LEGISLATION AND JURISPRUDENCE. THE PUBLIC HEALTH ACT 1872. The Times publishes the following summary of the Act: The Public Health Act 1872, which in its Bill. state provoked some opposition and much discussion, has just been issued. It is considerably shorter than the Government measure which was originally introduced in the House of Commons at the beginning of the session. The Bill as read for the first time in the House of Commons contained numerous clauses relating not only to local sanitary authorities, but also to the pollution of drinking water, the providing of hospitals, and to many matters which consisted, in reality, in an enlargement of the term "nuisance" as capable of being dealt with under the Nuisances Removal Acts, whereas the Act itself deals with very little else than the question of local sanitary authorities. Utilisation and Sanitary Acts, and by and upon the local autnority under the Common Lodginghouses, the Diseases Prevention, and the Bakehouse Regulation Acts. 9. Transfers to sanitary authorities (urban and rural) the property, with its liabilities, obligations, &c., possessed before the passing of the Public Health Act 1872, by any authority whose powers and duties have been transferred to and imposed upon such sanitary authorities. 10. Obliges each urban sanitary authority to appoint a medical officer of health, and each rural sanitary authority to appoint a medical officer or medical officers of health, and an inspector or inspectors of nuisances, and other necessary officers and servants. The Local Government Board may under certain conditions pay half the salaries of the medical officers of health and of the inspectors of nuisances. 11. Repeals the 4th section of the Artisans and Labourers' Dwellings Act 1868. 12. Provides for the appointment of the clerk and treasurer of both urban and rural sanitary authorities and for their salaries. The clerk and treasurer of rural sanitary authorities to be the union clerk and treasurer, who are to receive additional remuneration for duties imposed upon them under this 'Act. The great effect of the Public Health Act 1872, is to do away with a multiplicity of authorities endued with similar if not identical powers in one and the same locality. The vestries are, for instance, abolished as sanitary authorities, one great step towards counteracting the effects of the 13. A rural sanitary authority may appoint a mischievous legislation of 1865 and the few fol- committee consisting entirely of its own members, lowing years. Henceforth there will be but two to be the sanitary authority for its term of office. classes of sanitary authorities-urban and rural The rural sanitary authority (including such comand to these two authorities are (with one excep-mittees) may also appoint parochial committees, tion, as regards urban authorities) intrusted all the consisting wholly of the members of the appointsanitary powers which can be exercised in their reing sanitary authority, or partly of the members spective districts. The exception referred to in of such authority, and partly of other persons regard of urban sanitary authorities is, that contributing to the rate levied for sanitary purBoards of Guardians are still left the authority poses. The parochial committees are to be the for executing in urban districts the Diseases Pre- agents only of the sanitary authority to be subject vention Act when it is in force. The Bill did to its regulations. contain provisions for the transfer to urban authorities of the powers of local authorities under the Diseases Prevention Act; but in a subsequent stage this provision was struck out, consequently the local authority for executing the Act remains the Board of Guardians of the several unions in England and Wales. There are two or three other great changes brought about by the Public Health Act 1872; the principal are-first, the creation of "Port Sanitary authorities;" secondly, making it obligatory upon both urban and rural sanitary authorities to appoint medical officers of health, and, in the case of rural sanitary authorities, of inspectors of nuisances as well; thirdly, transferring to the Local Government Board the powers and duties of the Secretary of State under the Turnpike Acts; fourthly, making local boards, like other authorities, liable for stamp duty; fifthly, empowering the Government to lend money at 3 per cent. for the execution of sanitary works; and sixthly, empowering the Local Government Board to repeal, alter, or amend local Acts of Parliament. The Act is comprised of 60 clauses, of which the following is a summary: 1. Gives short title to Act-viz., "The Public Health Act 1872." 2. Limits the operation of the Act, except as regards the port sanitary authority for London, to the extra-metropolitan parts of England. SANITARY AUTHORITIES. 3. Creates urban and rural sanitary districts. 4. Constitutes, with one or two exceptions (1), boroughs, (2) the districts of improvement commissioners, and (3) the districts of local boards, urban sanitary districts, and constitutes the corporation, commissioners, or local board, the urban sanitary authority respectively. The exceptions referred to are the boroughs of Oxford, Cambridge, Blandford, Calne, Wenlock, Folkestone, and Newport in the Isle of Wight. Provision is made in this clause for cases in which the area of one local authority is for some sanitary purposes contained in the larger area of another local authority for other sanitary purposes. 14. Repeals the 4th section of the Sanitary Act, 1866. 15. Empowers the inspectors of the Local Government Board to attend the meeting of rural sanitary authorities and of local boards. 16. Provides how the expenses incurred by the urban sanitary authorities are to be met. 17. Provides how the expenses of rural sanitary authorities are to be met. The expenses being divided into two classes:-1, General expenses to be met by a common fund to be contributed by the whole district; and (2), special expenses to be a separate charge on each contributory place in the district. Contributory places are, as a rule (1), special drainage districts; (2), parishes wholly without the area of a special drainage district, or of an urban sanitary district; (3), such part of each parish as is without the area of a special drainage district or of an urban sanitary district. 18. Provides the mode of raising from the from rural sanitary districts. The money raised overseers, by means of precepts, the contributions for special expenses to be carried to the credit of the account of the contributory place in which it was raised. 19. Provides a remedy in cases where the overseers neglect to pay the amount required by the precept of a rural sanitary authority. PORT SANITARY AUTHORITIES. 20. Empowers the Local Government Board to constitute any riparian authority-comprising any sanitary authority a part of whose district abuts upon any port or waters thereof, and any conservators or commissioners having authority who may delegate to any of the component in such port-the "Port Sanitary Authority,' riparian authorities such or all of its powers as it may think fit. The Mayor and Corporation of London are constituted the sanitary authority of the port of London. A port means a port as established for customs' purposes. tary Authority are to be defrayed out of a common 21. Enacts that the expenses of the Port Sanifund, to be contributed by the riparian sanitary authorities as the Local Government Board thinks just. any 5. Constitutes the whole or such portion of union, not being within the area of an urban sanitary district, a rural sanitary district, and constitutes the guardians of the union, under certain conditions, the rural sanitary authority. 6. Directs that all sanitary authorities shall hold a meeting within twenty-eight days of the passing of the Act-i. e., on or before the 8th Sept. next. 7. Enacts that the Local Government Acts (which include the Public Health Act 1818) shall be in force in urban sanitary districts, and transfers to urban sanitary authorities the powers possessed by, and the duties imposed upon, the sewer authority under the Sewage Utilisation and Sanitary Acts, and of the local authority, under the Nuisances Removal, the Common Lodging-houses, the Artisans and Labourers' Dwellings, and the Bakehouse Regulation Acts. 8. Enacts that after the first meeting of a rural sanitary authority there shall be transferred to such authority the powers possessed by, and the duties upon, the sewer authority under the Sewage ALTERATION OF AREAS. 22. Empowers the Local Government Board to dissolve or otherwise alter a Local Government District: to dissolve an Improvement Act District when it is within the area of a borough; to dissolve a special drainage district wherein no sanitary works have been executed, and in respect of which money has not been borrowed; but if works have been executed in respect of which a loan has been raised, the Local Government Board may, in addition to dissolving the district, merge it in the parish or parishes in which it is situated. 23. Empowers the Local Government Board, on the application of the authority of a rural sanitary district, or of ratepayers representing onetenth of the net rateable value of such district, or of any contributory place therein, to constitute such district, or contributory place, an urban sanitary district with the like powers of an urbau sanitary district created by the Act. 24. Empowers the Local Government Board to declare any rural sanitary district, or any portion thereof, an urban sanitary district. 25. The Local Government Acts, or any provisions thereof, not to be adopted without the consent of the Local Government Board. Rural sanitary authorities may, with the consent of the board, constitute any portion of its area a special drainage district. UNION OF DISTRICTS. 26. The Local Government Board may, on application made and due inquiry had, form any sanitary districts or contributory places into a united district for the following purposes :-1. The procuring a common supply of water. 2. The making a main sewer or carrying into effect a system of sewerage for the use of all such districts or contributory places. 3. For any other purposes of the Sanitary Acts. 27. Directs that notice of the union of districts should be published in a local newspaper, that the expenses of such union shall be a first charge on the rates, and that the making of the provisional order shall be taken as evidence that all legal requirements have been fulfilled. 28. Enacts that the governing body of a united district shall be a joint board of elective members, the number to be determined by the Local Government Board. 29. Relates to the constitution of the above board, and directs that the powers of the sanitary authorities of the contributory places of the united district shall cease on the joint board being constituted. 30. Directs that the expenses shall be paid out of a common fund, and that the joint board may borrow money on the credit of such fund. 31. Enacts that the sums required be obtained by precept on the sanitary authority of each component district, and provides a remedy in cases of default. 32. Authorises the use for purposes of outfall of sewer of subjacent district by authority above such subjacent district. REPEAL OF LOCAL ACTS. 33. Authorises the Local Government Board to repeal, alter, or amend any local Acts of Parliament, except Acts relating to the conservancy of rivers, and provides for the payment of compensation in cases of abolition of office. MISCELLANEOUS. 34. Substitutes the consent of the Local Govern ment Board for that of the Secretary of State and of the Treasury with regard to the borrowing of purposes; the approval of the Board to be substi money, or appointment of officers for sanitary tuted for that of the Secretary of State in regard of the appointment of food analysts. If there is under the section, the Local Government Board's any dispute as to what are "sanitary purposes determination to be conclusive. 35. Transfers to the Local Government Board, from and after the 1st Jan. 1873 (unless such transfer shall have been previously made by order in council), the powers and duties of the Board of Trade under the Alkali Act 1863, and under the Metropolis Water Acts 1852 and 1871; and 36. Transfers at once the powers and duties of the Secretary of State under the Highway and Turnpike Acts, while 37. Provides for the transfer of all officers and others employed for the purposes of the above Acts. of the Local Government Board. 38. Provides for the salary of the medical officer 39. Provides for the settlement by provisional order of differences, should any arise out of the transfer of powers or property of sanitary authorities, and in cases where it is necessary for the confirmation by Parliament of such orders. 40. Empowers sanitary authorities to borrow money on the credit of the rates for permanent works, while 41. Empowers such authorities to raise money also on the credit of land, works, or other property possessed by them. 42. Repeals sect. 151 of the Public Health Act 1848, which exempted from stamp duty bonds and deeds executed by local boards. 43. Enacts that where in any local Act of Parlia ment a limit of rating is fixed, such limit shall not apply to expenses required for sanitary purposes. 44. Authorises the Public Works Loan Commissioners to grant loans to sanitary authorities at per cent. interest. 45. Provisional orders of the Local Government Board to be confirmed by Parliament. 46. Directs that where the period of repayment of loans has been extended to fifty years, the security shall not be invalid, though given originally for a less period than fifty years. 47. The costs of promoting or opposing provisional orders to be deemed expenses properly incurred, and may be paid by the contraction of a loan for the purpose. 48. Directs that all orders of the Local Govern ment Board (unless otherwise directed) shall be published in the London Gazette. 49. Enacts that the accounts of all sanitary authorities shall be made up to such day or days in each year as the Local Government Board may direct; and that the accounts of rural sanitary authorities shall be audited by the Poor Law auditors. 53. Provides for the taxation by the clerk of the peace of solicitors' bills of costs when required by a sanitary authority whose accounts have to be audited. 51. Empowers sanitary authorities to destroy infected bedding, &c., and to compensate the owners thereof. 52. Imposes a penalty on any person wilfully neglecting, or refusing to obey, orders, &c., of the Local Government Board; and also on any person who obstructs the execution of any order, &c., made under sect. 52 of the Sanitary Act 1866, for preventing the introduction of cholera or other dangerous infectious disorder. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS 53. Enacts that the status of sanitory authorities, as regards legal proceedings, is not interfered with by the Public Health Act 1872. 54. Provides for the raising the necessary funds for the payment of debts incurred on behalf of a defaulting sanitary authority. SAVING CLAUSES. 55. Enacts that authorities under local Acts may proceed either under the local Acts or the sanitary Acts, or both, provided no person is punished under both Acts for the same offence; and that the sanitary authority shall not, by reason of its having powers under a local Act, be exempt from any duties imposed upon it by the sanitary Acts. 56. Act not to affect obligations imposed upon collegiate or other corporate bodies by the Sewage Utilization Act 1867. 57. Act not to affect any outfall or other works of the Metropolitan Board of Works, or to affect any of that board's rights or powers. 58. Deals with districts constituted in pursuance of the Public Health Act 1848, for the purposes of main sewerage only. The Local Government Board may, by provisional order, dissolve such districts. 59. Declares the powers given by the Act to be cumulative. 60. Defines the several terms used in the Act. SOLICITORS' JOURNAL. ON NOTES OF NEW DECISIONS. LIBEL PRIVILEGE FAIR COMMENT MATTER OF GENERAL INTEREST AND NATIONAL IMPORTANCE. - Plaintiff was a naval architect, and had submitted to the Lords of the Admiralty certain proposals and plans for converting wooden line of battle ships into sea-going turret ships. The Comptroller to the Navy, in a letter addressed to the Lords of the Admiralty, commented on these proposals and plans, in terms which were deemed to be a reflection on the plaintiff's character. The First Lord of the Admiralty subsequently drew up a minute with regard to turret ships, in the appendix to which he set out the letter in question. Defendant, at the request of the Lords of the Admiralty, printed and published the minute and the appendix. An action of libel was then brought in respect of the publication of this letter. No actual malice was imputed to defendant. The judge, before whom the case was ried, directed a nonsuit on the ground that the matter complained of was part of a fair and honest comment on a question of general interest and national importance, and as such was privileged, so as not to be actionable without proof of actual malice. Held (per Willes, Byles, and Brett, JJ., dissentiente Grove, J.), that the direction was right. Per Grove, J., that the judge ought to have left to the jury the question whether the letter containing the matter complained of was fair comment on a question of general interest and national importance, and whether the alleged libellous matter was relevant to such comment: (Henwood v. Harrison, 26 L. T. Rep. N. S. 938. C. P.) MAR WILL CHARITABLE LEGACIES-PURE AND IMPURE PERSONALTY - DIRECTION TO SHALL-STATUTE OF MORTMAIN (9 GEO. 2, c. 36). -A testator directed all the rest, residue, and remainder of his personal estate and effects, which might be equally applied for such purposes, to be paid unto and legally between six hospitals therein named (two of which were empowered by law to take bequests of impure personality), and directed that his estate should be so marshalled and administered as to give the fullest possible effect to the legacies and bequests in favour of the several hospitals and charitable institutions therein before named; and he gave his residuary real estate and all the residue of his personal estate which should not be applicable to and be applied to the trusts and purposes aforesaid, unto the Middlesex Hos BIDDULPH (Col. Robert M.), Chirk Castle, Denbigh, and BROOKS (Rev. Ley), Derby. Nov. 1; Richardson and Small, pital, it being empowered by Act of Parliament to HEIRS-AT-LAW AND NEXT OF KIN. BRITTON (Isaac), Sandwich, Kent, gentleman. Heir-at-law WAUDBY (Arthur John), 58, Kentish Town-road, Middle- UNCLAIMED STOCK AND DIVIDENDS IN THE [Transferred to the Commissioners for the Reduction of the CREDITORS UNDER ESTATES IN CHANCERY. BLACKWELL (John K.), Esq., 73, Gloucester-terrace), Hyde- BRITTON (Isaac), Sandwich, Kent, gentleman. May 12: H. GAMBLE (Geo.), 25, Spencer-street, Everton-road, Liverpool, HALL (John), Bury, Lancaster, cotton spinner. Oct. 25; HOLBROOK (Thos. H.) Medmenham, Bucks, hotel keeper. MORRIS (Thos.), Oxford, supervisor of excise. Oct. 10; SADLER (George T.), Sanders-terrace, Chobham-road, Strat- SELFE (James), formerly of Orchard-place. Blackwall, SHOVE otherwise BROWNLOW (Emma L.), 48, Lupus-street, WOOD (Thos.), Colley-gate, Cradley, Halesowen, Worcester, CREDITORS UNDER 22 & 23 VICT. c. 35. BAYARD (Edward K. G.), Esq., St. Paul's-square, Holgate- BEESTON (Frederick W.), Holbeach, Lincoln, auctioneer. CRAVEN (John), Highthorn House, Huntington, North CUNNINGHAM (Rev. John), 6, Burton-street, Burton-crescent, DREW (Martin), Esq., 4, Carlton-crescent, Southampton. Hodgson and Son, solicitors, 13, Waterloo-street, Bir ECCLESTON (William), Dale End, Birmingham, fishmonge GRIFFITHS (Wm.), 67, Hall-street, Stockport, Chester HOLMES (Jas.), Market Weighton, York, gentleman, Sept. KEEBLE (Henry), 61, Tavistock-crescent, Westbourne-park, LAMBERT (Sir Henry E. F.), Great Malvern. Dec. 1; T. minster. RICHARDS (Francis), 116, Vyse-street, Birmingham, chemist SCOTT (John), Whitewall House, Norton, York, trainer. SNELL (Frederick H), formerly of Queen's College, Cam TENNANT (JOS. M.), Esq., Leeds. Oct. 16; Tennant and REPORTS OF SALES. Saturday, Aug. 17. By Messrs. LENNY and SMITH, at Norwich. A cottage, with outbuilding and parcel of land-sold for £390. £1500. Tuesday, Aug. 20. By Messrs. GREENSLADE, at Taunton. Somerset near Wellington.-The Park Farm, containing 154a. Ir. 17p., freehold-sold for £10,800. Thursday, Aug. 22. By Messrs. CHESHIRE and GIBSON, at Birmingham. Warwick, Studley.--Hardwick Farm, containing 117a.. 38p., freehold-sold for £8950. By Mr. H. E. MARSH, at Guildhall. St. Luke's.-Nos. 7, 8, and 9, White Horse-court, freehold sold for £250. By Messrs. NEWBON and HARDING, at the Mart. Hackney-road.-Nos. 9, 10, 14, and 24, Gloucester-street, term 44 years- sold for £675. Holloway.-Nos. 152 and 151, St. James's-road, term 62 years -sold for £610. Islington.-No. 22, Gibson-square, term 55 years-sold for £390. De Beauvoir Town.-No. 55, Downham-road, term 44 years -sold for £365. Islington.-No. 30, Brooksby-street, term 37 years-sold for £270. Norfolk, near Stalham.-A farm-house, with homestead and Monday, Aug 26. By Messrs. MURRAY and Sox, at the Mart. for £350. By Messrs. DEBENHAM, TEWSON, and FARMER, at the Mart. for £880. MAGISTRATES' LAW. THE NEW LICENSING ACT. THE OPERATION OF THE ACT. IT is somewhat to be regretted that a short interval was not allowed to elapse after the passing of the Licensing Act before it came into operation. No date was mentioned in the Act as to the time when it should come into force, and it therefore became law as soon as it received the royal assent; but it is rather unreasonable to expect all the world to have been at once acquainted with this fact, and to guide themselves accordingly. Ignorantia legis neminem excusat is, no doubt a maxim of the courts, but it may be A SOLICITOR CHARGED WITH EMBEZZLEMENT too strictly applied. The Licensing Act abounds AND FRAUD.-At the Guildhall, Walsall, this with minute regulations which are really matters week, Messrs. J. W. Newman and J. Brewer of police rather than of permanent law, such as is presiding, Thomas W. Burbury, solicitor, Kidderminster, was charged under two summonses, first, contemplated in the maxim we have cited; and, though it could never be permitted that sellers with having embezzled various sums of money, of intoxicating liquors should continue to plead the property of his late employers, Messrs. Duignan, Lewis, and Lewis; and, next, with ignorance of its provisions for an indefinite time to come, they might have been allowed a week to having obtained a sum of money by false pre-acquaint themselves with all that it orders or tences from Dr. J. Burton, of Walsall. Mr. Dale forbids. This is so far consistent with common (from the offices of Messrs. Duignan, Lewis, and sense that in some parts of the country, among Lewis) appeared in support of the first-named others the metropolis, a short interval of grace charge, and Mr. F. Bill in support of the second. was tacitly accorded; but in other places not so The defendant not appearing when called upon, much as a day or half a day was granted, and we Chief Superintendent Cater proved the personal reported yesterday a case where the proprietors of a railway refreshment room were fined for not Wednesday, and a warrant was ordered to issue having put into force at eleven o'clock at night a statute which had not received the royal assent before two o'clock the same afternoon. service of the summonses at Kidderminster on in each case. - ECCLESIASTICAL LAW. THE The Licensing Act received the royal assent on the day Parliament was prorogued-Saturday, the NOTES OF NEW DECISIONS. 10th inst.-the assent being signified by the same HERESY COMMUNION-REAL PRESENCE commissioners who subsequently proclaimed the SACRIFICE ADORATION OF CHRIST PRESENT prorogation. It will be remembered also that the IN THE ELEMENTS RETRACTATION BEFORE day of prorogation wa at the last somewhat sudSUIT PRACTICE APPEAL ΤΟ PRIVY denly advanced, and members were released on COUNCIL ON ORDERS TO REFORM PLEADINGS. Saturday afternoon who expected to be detained -In proceedings against the respondent, a clergy. till the Tuesday following. The Act had remained man, for heresy in having published certain docu- under discussion almost up to the last moment, trines with respect to the Holy Communion: and it was of course impossible that copies of it Held (affirming the judgment of the Court of should be obtainable as soon as it was passed, even Arches) (1.) That to maintain a real, actual, if the uncertainty as to the time when it would and objective" presence in the Sacrament under receive the royal assent had not existed. Those the form of bread and wine is a position not conwho were in London on the following day, Sunday, traditory or repugnant to anything in the articles are aware that in the great thoroughfares of the or formularies of the Church. (2.) That to main- Strand and Oxford-street more than half the tain that the Communion table is an altar of public houses opened as usual at five o'clock in sacrifice, at which the priest appears in a sacerthe afternoon, those who remained shut until dotal position at the celebration of the Com-six constituting a small minority of the whole. munion, and that at such celebration there is a We do not know whether the keepers of the great sacrifice or offering of Christ by the minis- houses which opened were visited by the police, tering priest, in which the mediation of Christ and it is certain that they were not subject to ascends from the altar to plead for the sins of any legal proceedings for having neglected to men, is not necessarily such a use of the word conform to the new law. At Croydon there "sacrifice" as to contravene the 31st Article of was not the same laxity. It appears that Religion. (3.) That to teach " adoration of Christ Messrs. Bertram and Roberts, till recently the present in the Sacrament, under the form of contractors at the Crystal Palace, are the keepers bread and wine," is not so clearly heresy as to of the refreshment room at the West Croydon make a clerk liable to penal proceedings; since Railway Station, and, in accordance with their the words do not necessarily imply any adoration usual practice, the room was kept open on Saturof the consecrated elements, or of any corporeal or day, the 10th, until 11.35 p.m., the time of the natural presence therein. The respondent in the departure of the last train from the station, and second edition of a book, used expressions in con- applied for refreshments. Under the new law the the attendants served indiscriminately anyone who travention of the formularies of the Church. In a third edition, published before suit, the responroom might be kept open with impunity, but no dent so altered the statements made in the second one ought to have been served after eleven who edition as to free them from heresy. The second was not a traveller by the railway, and it is sugand third editions of the book were the subject of gested that applicants for refreshments ought to the charges against the respondent. Held, that, prove themselves travellers by producing their without regarding the alterations made as a retickets on asking for a glass of beer. The barmaid tractation, it was competent for the court to take in charge of the room had, however, never heard the altered language into consideration as an exof the new law, which is not remarkable, considerplanation by the accused of the language before ing that, if it was at that moment in force at used by him, and to accept the later words as a all, it was not ten hours old. Messrs. Bertram correct expression of the accused's meaning, if and Roberts were, however, summoned before the such explanation appeared to be made bond fide Croydon Bench last week for having permitted the and to be entitled to credit. Where an appeal is Act to be contravened in their refreshment room presented to the Privy Council from an order of on the night of the 10th, and the Bench held that the court below, directing a reformation of articles they were obliged to convict the defendants, and of charge or other pleadings, the actual reforma-fined them 20s. and 18s. costs, but graciously tion which appears to the judge to be required, added that they would not on this occasion indorse should, in future, for convenience' sake, be made their licence. The Act itself very foolishly proby him on the face of the order, so that on appeal 20s.; and we cannot, therefore, object to the vides that no penalty shall be mitigated below the very passages omitted may be clearly brought under the notice of the Judicial Committee in- amount of the fine if the main decision was stead of an order directing, by general reference sound; but, with the greatest respect for the only, the nature of the alteration required: Croydon justices, it may be questioned whether (Shepherd v. Bennett, 26 L. T. Rep. N. S. 923. recognised that the law does not take account of their decision was not erroneous. It is well Priv. Co.) fractions of days in determining when Acts of Parliament come into force. The Act received the royal assent on the 10th, and it undoubtedly came into force that day; but, as it would be absurd to hold that it was in force from the first moment the day began, which would be before the royal assent was signified, it would seem to be a necessary conclusion that it did not come into force until the moment before midnight, when the day closed, in which case Messrs. Bertram and Roberts were not exposed to its penalties. ELECTION LAW. REGISTRATION OF VOTERS.-Mr. Spencer Percival, the revising barrister for the city of London, has appointed Wednesday, the 18th Sept., for the Commencement of the revision. By the Registration of Voters Act the courts of revision are to be held in counties between the 20th Sept. and the 31st Oct., and in boroughs between the 15th Sept. and the 31st Oct. Last Saturday week was the last day for the notice of claims in boroughs and notices of objections to be made. It is not likely that the prosecution at Croydon will be paralleled elsewhere, but it may be properly observed that the Licensing Act is a statute above all others requiring discretion on the part of those who see that it is put into operation. The Act compels a considerable change in the usages of large numbers of people, and, although we are clearly of opinion that it does not go too far, and we would have it enforced with firmness, it is unnecessary and injudicious to press for its penalties in every instance, or to insist upon prosecutions when its provisions have been neglected through pure ignorance. If anything could justify the disturbances which have occurred at Exeter and have been threatened at Leicester-if anything could lead the most sober-minded to sympathise with those who object to the restrictions put upon them-it would be an indiscriminating desire to prosecute on the part of magistrates and police. A little common sense in this, as in so many other relations of life, is an invaluable commodity. The Act itself is framed with a certain degree of elasticity, and local authorities are allowed to modify within defined limits some of its provisions-such, for example, as the hours of closing so as to suit the convenience of each locality. It is part of the design of the measure that magistrates should pay attention to the circumstances of each neighbourhood. It does not follow that they should defer to what the keepers of public-houses may address to them as self-constituted representatives of local wants. The trade in Chatham and Rochester appear to have applied to the magistrates of the district to allow taverns to be kept open till twelve o'clock on week-days instead of eleven, on the ground that the change would cause inconvenience to the public and loss to the publicans. Without special knowledge we may avow that we are very sceptical as to the alleged "inconvenience," while the 'loss" deprecated is not a circumstance that can, by itself, justify an extension of the hours. When, however, the same publicans ask for permission to open at five instead of at six we may fairly presume that some public convenience prompts the request. It seems certain that the hours of opening and closing which the National Union urge upon the magistrates for universal adoptionseven o'clock in the morning and ten o'clock at night-could not be sanctioned in towns without inflicting great inconvenience upon many classes, and could not be enforced if formally sanctioned. We hope we have heard the last of the silly street demonstrations at Exeter and Leicester, and that we shall have no imitations of them elsewhere. The respectable inhabitants of the capital of the West seems to have come promptly forward to assist in repressing disorder, and, indeed, although there were some noisy gatherings both there and at Leicester on Saturday, they appear to have been little more than Saturday-night crowds come out to see the fun. Persons who are sometimes thoughtlessly disposed to assist in affairs of this kind ought to remember that they easily grow until they become of unmanageable dimensions. A crowd may consist of good-natured idlers, and the accidental presence of some half-drunken, unreasonable men among them may serve as a match to kindle passions not soon allayed. This was the explanation of such tumults as happened at Exeter and Leicester on Saturday. A drunken man was arrested at Exeter, and the crowd saw at once an opportunity of jostling the police until, by pushing one another upon them, they managed to separate the prisoner from his captors, and carried him off into concealment. This victory accomplished, a crowd proceeded to march up High-street, but being confronted by a line of police and special constables, it was dis persed with no greater damage than may result from some use of the truncheon. The transaction at Leicester was much the same, except that there the police retained possession of their intoxicated captive, and the crowd, finding their efforts at a rescue unsuccessful, melted away. Occurrences of this kind are such as might happen in any busy town after a Saturday-night's market, and it would be foolish to magnify their importance. Care must be taken to provide, as far as possible, against their repetition, and to insure that, if repeated, they shall prove as harmless as in the first instance; and this is all that need be done. The itself out if left alone. There is no public opinion excitement which has arisen will rapidly burn among any class in favour of long hours for publichouses nor against the restrictions of the Licensing Bill. Men who find themselves for the first time allowed to sit and drink until twelve will, not unturned out at eleven where they were formerly naturally, give vent to angry feelings at the moment; but the majority of their "mates," who are quietly at home with their wives and families, are against them, and they themselves, after a few days' interval, will acquiesce in the friendly restrictions put upon their indulgence. A quiet and firm determination to maintain the law will soon tell upon the keepers of public houses themselves, and with them the last spark of opposition to the Act will die away.-Times. ANNUAL LICENSING SESSIONS. The Southampton borough magistrates hel their annual licensing sessions on Tuesday. Seve closed, and that they would have to discontinue ral memorials were presented, one from a large The licensed victuallers of Richmond held a meeting on Tuesday evening to take into consideration the new Licensing Act. All the principal publicans were present, and Mr. Grünhold, of the Talbot Hotel, was voted to the chair. After some discussion the following resolution was carried unanimously: "That the hours fixed by the Act are totally inadequate to the require ments of visitors and the inhabitants, and prejudicial to the interests of the town and trade of Richmond." On Wednesday afternoon a large number of publicans attended at the petty sessions for the purpose of presenting to the magistrates a memorial embodying the above resolution, and praying that the hours adopted within the four-mile radius of the metropolis might be extended to Richmond. The chairman (Sir Henry Watson Parker) said it was not in the power of the magistrates, even if they had the desire, to extend the time of closing from eleven to twelve, as they had not yet held a meeting on the subject, but they intended to hold meeting shortly, when their request would be taken into consideration. He could not help remarking, however, that, so far as he was concerned, he was in favour of letting the hours remain as they were at present, so as to give the Act a fair trial. The memorial, he noticed, was signed principally by publicans; but the public had as great an interest in the question as the licensed victuallers. One of the publicans, who acted as spokesman informed Sir Henry that the meeting was only held the previous evening, and that they had had no time to get the public to sign; but they could get a host of signatures if they had time. Sir Henry promised to take the memorial into consideration, and the publicans then withdrew. At the Newcastle Brewster Sessions on Tuesday all applications for special licences were refused, and the magistrates determined to abide by the new Act in its entirety. At the Gateshead Sessions for the Northern Division of the county of Durham, the magistrates refused to allow any public houses to be open longer than from seven in the morning till eleven at night, and they also ordered all places to be closed at nine o'clock on Sunday. The new Act has already done much to check drunkenness in the Tyneside boroughs. The magistrates of Tunbridge have decided not to grant any new licences in the petty sessional division. Mr. W. C. Cripps, solicitor, of Tunbridge Wells, applied on behalf of the licensed victuallers of the division that the magistrates would give the twenty-one days' notice, at the expiration of which time they would memorialize their Worships to extend the hours of closing from eleven to twelve o'clock. Mr. Cripps having argued the point, the chairman (Mr. T. Hankey) said the feeling of the Bench for the present was that it would be desirable to conform to what they considered the spirit of the Act, which was for closing public-houses at 11 o'clock. It would be time enough after the Act had been in operation for twelvemonths to consider whether an alteration should be made. They had also made up their minds not to grant any new licences for 12 months unless some very exceptional case came before them. A spirit grocer of Edenbridge made an application to the Bench for an explanation of the new Licensing Act so far as spirit grocers are concerned. He said it was the impression of most ble that grocers would have to close their at the same time that public houses were PROSECUTIONS UNDER THE NEW LICENSING Аст. The Nottingham borough magistrates have just convicted two or three publicans who have contravened the provisions of the new Act by keeping their houses open after eleven o'clock p.in. Mr. J. Smallwood, landlord of the Peach Tree Inn, a stone's throw from the theatre, was fined £5, including costs, for having forty-seven persons in his house at half-past eleven o'clock. Mr. W. Foulds, landlord of the Loggerheads Inn, Narrow Marsh, and Mr. Thomas Sharpe, landlord of the Newcastle Arms Inn, Sherwood-street, for similar offences, were each fined £1, including costs. The defendants' licences were not to be endorsed with the convictions. The Nottingham Good Templars have formed a committee of vigilance to watch public houses, and they have fortified themselves by an appeal to the Home Secretary, who has replied to their inquiry, saying that there can be no objection to teetotallers watching the conduct of public houses, and policemen too, providing such surveillance is not attended by actual personal annoyance to the persons whose premises they watch. A case of some importance under the provisions of the new Licensing Act was heard at the Croydon petty sessions, on Saturday, before Mr. T. R. Edridge, chairman, and a full bench of magistrates. Messrs. Bertram and Roberts, proprietors of the refreshment bar at the West Croydon Railway Station, were summoned for serving persons other than passengers travelling by rail after the hour of il p.m., on Saturday, the 10th Aug. Mr. Beard appeared for the defendants. The summons arose out of a communication made to to the Bench by Mr. Robert Appleby, of Croydon, who stated that on the night in question, after observing that the outside houses were duly closed, he went into the waiting-room at the West Croydon Railway Station. This room, as is well known, is accessible to anyone; it was literally crowded with people, and had all the characteristics of a taproom-dancing, singing, shouting, and accor dion-playing-a large trade at the same time being done at the bar. Indeed, there was nothing to hinder visitors who had just been turned out of the public houses from going to the refreshment bar and getting whatever they chose. The bar in question was not closed till 11.35 p.m., and any of the outside public could get served up till that time. Mr. Appleby added that himself and several friends were served with soda-and-brandy. The barmaid did not inquire of any of the customers whether they were going by train, and they were not asked to show their railway tickets. Mr. Beard said Messrs. Bertram and Roberts had no desire to infringe the law, but, on the contrary, were most anxious to conform to it. No doubt, it being the first night that the statute came into operation, persons did go to the bar at the railway station, but it was situate within the station premises. As far as the defendants were concerned, they did not knowingly serve anyone who was not a traveller, and as soon as the last train had left the station the window of the refreshment bar was shut down and the business ceased. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, he thought the Bench would be justified in dismis sing the summons. The barmaid was called, and she stated that she served persons indiscrimi nately on the night in question, without thinking whether they were going by train or not. She had received no instructions about closing the bar at eleven o'clock, but it was closed immediately after the departure of the last train. Instructions on the point were given her a few minutes after. wards, and it appeared that the person who had to deliver them did not reach Croydon till after ten o'clock. After some consultation among the magistrates, Mr. Edridge said the Bench had no course to pursue but to convict the defendants, who would be fined 203. and 18s. costs, but the Bench would not endorse the licence th s time. He then drew attention to the Act of Parliament, par ticularly to the clause prohibiting the proprietors of railway refreshment bars from serving anyone after the time for closing public houses, except travellers by rail. SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA. SHAFFNER v. COMMONWEALTH. On a trial for the murder of A.-Evidence to show that another party had died at the prisoner's house of the same kind of poison as A., and had been attended by the prisoner, is not competent. ERROR to the Court of Oyer and Terminer of Dauphin county. Opinion by AGNEW, J.-It is a general rule that a distinct crime, unconnected with that laid in the indictment, cannot be given in evidence against a prisoner. It is not proper to raise a presumption of guilt, on the ground, that having committed one crime, the depravity it exhibits makes it likely he would commit another. Logically, the commission of an independent offence, is not proof, in itself, of the commission of another crime. Yet it cannot be said to be without influence on the mind, for certainly, if one be shown to be guilty of another crime equally heinous, it will prompt a more ready belief, that he might have committed the one with which he is charged; it therefore predisposes the mind of the juror to believe the prisoner guilty. To make one criminal act evidence of another, a connection between them must have existed in the mind of the actor, linking them together for some purpose he intended to accomplish; or it must be necessary to identify the person of the actor, by a connection which shows that, he who committed the one must have done the other. Without this obvious connection, it is not only unjust to the prisoner, to compel him to acquit himself of two offences instead of one, but it is detrimental to justice, to burthen a trial with multiplied issues that tend to confuse and mislead the jury. The most guilty criminal may be innocent of other offences charged against him, and of which, if fairly tried, he might acquit himself. From the nature and prejudicial character of such evidence, it is obvious it should not be received, unless the mind plainly perceives that the commission of the one tends, by a visible connection, to prove the commission of the other by the prisoner. If the evidence be so dubious that the judge does not clearly perceive the connection, the benefit of the doubt should be given to the prisoner, instead of suffering the minds of the jurors to be prejudiced by an independent fact, carrying with it no proper evidence of the par ticular guilt. We come now to the offer of evidence received by the court. Leaving out that part relating to the prisoner's first wife, which the court rejected as too remote, the offer was to prove that John Shurlock died from poison, the same kind of which Nancy, the prisoner's wife, died; that his symptoms were the same as hers; that the prisoner attended upon both; and that both died at the prisoner's house; Shurlock on the 17th Feb. 1871, and Nancy, the wife, on the 11th June, 1871. In substance, this was an offer to show that the prisoner poisoned Shurlock, as evidence that he also poisoned his own wife. The purpose insisted on, was to show a motive on the part of the prisoner for taking the life of his wife, and that the deaths were so connected that they formed one chain of facts, which could not be ascertained without rendering part of the evidence received unintelligible and incomplete. It is argued that the motive of the prisoner for taking the life of Nancy, his wife, was to enable him to obtain her money, and to enable him also to marry Susan, the wife of John Shurlock, who had been the prisoner's paramour, as the means of obtaining her money, which was in the form of an insurance policy on the life of her husband, John Shurlock; and that in order to carry out this plan it was necessary first to put Shurlock out of the way. It is obvious that to connect together the deaths of Shurlock and Nancy, and make the former bear upon the latter, they must have been both contemplated by the prisoner as parts of one plan in his mind, in which the taking of Shurlock's life was part of his purpose of taking the life of Nancy. He must, therefore, have contemplated the death of Nancy before taking the life of Shurlock. In order to let in the poisoning of Shurlock, the judge must have had before his mind some fact or facts exhibiting this pre-existing determination to take Nancy's life. Herein, the evidence was defective. Let us examine the question of probable motive, and first as to the money of Nancy, his wife. Now clearly it was not necessary to put Shurlock out of the way to obtain it. Shurlock's death opened no door to reach it. Nancy's death alone would bring it. The evidence was, therefore, inadmissible on this score. Then there was the prisoner's illicit intercourse with Susan Shurlock. This was made the turning point of the admission of the evidence by the court. But there was no evidence that the prisoner at any time contemplated marriage with Susan, or from which such an intent can fairly be inferred to have existed before Shurlock's death; yet this is the essential fact to make it probable, that the prisoner took Shurlock's life, as preparatory to taking Nancy's life and as the means of enabling him to marry Susan. According to the evidence, the libidinous intercourse between him and Susan existed for years, during the lives of both his wives without restraint, and Susan continued in his family after his marriage with Nancy, and her own marriage with John Shurlock. Nor was desire of the enjoyment of Susan, so long sated at pleasure, curbed by any new impediment, to make it a ruling motive; while the evidence also shows, that after the prisoner's first wife's death he purposely passed by Susan when she was single, to marry Nancy, the second wife. Now the meretricious intercourse with Susan having existed so long, and when he could have gotten her, having left her to marry Nancy, and the opportunity of enjoying her still continuing, it is not a reasonable or probable presumption that the idea of marrying Susan was in the prisoner's mind when he poisoned Shurlock, nearly four months before he poisoned his wife, so as to constitute a ruling motive to take the lives of both Shurlock and Nancy, as the means of marrying Susan. Then we come to the peculiar motive, viz., of obtaining Susan's money. If the prisoner had been on his trial for the murder of Shurlock, his desire to obtain the policy money dependent on Shurlock's death, would constitute a motive for taking his life; but the question here being upon the probable motive for taking Nancy's life, the inquiry is, what probable connection existed in the design of the prisoner to make Shurlock's death preliminary to that of Nancy? Let it be supposed that the purpose of the prisoner in taking the life of Shurlock, was to enable him to obtain Susan's policy money, yet it was not a necessary consequence that the prisoner deemed it essential to his plan that he should also take his own wife's life. It is evident these two purposes cannot be linked together unless the prisoner considered his marriage with Susan necessary to obtain her money. Marriage with Susan must then have been a pre-existing intent, inducing him to frame in his mind the plan of taking the lives of both Shurlock and Nancy to enable him to marry Susan, and thus to obtain her money. But here the evidence fails to furnish the wanting link. There was no evidence, as we have seen, of any design to marry Susan, while it also appears that the prisoner had no cause to doubt his power to obtain possession of Susan's money, in order to make marriage a ruling motive. On the contrary, the evidence shows that instantly on Shurlock's death the prisoner took the steps to obtain the policy money, and soon accomplished the purpose. The agent of the insurance company states that when the money was paid to Susan she handed it to the prisoner, who put it in his pocket; and we find that afterwards he spoke of still having it, and offered to pay a debt for Susan. It might be, if the prisoner found that Susan would not part with her money after she got it, he then formed the design of marrying her to get it, and as the means of doing so then resolved to kill his wife. But this comes too late, for unless this purpose was present to his mind before he took Shurlock's life, it could not constitute a motive and part of his plan to take his wife's life also, so as to link the two deaths together. But in order to be present to his mind before Shurlock's life was taken, he must have previously known or believed, or must have plainly foreseen he could not avail himself of Susan's money without marrying her, and concluded to marry her, a fact unsupported by any evidence. The previous purpose to marry Susan is the broken link in the chain to complete the connection, without which the deaths of both are not so probably connected as to make Shurlock's death evidence on the trial for the death of Nancy, It was therefore unjust to the prisoner to compel him, on his trial for the murder of his wife, to defend himself against the charge of murder- mentioned in the statute, and the Secretary of ing Shurlock. The offer should have been rejected. State for the War Department is empowered to The other errors assigned to the charge are not carry into effect the purposes of the Act. The sustained. It is contended, and earnestly pressed money is to be expended under several heads, and upon us, that the judge had no right to say to the no greater sum is to be applied to the expenditure jury that if the prisoner was guilty of murder, it under any one of the heads than the estimated was murder in the first degree, and it was their sum, except under the joint certificate of the duty to say so regardless of consequences. The Secretary of State and the Treasury. The mode of indictment charged a murder by poison, and such obtaining the sanction of Parliament for comwas the tendency of the evidence. It was not pulsory powers to procure land is set forth. One only the right but the duty of the judge to inform month at least before making any application to the jury of the degree which the law attaches to Parliament for the compulsory purchase of land murder by poison, and to instruct them in their a notice is to be served on the owner, and if duty under the law. It is only when the charge after inquiry the Secretary of State is satisfied becomes imperative, and takes from the jury the that the land ought to be taken a Bill is to right of deciding and pronouncing the degree of be introduced into Parliament for that purthe murder, that we have held it to be error. pose. Counties and boroughs may transfer When left free, as in this case they were, to decide buildings or land to the Secretary of State. the degree for themselves, we have not held it to All lands acquired by the Secretary of State, be error to impress upon their minds the legal which were at the time of the acquisition subject inference from the facts, and their duty to obey to land tax, to poor or other rates, to continue the law. But when, as in Rhodes v. Commonwealth liable thereto. The Act is applied to the United (12 Wright, 336), and Lane v. Commonwealth Kingdom. Under the first head of expenditure, (9 P. F. Smith, 371), a court addresses a jury autho-"Provision of depôt centres," including depôt ritatively, and requires of them a verdict of mur- storehouses, the sum is £1,627,200; the second der in the first degree, it is error. Jurors unin-head, "Training barracks for Militia" (also availstructed in their rights in a capital case, may feel able for regular troops) and barrack accommodathemselves constrained by the peremptory direction, to replace accommodation taken for depôt tion of the judge. Both the cases referred to stood centres, £1,010,480; for district store establishupon the same ground, and in both the error was ments £100,000; for the purchase of land, &c., the binding instruction of the court. The lan- the sum of £554,000 is the estimated amount; guage in this case approaches closely the boun- depôt centres, £204,000; for a metropolitan exerdary line of peremptoriness, but we cannot cising ground, £50,000; and £300,000 for a tacsay it overstepped it, in view of those parts of tical training station. The last item is £208,320 the charge which left them free to act for them for contingent expenses, making a total of selves. Jurors are so apt to lean away from a £3,500,000. Money is to be issued out of the verdict of murder in the first degree, we must not Consolidated Fund for the expenses of the Act. scan too critically the language of the judge, if he has left them free to find the degree of the murder, on the evidence. None of the other assignments of error require notice. The sentence of the Court of Oyer and Terminer is reversed and a venire facias de novo is awarded, and the record is ordered to be remitted for a new trial. Hamilton Alricks, R.A., Lamberton, and A. J. Herr, for plaintiff in error. Joshua M. Wintling, district attorney; Hon. Wayne McVeagh and S. H. Alleman, for defendant in error. TURNPIKE ACTS.-Two Acts were passed in the late session relating to turnpikes. One (35 & 36 Vict. c. 72), confirms a provisional order under a recited statute to facilitate arrangements for the relief of turnpike trusts. The other Act (c. 85) continues certain Acts and repeals other Acts. The statute mentioned repeals in the first and others on the 1st Jan. The statute further schedule a number of Acts on the 1st Nov. next provides that a highway board may voluntary repair a turnpike road at the cost of the district fund. There is also power given to highway boards to pay off the debts on turnpikes. last session, and now in operation, the law as to THE NEW BASTARDY LAW.-By the Act passed orders for the maintenance of illegitimate children is materially altered, magistrates having the power to make an order for payment of 5s. instead of only 2s. 6d. per week, and also to extend such payment till the child attains the age of 16 instead of 13 years as formerly. The amount in arrears to be recoverable will be thirteen weeks' contributions as under the old law, but inasmuch as the magistrates had no further power than commiting to prison for a month in default where the sum claimed was under 40s., the new Act given the power to make the commitment to prison for a period of three months. PARISH CONSTABLES.-It is recited in an Act passed on the day of the prorogation that the establishment of an efficient police in the counties of England and Wales has rendered the general appointment of parish constables unnecessary. After the 24th March next no parish constable is to be appointed except when deemed necessary by the quarter sessions. A paid constable may be appointed for a parish on the application of a vestry, the paid constables already appointed to be continued in office. The duties are set forth, and the fees and allowances to be made under the Act. A constable appointed under the statute is to be subject to the authority of the chief constable of the county, riding, or division. From and after the 24th March next the 13 & 14 Car. 2, s. 15, 16, 17, 18, and also the 18 Geo. 3, c. 19, s. 4, and so much of the statute 2 Will. & Mary, c. 5, as requires a sheriff or under sheriff, or constable to be aiding and assisting at any distress for rent or to swear any appraiser thereat, shall be repealed, and no oath shall be required after the day mentioned from such appraiser. THE LOCALISATION OF MILITARY FORCES.The Act to make provision for defraying the expenses of building barracks and otherwise providing for the localization of military forces was among the last passed on the day of the prorogation. The sum of three millions and a half has been voted by Parliament to effect the objects SEASON TICKET-HOLDERS. The following letter was addressed last week to the Editor of the Echo:-" Sir,-I see in the police reports of the Times of Thursday that a season ticket-holder on the South-Eastern Railway was summoned before the Lord Mayor by the company for refusing to produce his ticket when required; and, according to the Times' report, it appears that the Lord Mayor told the defendant at the outset that he should hold that in every case, and in every state of circumstances, where an official required a passenger to produce his ticket, or pay the fare from the starting place of the train, he was bound to do one or the other. No explanation by the defendant would alter that opinion.' As his lordship has limited his refusal to an explanation by the defendant, perhaps he will not object to consider the opinion of the Court of Queen's Bench upon this point. The Lord Mayor, in common with many other people, seems to think that, in the framing of by-laws, railway companies are under no restrictions, except the consideration of their own convenience. In Dearden v. Townsend (1 L. Rep. Q. B. 10) one point under discussion was the effect of a by-law, the material clause of which was as follows:- Any passenger not producing his ticket as aforesaid (whether it be a contract, or season ticket, or otherwise); or any passenger not delivering up his ticket as aforesaid (if it be other than a contract or season ticket), will be required to pay the fare from the place whence the train originally started; and, in default of payment thereof, shall forfeit and pay a sum not exceeding 40s. As to the effect and value of such a by-law the opinion of the Lord Chief Justice may be usefully referred to. His Lordship said: The statute 8 & 9 Vict. c. 20, s. 103, expressly provides for the case of persons intending to evade the payment of their fares, making that fraudulent intention the gist and essential ingre dient of the offence, and then section 109 authorises the company to make by-laws not repugnant to the provisions of the statute. Therefore if the company, thus alone authorised to make by-laws, were by a by-law to constitute the same facts an offence, striking out the ingredient of intention to defraud, they would be altering an enactment of the statute, and legislating in a sense repugnant to the provisions of the statute.' This opinion was also endorsed, if possible, in more positive terms, in the same case, by Mr. Justice Lush. If any doubt ever existed upon the point, there certainly can be none now that all the statutory powers given to railway companies to inflict a penalty for non-payment of fares were intended to apply, and, in fact, do apply, only to cases where an intention to avoid payment is imputed, and no such imputation can exist where, by taking a season ticket, a contract has been made for a year or any shorter time. The effect of a wilful refusal to produce a ticket which a traveller has in his possession at the time, when required to do so by the companies' servants, is another matter entirely, into which I do not propose to enter, but it is simply absurd to say that the mere accident of a ticket being left at home will subject the traveller to the option of having to pay the fare from the place whence the train started or submit to pay a penalty of 40s. Railway companies have ample powers for protecting themselves by refusing to allow anyone to enter a carriage without produ cing a ticket, and if they choose to neglect this |