr. Francis Broderip, of Lincoln's Inn. Mr. Emery served his clerkship with Messrs. Iliffe, Russell, Iliffe & Cardale of London, and obtained the Clement's Inn and Daniel Reardon prizes at the Final Examination held in June, 1882.

LOCAL PRIZES.

Timpron Martin Prize for Candidates from Liverpool. Atkinson Prize for Candidates from Liverpool or Preston.Roderick Williams having, from among the candidates from Liverpool, passed the best examination, and attained honorary distinction, the Council have awarded to him the prize, consisting of a gold medal, founded by Mr. Timpron Martin, of Liverpool; and having, from among the candidates from Liverpool or Preston, shown himself best acquainted with the Law of Real Property and the Practice of Conveyancing, otherwise passed a satisfactory examination, and attained honorary distinction, the Council have awarded to him the prize, consisting of a gold medal, founded by Mr. John Atkinson. of Liverpool. Mr. Williams served his clerkship with Mr. Joseph Richardson, of the firm of Messrs. Laws, Bird, Newton, and Richardson, of Liverpool, and obtained a second class certificate at the Final examination held in January, 1882.

Birmingham Law Society's Prize for Candidates from Birmingham.-The Examiners reported that among the candidates from Birmingham in the year 1882 there was no one qualified to take the prize.

Stephen Heelis Prize for Candidates from Manchester or Salford.-Frederic William Hardman having, from among the candidates from Manchester or Salford, passed the best examination, and attained honorary distinction, the Council have awarded to him the prize, consisting of a gold medal, founded in memory of the late Mr. Stephen Heelis, of Manchester. Mr. Hardman served his clerkship with Mr. Christopher Moorhouse, and with

Mr. John Graves, of Salford, and obtained a prize at the Final Examination held in January, 1882.

INNS OF COURT.

DECEMBER EXAMINATION, 1882.

Examination of the students of the Inns of Court on the subjects of the lectures of the Professors, held at Lincoln's Inn Hall, 19th and 20th December, 1882.

The Council of Legal Education have awarded the following prizes to the undermentioned students :

Roman Law, Jurisprudence, and Private International Law.-Hugh Fraser, Inner Temple, £50; Satyendra Prasanna Sinha, Lincoln's Inn, £25; Henry Lynn, Inner Temple, 15; Shapurji Kavasji Sanjana, Inner Temple, £10. Common Law.-William Hepworth Mercer, Inner Temple, £50; Gilbert Rowland Alston, Inner Temple, £25; Robert Frederick Colam, Middle Temple, £15; Thomas Mott Whitehouse, Middle Temple, £10. Real and Personal Property Law.-Lawrence Hugh Jenkins, Lincoln's Inn, £25; James Shapland Sargeaunt, Inner Temple, £10. Equity.-Thomas Frederick Hobson, Inner Temple, £50; John Morris Stone, Lincoln's Inn, £10.

The Council have also awarded to the students who obtained the greatest aggregate number of marks in the subjects of the lectures given by two of the Professors, viz., in Equity, and Real and Personal Property Law.John Lenton Pulling, Gray's Inn, £70; William Andrew George Woods, Middle Temple, £30.

HILARY EXAMINATION, 1883.

General Examination of Students of the Inns of Court, held at Lincoln's Inn Hall, 21st, 22nd, 27th, 28th, and 29th December, 1882, and 1st January, 1883.

The Council of Legal Education have awarded to Henry Lynn, Inner Temple, and Thomas Henry Richmond, Gray's Inn, studentships in Jurisprudence and Roman Law of 100 guineas, to continue for a period of two years; and to Frederick Ritter, Middle Temple, and James Robert Vernam Marchant, Gray's Inn, studentships in Jurisprudence and Roman Law of 100 guineas, for one year.

The Council have also awarded to the following Students Certificates that they have satisfactorily passed a Public Examination :-Anthonyson, William Ebenezer, Middle Temple; Archer, William, Middle Temple; Barton, Charles Croker, Middle Temple; Beddoes, William Francis, Inner Temple; Berger, Ernest Maris, Inner Temple; Bond, Henry, Middle Temple; Bower, Herbert Morris, Middle Temple; Brown, Charles Herbert, Inner Temple; Bruce, James Alexander Beresford Barwick, Middle Temple; Button, John James, Inner Temple; Cann, William Moore, Inner Temple; Carrington, George, Inner Temple; Clarke, Charles Pitcher, Inner Temple; Cunliffe, John Williams, Inner Temple; David, Alexander Jones, Inner Temple; Evans, Griffith Henry, Middle Temple; Ford, William, Middle Temple; Graham, William Woodman, Middle Temple; Grant, Thomas Wentworth, Inner Temple; Hall, Hugh, Inner Temple; Henderson, Richard, Inner Temple; Hewitt, Edgar Percy, Lincoln's Inn; Hipwell, Alfred George, Middle Temple; Holloway, Edward Thomas, Middle Temple; Hopkins, Albert Bassett, Inner Temple; Jaques, Maurice, Inner Temple; Kirkham, Thomas Brown, Middle Temple; Latter, Bertram Henry, Inner Temple ; Lawrence, Walter, Inner Temple; Lewin, Wilfrid Hale, Middle Temple; McNaughton, David Norman, Middle Temple; Mactaggart, William Charles, Inner Temple; Manning, Henry John, Middle Temple; Moline, Edgar Robert, Inner Temple; Morgan, Christopher Hird, Lincoln's Inn; Munroe, Harry Courthope, Inner Temple; O'Connor, Arthur, Middle Temple; Oxenham, Edward Lavington, Middle Temple; Parr, Robert, Inner Temple; Payne, Frederick William, Inner Temple; Payne, Frederick William, Inner Temple; Payne, John Farrell Lavington, Inner Temple; Rubie, John Fonthill, Inner Temple; Shindler, Thomas, Inner Temple; Smith, Algernon Haskett, Middle Temple; Smith, Ernest Manley, Inner Temple; Tomkinson, George Arnold, Inner

Temple; Vaughan, Gerald Osmond, Middle Temple; Vels, Henry Bernard Isaac, Inner Temple; Warden, Arthur Henry, Lincoln's Inn; Webbe, Herbert Ross, Lincoln's Inn; White, Horace, Inner Temple; Wise, Bernhard Ringrose, Middle Temple; and Yates, James Stuart, Middle Temple. The number of students examined was 101; of these 54 passed as above, and 47 were postponed; 113 students were also examined in Roman Law, of whom 94 passed, and 19 were postponed.

The Solicitors' Preliminary Examinations throughout the year 1883 will take place on 14th and 15th February, 9th and 10th May, 11th and 12th July, and 24th and 25th October.

The remaining Solicitors' Intermediate Examinations throughout the year 1883 will take place on 26th April, 21st June, and 8th November. The work for the examinations is Stephen's Commentaries, 8th or any subsequent edition, omitting Books IV. and VI.

The remaining Solicitors' Final Examinations throughout the year 1883 will take place on 24th and 25th April, 19th and 20th June, and 6th and 7th November.

The Easter Bar Final Pass Examination will be held on 13th, 14th, 15th and 16th March next. Subjects-Common Law. 1. Contracts. 2. Torts. 3. Criminal Law. 4. Practice in the Queen's Bench Division. Equity. 1. Trusts. 2. Mortgages. Conveyancing. Elementary Principles, chiefly from Williams' Real Property and Williams' Personal Property, and the Married Women's Property Act, 1882. The Trinity Bar Final Pass and Honours' Examination will commence on 3rd May next. Further particulars next mouth.

Law Students' Sagigtigs.

[Reports of, and information as to Law Students' Societies, throughout the kingdom, will be inserted as far as space will permit, and secretaries are invited to communicate.-One condensed report of the whole month's proceedings should be forwarded. -Communications should reach the office of this Journal, if possible, not later than the 24th of each month.]

DURHAM CITY LAW STUDENTS' SOCIETY.

The annual meeting of this society was held at the office of Henry Marshall, Esq., solicitor, Durham, on Thursday, the 11th January, 1883. The honorary secretary (Mr. A. E. Graham) read the annual report and treasurer's balance-sheet, which were duly adopted. The report showed that there were now sixteen ordinary and six bonorary members of the society; that twelve meetings had been held, at six of which points of a legal character were discussed, and at two of which lectures on legal subjects were delivered. The report also stated that three members of the society had passed the Intermediate examination during the year. The treasurer's balance-sheet showed a good balance in hand. The committee and officers for the ensuing year were elected as follows :-Committee, Messrs. J. G. Howe, F. W. Shields, and A. E. Graham ; honorary secretary, Mr. H. W. Spowart; honorary treasurer, Mr. E. White. The society, notwithstanding that it has had only one season's existence, appears, we are informed, to be in a satisfactory condition, and promises to afford great advantages to the law students of Durham.

LANCASTER LAW STUDENTS' DEBATING SOCIETY.

At the fourteenth meeting of the session, held on Wednesday the 10th January, 1883, Wm. Whelon, Esq., in the chair, the subject for debate was : "Is the case of Percival v. Hughes (51 L. J. R., N, S., 388 Q. B.) decided

rightly?" was opened for the affirmative by Mr. J. E. Lambert, and for the negative by Mr. H. S. Oglethorpe' After a searching discussion, the openers having replied, the chairman summed up and gave his verdict for the negative. A vote of thanks to the chairman concluded the meeting.

At the fifteenth meeting of the session, held on Wednesday, the 17th January. 1883, James W. Marshall, Esq. in the chair, the subject for debate was: "X, a person in Y's employ, receives an injury caused by reason of a defect in certain machinery supplied by A to Y. The accident is due to negligence on the part of A in the construction of the machinery. Can X maintain an action against A for damages? was opened in the affirmative by Mr. J. C. Clarke, and in the negative by Mr. J. W. Picard. After a lengthy debate, the chairman summed up, and gave his verdict for the negative. A vote of thanks to the chairman concluded the meeting.

LIVERPOOL LAW STUDENT'S ASSOCIATION.

The annual meeting of this association was held on Monday evening, the 15th January, in the Law Library, Union Court, Mr. Enoch Harvey (President for 1882) in the chair. Mr. H. W. Collins (President of the Liverpool Incorporated Law Society) was unanimously elected President for the ensuing year. The newly-elected president then delivered a short address to the members, expressing the pleasure it gave him to accept the office of president, and thus testify to the interest and sympathy with which the Law Society of Liverpool regarded this association. He urged upon all articled clerks not to postpone their reading until the eve of their examinations. Mr. Collins went on to say that, to his mind, an adequate knowledge of the principles of the law was as difficult of attainment as ever. In the course of his remarks he impressed upon the members the urgent necessity of aiming at a high professional standard, and of dealing with professional brethern in all cases fairly, honestly and chivalrously, and he trusted that in that way litigation would be avoided instead of being fostered. Mr. Collins, in referring to the high position of the legal profession in this country, alluded to the important offices which were held by solicitors in this city. In conclusion, he said that it depended on the law students to preserve the prestige of the profession by upholding its high and honourable character, and he could not close his remarks better than by using a quotation from Roger Bacon: "I hold every man a debtor to his profession from the which as men of course do seek to receive countenance and profit, so ought they of duty to endeavour themselves by way of amends to be a help and ornament thereto." There were about 60 members present.

PRESTON LAW STUDENTS' SOCIETY.

The third general meeting for the present_session was held on Friday, January 19th, at the Preston Law Library, the chair being occupied by Wm. Cooper, Esq., solicitor. A debate took place on the following moot point :—“ B, deed of gift, in the year 1881, assigned to his wife a policy of assurance on his life, without expressing it to be, for her separate use, and gave notice to the assurance company of such assignment. On the husband's death in the same year, intestate, can the wife compel payment from the insurance company without taking out letters of administration?" Decided in favor of the negative.

LAW CRICKET CLUB.

We have received the fourth annual report of this highly successful club, and we would call our readers' attention to it. Full particulars may be obtained by application to Mr. Hayes, hon. sec, 66, Great Russell Street, W.C. There will be a smoking concert at Anderton's Hotel, Fleet Street (Mr. Webster, Q.C., in the chair), on the 2nd of February inst.

NOTES OF THE MONTH.

THE result of the last Solicitors' Honours Examination is somewhat discouraging to those who like to get something inthe shape of honours, but after all it is not very surprising. So many men will go up who have but little prospect of honours, because they have not thoroughly applied themselves; and out of the 74 who went up for the last one we dare say not more than half had any right to go up. At the same time even then the result would show that the standard has been placed pretty high.

HOWEVER, students have a right to complain about it having a little while ago been easy to obtain something in the shape of honours, and now being suddenly made hard. Yet, to a certain extent, they have brought it on themselves.

AND now for the remedy. Henceforth there is to be an additional fee of £1 paid by candidates entering for the Honours' Examination, and we expect this will have the desired effect of thinning the ranks, for, whereas, hitherto many a man has gone up on the principle that it is all included in the money, and that he may as well have a shot at it, such will cer

tainly not do so now. The result, we venture to anticipate, will be a much smaller number going in for Honours, and a much more respectable average of successful ones.

OUR readers know we have always advocated an extra fee for the Honours' Examination, but now we want to advocate something more, and that is that the additional revenue that will be obtained by the Incorporated Law Society by means of these fees, shall be applied in additional or more valuable prizes.

THE past month has witnessed the retirement of a man whose career may well be described as remarkable. We speak of Mr. Benjamin, Q.C. He has had, as it were, two lives, one in America terminating in 1865, and another in England, extending from 1866 to the present time. In 1866, at the age of 54, he entered as a student at Lincoln's Inn, and by special grace was admitted to the Bar after six months' probation. His English career has been an immense success, for he obtained silk in 1872, and was soon afterwards recognized as practically the leader of the Bar, at any rate in a good many senses. He has in a few years here won not only a thorough standing as an English lawyer, but also a fair fortune.

ONLY a few weeks ago we were perusing an opinion Mr. Benjamin had just written from Paris, and were struck by its power and thorough grasp of the subject. He has now, as it were, entered on a third life, that of quiet and retirement, away from the noise of men, and the constant strife of active life. May it be his fortunate lot to experience to the fullest the happiness of

"Those voices which arose

After the long day's close,

And whisper'd to my weary heart, repose."

ONE thing to be gathered from considering such a life as Mr. Benjamin's is, that knowledge, energy, and determination, can work wonders.

THE career of Mr. Benjamin in this country speaks favorably for the English Bar, for he was well received here, and the jealousy at his success has been but little.

It did one good to be present at the Smoking Concert of the Law Cricket Club last month. Some account of it is given in another column. Mr. Webster, Q.C., presided, and presented a type of the successful barrister, and a good example to follow. In him we see a man probably the most successful for his age at the Bar, and it was gratifying to recognize that though he may sometimes, in the hurry of his profession, have an objectionable and domineering way with him, yet at heart he is sociable and good natured, and free from humbug.

establish Limited Partnership; a Bill to abolish actions for Breach of Promise of Marriage; a Bill to amend the Employers' Liability Act; a Bill to consolidate and amend the Law of Partnership; a Bill to amend the Bankruptcy Acts; a Bill to amend the Law of Distress; a Bill to amend the Law Relating to Imprisonment for Contempt of Court; a Bill to amend the Settled Land Act, 1882; a Bill to extend the Jurisdiction of County Courts; a Bill for the Registration of Firms carrying on business under names or styles other than their own; a Bill relating to the Trial of Causes in the County of Surrey.

WE are afraid there are too many lawyers in the House. Nearly every one seems to think that now and then he must try and amend the law. It is almost enough to make one wish for more of the good old style of Members who consider they have done their duty by voting as told.

WE are informed that the rule nisi, in Belt v. Lawes, is to be argued. We were in hopes the parties had had about enough of it. Some people, however, never are satisfied.

WE are told that, in this case, Sir Hardinge Giffard, who led for the plaintiff, had 300 guineas with his brief, and a refresher of 60 guineas a day. Also that on the defendant's side the leader, Mr. Russell, had 150 guineas with his brief, and a refresher of 50 guineas a day; and Mr. Webster, Q.C., 100 guineas with his brief, and a refresher of 30 guineas a day. We do not vouch for the accuracy of these figures, but they do not seem improbable.

SUCH fees to counsel make a bill of costs look large, but in this, as in most cases, it is the counsels' fees which so swell the total.

THE Hastings election petition will be heard very shortly. We believe Mr. Morgan Howard, Q.C., and Mr. Brickwood are counsel for the petitioners, and Mr. Grantham, Q.C., Mr. Coward, and Mr. Richards for the respondents.

LAST month we published a letter from a correspondent on the subject of the Law Students' Societies' Congress, and stated that we believed no Congress had been held since 1879. We would here specially mention this matter, and express a hope that secretaries of Law Students' Societies will consult together and consider whether the time has not arrived to hold another, and consider generally the position of Law Students. Such a congress held occasionally must do a great deal of good to Law Students' Societies, and to Law Students in general.

Students' Cases.

Read v. Anderson, 10 Q. B. D., 100.

If one man employs another to make a bet for him an authority is implied on the part of the agent to pay the bet if lost, and this authority becomes irrevocable when the bet has once been made.

NOTES. The 18th section of the 8 & 9 Vict., c. 109, provides that "all contracts or agreements. whether by parol or in writing, by way of gaming or wagering, shall be null and void; and no suit shall be brought or maintained in any Court of Law or Equity for recovering any sum of money, or valuable thing alleged to be won upon any wager." The construction which has been placed upon this section is, that it does not affect the legality of wagering contracts-they were legal at common law, and the Act does not make them illegal-but the Act simply makes them null and void; and not enforceable by any process of law. The parties in fact do not violate any law by making a bet; but the law will not assist the winner, in enforcing payment of the bet.

The ground of the decision appears to be, following the case of Rosewarne v. Billing, 15 C.B. (N.S.), 316; 33 L.J.C.P. 55, and Bubb v. Yelverton, 19 W.R., 739, that, although the law will not compel the loser of a bet to pay it, he may do so if he please; and he may authorize anybody else to pay the bet for him. If he employs an agent to make the bet for him, he must also authorize the agent to pay the bet in case it is lost. Nor can the principal revoke the agent's authority to pay the bet once it is made, as the non-payment would entail serious consequences upon the agent, and the principal must be taken to have tacitly agreed with the agent, to indemnify the latter against all the ordinary consequences of the agency. (Note in Indermaur's Principles of Common Law, 3rd edition, p. 267; Shirley's Leading Cases, under the case of Diggle v. Higgs.)

Bell and another v. Stocker, 10 Q. B. D., 129. A husband is not liable under the Married Woman's Property Amendment Act, 1874, for the debts of his wife contracted before marriage after her death.

NOTES.-Sec. 1, of the Married Women's Property Amendment Act, 1874, enacts that a husband and wife married after the passing of that Act, may be jointly sued for any debt of the wife contracted before marriage. It does not provide that the husband may be sued alone for such debts. It was therefore decided in the above case that a creditor had no right of action against the husband alone, after the wife's death.

Miller v. Brasch & Co. 10 Q. B. D., 142. The plaintiff employed the defendants, who were carriers, to carry a trunk from London to Rome. The trunk was to be sent by rail from London to Liverpool, and from thence sent by ship to Italy. Through the negligence of the defendants, the trunk was shipped to New York instead of Rome, and a long time elapsed before it was ultimately restored to the plaintiff. The trunk contained apparel belonging to the plaintiff's wife. The contents were articles coming within the Carriers' Act, above the value of £10, and no declaration was made pursuant to that act. The plaintiff was obliged to purchase goods in Rome at increased prices to supply the place of the goods contained in the trunk.

DECIDED that (reversing the decision of Lopes, J.) the plaintiff could not recover from the defendants damages either for the temporary loss of the trunk or on account of the fact that he was obliged to replace the missing goods at increased prices. That the fact

that the loss was a temporary not a permanent one, made no difference. And that the Carriers' Act not only protected the carrier from the loss of the articles themselves, but also from any damages consequential to such loss. The decision of Lopes, J., overruled by the Court of Appeal will be found noted at p. 14 of the Law Students' Journal, 1882.

NOTE at p. 14 of the Law Students' Journal 1882. Indermaur's Common Law, 3rd edition, p. 106.

Ex parte Ward. In re Ward, 22 Ch. D., 132 (C. A.) The amount certified to be due from a defaulter on the London Stock exchange by the official assignee of the Stock Exchange, is a liquidated debt, and will support a bankruptcy petition.

NOTE in Baldwin's Bankruptcy, 2nd edition, p. 31; Ringwood's Bank., p. 14, and under sec. 6 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869.

Ex parte Webster. In re Morris, 22 Ch. D., 136 (C. A.) The affidavit filed on the re-registration of a bill of sale must state the residence of the grantee as it is stated in the bill of sale, even though it be incorrectly stated in the bill of sale.

Mullins v. Miller, 22, Ch. D. 194. (V. C. Bacon.)

An agent employed by a vendor to sell a property has authority to describe the property, and to state facts which will affect the value of the property. If the agent makes a false statement relating to the property, the vendor is bound by it, and cannot enforce the sale in an action for specific performance.

In this case the agent induced the defendant to enter into a contract for the purchase of property by some statements of its value, which were unauthorised by the vendor, and untrue.

DECIDED that the vendor was bound by the misstatements made by the agent.

NOTE in Snell, chapter on specific performance. Indermaur's Common Law, p. 252; Smith's Manual of Equity, chapter on Specific Performance.

Miller v. Huddlestone, 22 Ch. D., 233 (Fry, J.) The balance of a debtor in the hands of his bankers may be attached under a sequestration, and the banker ordered to pay it to the sequestrators.

NOTE.-In Indermaur's Manual of Practice, 2nd edition, p. 105, or in any copy of the Rules of the Supreme Court under O. 42, rule 2.

Wade v. Wilson, 22 Ch. D., 235 (Fry, J.)

If the plaintiff in a foreclosure action asks for a sale, and the mortgagor does not appear, the court will first order an account to be taken of what is due to the plaintiff, and will then order so much of the mortgaged property to be sold as will satisfy the amount found due to the plaintiff.

NOTE.-In Snell, chapters on Mortgages; Smith's Manual of Equity, Mortgages.

Wood v. Heather, 22 Ch. D., 281 (Chitty, J.)

A foreclosure decree absolute is not a judgment for the recovery of land, and does not come within O. 42, Rule 3 of the rules of the Supreme Court. And the plaintiff upon a foreclosure decree absolute is not entitled to a writ of possession.

NOTES.-It must be remembered that a foreclosure decree does not give the mortgagee possession of the property. So that unless the mortgagee is in possession of the property he should in an action of foreclosure add a claim for recovery of possession of the property. If he does not do this, he must bring a second action for possession. (Notes in Snell's chapter on Mortgage; Smith's Manual of Equity, Mortgages.)