clerkship registered has been 269-viz., 232 for five years, 14 graduates for three years, and 23 clerks for three years, besides 56 assignments for the residue of the term].

Commissions, &c.-So, under the 30th section, commissions to administer oaths or take acknowledgments must be brought to the registrar, who shall enter the date and mark the same on the commissions before they can be acted upon.

Certificates. By the 21st section of the Attorneys' Act, when the certificate duty is paid after the 1st of January, the certificate must be produced to the registrar of attorneys at the Incorporated Law Society within a month from payment of the duty. If not, it has effect only from the time of production, unless an order be obtained from a judge to enter it nunc pro tunc.

Employments, Offices, &c.-It is also important to attend to the 10th section of the Attorneys' Act, by which an articled clerk is prohibited from holding any office, or being engaged in any employment whatsoever, other than the employment of clerk to the attorney. Many applications have been made to the Council for their opinion as to clerks holding the appointment of deputy coroner, clerk to boards of guardians, agents to insurance offices, &c., and the parties have been referred to the stringent provision of the statute. Their opinion has also been asked whether the service of an articled clerk to an attorney who is acting as clerk to another attorney would be deemed good service under the 6 & 7 Vic., cap. 73, sec. 4, where the attorney acted as clerk in one town who had a practice of his own in another town, and the Council deem such service would not be sufficient.

Law List-Several residences.—In carrying into effect the 22nd section of the Attorneys' Act, by which the Law List is made primâ facie evidence of the right to practice, it was thought desirable that all the places of business of attorneys who practised at several towns should be inserted at each, thus making the list more complete, and removing a serious inconvenience under which attorneys sending writs and other legal documents to country attorneys have hitherto laboured. The council have had before them several instances of delay in the service of process, when sent to an attorney entered in the Law List as of a town where he only attended on market days. It is expected that under the provisions of the act attorneys will insert those places only at which they have an office; and no doubt in sending process to an attorney for service one will be selected who, having one place of business only, may be assumed to reside as well as practise there. The list of London attorneys already contains both addresses where a London attorney also practices at some adjacent country place. In addition to this improvement, the Law

List now contains the dates of the admission on the roll of attorneys, and the name of each member of a firm practising in the country is placed in alphabetical order as in the London list.

Appointments, &c.-Pursuant to the 31st section of the Act applications have been made to the officers of the several courts for lists of the authorities and appointments now in force granted to attorneys, solicitors, proctors, or others, enabling them to administer oaths and take acknowledgments, declarations, and affirmations, whether such authority be to act in England, or elsewhere, in order to form a complete register of such authorities and appointments, with the places of business of the persons so appointed, and the extent of the authority conferred.

Admiralty Commissions.-On applications to the High Court of Admiralty for admission as a commissioner to administer oaths in Admiralty, the judge has been pleased to direct that the testimonials in support of the application should be sent to the council for investigation, and they make the requisite inquiries into the character and professional position of the applicants, and report the result.

Preliminary and Intermediate Examinations.-The Council, having been instrumental in urging upon the Legislature the expediency of the examinations prescribed by the 5th and 8th sections of the Act, on subjects of general knowledge before or during articles, and by the 9th section in legal knowledge during articles, felt that the duty devolved on them of offering to the judges suggestions for carrying those sections into effect. The Council, therefore, referred the subject to a committee of their body, who, after having made extensive inquiries for the purpose of obtaining information to guide their judgment, presented a preliminary report, which was widely circulated by the Council among the members of the society, and the several law societies in London and the country. Copies were also sent to the masters of the several courts of law, and all were invited to express their opinions on the subject. The suggestions thus elicited by the Council enabled the committee materially to improve their report, and the Council believe that the revised report, as adopted by them, expressed the opinions and wishes of a very large proportion of the attorneys and solicitors of England. They transmitted copies of the revised report to the Lord Chief Justices, Master of the Rolls, and Lord Chief Baron, and solicited them to take the report into their favourable consideration, and to make such regulations as might appear to them calculated to carry into effect the intentions of the Legislature, and to confer on the public the advantages which must result from having well-educated, intelligent, and honourable legal advisers. The report was sent to the judges

in the early part of Easter Term, and the Council have recently received from them a communication which leads the Council to believe that, with some modification of one of the suggestions, the scheme contained in the report will be adopted. (See pp. 172, 177.)

Final Examinations.-It may here be added, with respect to the examinations in legal knowledge, that in the course of the last four Terms 477 candidates have been examined, of whom 417 were passed and 60 postponed. To the first class of the successful candidates 18 prizes were awarded; and to the second class 24 certificates of merit; a favourable notice was also given by the examiners to 25 candidates who were above the age of 26. The names of all these gentlemen are given in an appendix to this report.

MAXIMS.

Exoneration of Mortgaged Estates-"And" not changed into "or"— Weak foundation-Allegations against one's own act-Consent.

THE following will illustrate some of the maxims noticed in our work entitled "Alphabetical List of Law Maxims: with Translations and Explanations," or may be read, and will be useful independently of that work, and by those who may not have it.

At p. 60 of the work referred to it is stated that there is a rule that "EXEMPLA illustrant non restringunt legem," and not having given any illustration, we avail ourselves of a late decision on the effect of the 17 & 18 Vic., c. 113, by which the heir or devisee is not to be entitled to have the mortgage discharged out the personalty: so says the earlier part of the clause; the latter part runs thus:"But the land so charged shall, as between the different persons claiming through or under the deceased person, be primarily liable to the payment of all mortgage debts with which the same shall be charged, every part thereof, according to its value, bearing a proportionate part of the mortgaged debts charged on the whole thereof." Now, this latter part is only in the nature of an illustration of the first part of the clause, for the purpose of showing that, if the mortgage overrides several 'estates devised to different persons, those devisees are to pay the mortgage debt pro rata among themselves, according to the value of the particular portions of the whole estate subject to the mortgage, and which has been devised to them. In the case above referred to the Crown had become entitled to a moiety of the testator's personal estate, and Vice-Chancellor Wood observes : "It was said, if there had been any next of kin in this case, as well

as the widow, the next of kin and the widow would have claimed through or under the deceased person, and, therefore, the Act would apply. But here, as to one moiety of the personal estate, it neither goes to the widow nor to the next of kin, but to the Crown, and the Crown is entitled to it by its prerogative, and does not claim through or under the deceased person. Wherefore it was urged that the Crown was, notwithstanding the statute, liable to discharge the mortgage debt. If the only part of the enactment had been the last clause, it might have been difficult to avoid that conclusion. But the first clause is general, viz., that the heir or devisee is not to be entitled to have the mortgage discharged out of the personalty, and the clause which follows is in the nature of an illustration of that, for the purpose of showing that, if the mortgage overrides several estates devised to different persons, those devisees are to pay the mortgage debt pro ratà among themselves, according to the value of the particular portions of the whole estate, subject to the mortgage, and which has been devised to them. Upon the true construction, therefore, of this Act of Parliament, I cannot say that the generality of the prior clause is limited or contraeted by that which follows. I am, therefore, of opinion that in this case the devisee of the real estate, subject to the mortgage-i. e., the widow-is not entitled to have the personalty applied in discharge of the mortgage debt. One difficulty that might arise from a different view of this Act would be this: In a case where one half of the personalty goes to a person claiming through the deceased person, and the other half to a petson not so claiming, and where there is a devisee of half the realty to A. B., subject to a mortgage, instead of the whole of it to the widow, would A. B. be entitled to have his moiety discharged from the mortgage The Act by the first portion of the clause entirely precludes the devisee of the mortgaged estate from any right to have the mortgage discharged out of the personalty; but the next clause speaks of particular instances as illustrations of that, without, however, limiting the generality of the prior clause. The devisee, therefore, of that portion of the real estate in mortgage would not in such a case be, in my opinion, entitled to have the mortgage discharged out of the personal estate. So, also, there is no such right in this case."

"And" not read "Or."-Under the maxim "GRAMMATICA falsa non vitiat chartam," reference was made to a decision respecting "and" being read "or," and vice versa in 8 Week. Rep., 595, and it may be stated that the case referred to is Seecombe v. Edwards, and it appeared that a testator gave certain property to trustees in trust for the five children of his sister, and directed that "should one or more of them decease before marriage, and leave no

issue, then that part or parts shall fall to the remaining brother or brothers, or their issue, share and share alike." Two of the children died unmarried and without issue, another died leaving several children. The remaining child died married, but without leaving any issue. Held that the word "and" could not be changed into "or," and, therefore, that the gift over to the children of the deceased child did not take effect. (Seecombe v. Edwards, 8 Week. Rep., 595.) The Master of the Rolls said:-"The cases of Brownsword v. Edwards, 2 Ves., 243; Maberly v. Strode, 3 id., 450; and Bell v. Phyn, 7 id., 453, were cited as strong authorites in support of the contention that 'and' should be read 'or,' and it is very difficult upon these authorities to say that that is not the right construction. But, on the other hand, the cases of Doe v. Jessop, 12 East, 288; Pearson v. Rutter, 3 De. G. M. and G., 398 ; and Grey v. Pearson, 6 Ho. Lds. Cas. 61, are relied upon in favour of the opposite construction. I have very carefully considered the various cases, and I do not see how, upon these latter authorities, the word can be changed. I regret the course which the judicial decisions have, in many respects, taken. It is of much greater importance, however, that the law upon these points should be well known than that the words should be altered according to the peculiar circumstances of each case. Certainly, in common conversation, 'and' is often used as equivalent to 'or,' and vice versá; and, in a case exactly resembling the present, Lord Hardwicke construed the word 'and' as equivalent to 'or.' That continued to be the doctrine of the Courts for 50 years, when Lord Ellenborough thought it contrary to common sense to read 'and' disjunctively; and, accordingly, in Doe v. Jessop, his lordship decided that the word was to be taken in its literal sense. Since that time the decisions have fluctuated to some extent, while the later construction has been followed and confirmed by the late decision of the House of Lords in Grey v. Pearson. It is of the greatest importance for the protection of titles that well settled principles of construction should be followed; and the House of Lords having considered the case, and determined that the views of Lord Hardwicke and Sir W. Grant should be rejected, and the construction of Lord Ellenborough adopted, this Court is bound to follow that decision. I am unable to distinguish between the two I have read the observations of Lord St. Leonards, who dissented, very carefully, but I feel bound to adhere to the decision of the House of Lords. * * Looking at the current of authorities, and especially at the case of Grey v. Pearson, I feel bound to hold that the word and' must be read conjunctively, and cannot be changed into 'or,' and accordingly that the gift over does not take effect.' However, in the case of Johnson v Simcock (2 Law

cases.

*

*

*