ANS. Where a factor sells goods for an undisclosed principal, the transaction being a simple contract (Com. Law Princ., 134; 2 Bl. C. 294, 465), not only such agent but also the principal may be at any time sued upon it; in the latter case the party dealing with the agent will be allowed any set-off he might have exercised against the agent, had that agent been the principal (Com. Law Princ. 54; per cur. in 5 B. and A. 393; 24 L. J. C. P. 225; Law Dict. 14).

XIV. What modern alteration has been made in the law relating to the consideration for a guarantee appearing in writing?

ANS. By the 19 & 20 Vict. c. 97, s. 3, it is not any longer necessary that the consideration should appear on the face of a guarantee, but one must of course be proved at the trial (2 L. C. 335; 3 Id. 88, 90, 129; Com. Law Princ. 152, 153; Exam. Quest. 120); as to a guarantee showing a past consideration (See Martin v. Py. 22 L. J. Ch. 94; 2 L. C. 335).

XV. In what cases has the consignor of goods the right of stoppage in transitu? and how is such right liable to be defeated? ANS. Where goods are consigned on credit, if the consignee become bankrupt or insolvent before the goods are actually or constructively delivered, the consignor is allowed by law to resume possession of them, if he can succeed in doing so while they are on their way. Delivery of part, if intended as delivery of the whole, will defeat the right; but the most usual way in which this is done is by assigning the bill of lading to a bona fide assignee (See Exam. Quest. pp. 42, 43, No. XI., Rosc. Evi. 626, 9th ed.; Gurney v. Be. 23 L. J. Q. B. 265).

EQUITY.

I. Mention some of the ordinary cases in which the Court of Chancery exercises jurisdiction as distinguished from Courts of Law.

ANS. The following are some of the ordinary cases in which equity exercises exclusive jurisdiction: enforcing trusts, granting specific performance in matters of contract merely, protecting charities, perpetuating testimony, there being no actual litigation, administration of deceased persons' estates, foreclosure of mortgages, and also redemption of mortgages where the right is gone at law, guardianship and protection of infants, idiots, lunatics, married women, and other persons under disabilities (Key Equity, pp. 3-7; Smith's Man. Eq. 29, 1st ed.; Haynes' Outl. Equity, p. 15, et seq.).

II. What is an ademption of a legacy Give some instances of ademption.

ANS. Where a parent, or other person standing in loco parentis,

bequeathes to his own or such relation's child a legacy (not being residuary), and afterwards, by an act inter vivos, makes a provision for the same child of equal or greater amount, of equal certainty and substantially the same in kind and in degree of benefit, without expressing it to be in lieu of the legacy, or for other objects than hose for which the legacy was given (the presumption being against, a double portion, 5 L. C. pp. 20, 132), in the absence of evidence to the contrary, this will be deemed a satisfaction or ademption of the legacy. The fact that the trusts of a bequest and those of a subsequent portion are slightly different, will not prevent the former from being adeemed by the latter (Montefiori v. Gu. 8 W.R. 53; 2 L. C., N.S., 8, 9). There may be a partial ademption.-(Ibid.) The doctrines of satisfaction and ademption rest on the same grounds.-(Ibid.) The presumption of ademption or satisfaction may be rebutted by evidence, as to which see Schofield v. He. 28 L. J. Ch. 104; 1 L. C., N.S., 87. See further 5 L. C. 20, 132.

III. A. by his will gives to charitable uses the residue of his property, consisting of consols, railway shares, a share in the New River Company, shares in various insurance and dock companies, long leaseholds for years and leaseholds for lives, a common money bond, and arrears of unreceived rents. Are any, and which, of these gifts void, and why? and who is en titled to the benefit of such portions of the said property as do not pass to the charitable uses?

ANS. The portions of the residue consisting of consols, railway shares, shares in insurance and dock companies, the common money bond and arrears of rents (25 L. J. Ch. 82) are validly given, and they will pass under that bequest. The gift of the share in the New River Company (being an interest in land) is invalid, and the share will go to the testator's heir, and the gifts of the several leaseholds are also invalid and will pass to the executor in trust for the next of kin (F. B. R. 96, 97, 162, 175; Edwards v. Ha., 25 L. J. Ch. Jur. N .S. 1189; Taylor v. Linney, 29 L. J. Ch. 534; 5 L. C. pp. 2-5; 11 Jarm. Convey. 156; Tudor's Real Prop. Índex, the effect of which is given in 5 L. C. 2—5).

IV. If A. assigns to B. a policy on his own life for a valuable consideration, and subsequently assigns the same policy to C. also for a valuable consideration, and B. and C. both give notice. of their respective assignments to the insurance office, but C.'s notice is served on the office before B.'s notice, what will be the relative legal position of B. and C.?

ANS. In the case here put, C.'s assignment will have priority, the money secured by a policy of assurance being a chose in action, and in such a case it is not the assignment but the notice which gives

the priority (F. Bk. 197, 198; 7 W. R. 615; 1 L. T., N.S., 84; 2 L. C. 75-78, 324; 5 Id. 21, 175).

V. What is a distringas, and how may it be obtained?

ANS. A distringas, in reference to the stock in the public funds, is a writ to distrain on the Bank of England, to compel them to appear to a bill said to have been filed against them. No such bill is, however, then filed, the writ never comes to the knowledge of the sheriffs to whom it is addressed, and the form gives no hint of its real effect under the statute. It is provided by 5 Vic. c. 5, that such a writ may be sealed by the record and writ clerk on the production to him of an affidavit that the applicant is, or his solicitor believes him to be, interested in the particularised stock. This affidavit being filed, the writ is sealed and taken to the Bank, together with a notice desiring them not to permit a transfer of the stock, or not to pay any dividends on it, as the case may be. If any application be afterwards made to the Bank, they will not allow the transfer or pay the dividends for eight days after, and will at once send notice of the application to the person for whom the distringas was obtained (Hunter's Suit Equity, pp. 216, 217, 218; Ayckb. Pract. 22, 264, 6th ed.; Key, Equity, 122; Exam. Ques. 87, No. II.). There is another kind of distringas which is issued against a corporation in cases of contempt. If this writ be insufficient, an alias distringas, and after that a pluries distringas, may be issued without order (Ayckb. Pract. p. 139, 6th ed.).

VI. A settlement dated in 1861 authorises the trustees to invest the trust funds in Government or real securities in England; may the trustees invest such trust funds in any other, and what, countries, and by virtue of what authority? Is there any dif ference if the settlement is dated in 1840?

ANS. By sec. 32 of 22 & 23 Vic. c. 35, any trustee, executor, or administrator, not expressly forbidden by his trust instrument so to do, may invest trust funds on real securities in any part of the United Kingdom, or on stock of the Bank of England or Ireland, or East India stock (1 L. C., N.S., 333), which was held not to extend to the new East India Stock (2 L. C., N.S., 104). As by sec. 12 of 23 & 24 Vic. c. 38, it is enacted that the above provision should operate retrospectively, it will make no difference that the settlement was executed in 1840 (2 L. C., N.S., 169). As the first act uses the word "United Kingdom," the investment may be made on Irish real securities, but by reason of sect. 15 it is doubtful whether Scotch real securities may be adopted (Re Miles, 29 L. J., Ch. 47; Hunter's Suppl. 25).

VII. Suppose a plaintiff appeals to the Lords Justices from a judgment of one of the Vice Chancellors, and their Lordships

differ in the opinion, what is the effect on the judgment of the Court below?

ANS. The judgment of the Court below is affirmed, as by sec. 9 of the 14 & 15 Vic. c. 83, the decision of the majority of the judges of the Court of Appeal is to be deemed to be the decision of the same court and if the judges be equally divided in opinion on any appeal, the decree or order appealed from is to be deemed to be affirmed (Morgan's Ch. Acts, pp. 82, 84, 1st ed.).

VIII. If the plaintiff's bill is dismissed with costs, and he appeals to the Lords Justices, and the appeal is dismissed with costs, and the costs are not paid,-can he appeal to the House of Lords before he has paid the costs incurred in the courts below?

ANS. The plaintiff can appeal to the House of Lords, and, as the appeal does not cause a stay of proceedings in the Court below, the decree may be enforced, and the costs recovered against him. (2 Dan. Ch. Pract., 1337; 8 Beav. 321).

IX. What is the nature and extent of the security required by the House of Lords before their Lordships give leave to appeal?

ANS. The appellant must give security to the clerk of the parliaments by recognizance, in the penalty of four hundred pounds, conditioned to pay all such costs as the House shall think fit to order (4 L. C. 301; F. Bk. 391; Ayckb. Pract., 342, 6th ed.). X. A dies without issue intestate, leaving a mother, widow, two younger brothers, three sisters, and a nephew and niece, children of his eldest brother deceased,-upon whom, and in what proportions, will his real and personal estate devolve?

ANS. The real estate will descend to the intestate's nephew, subject to the widow's right to dower. As to the personal estate, one-half will go to the widow, whilst the other half will be divided as follows:-One-seventh thereof to the mother, two younger brothers and three sisters respectively, and the remaining one-seventh to the nephew and niece (22 & 23 Car. 2. c. 10; F. Bk. 232; 2 Atkins. Conv. 555, 1st ed.; 18 Jur. 611; Burt. Comp. pl. 1420).

XI. How soon after filing of a bill ought interrogatories to be delivered?

ANS. The time for delivering interrogatories (unlike the filing) differs according as the defendant appears in due time or not; where a defendant or defendants required to answer appear within the time limited for that purpose, the plaintiff must within eight days after the time allowed for such appearance, deliver a copy of the interrogatories required to be answered. Where the defendant does not

appear within such limited time, the plaintiff may deliver a copy of the interrogatories to such defendant at any time after the time allowed to such defendant to appear, and before his appearance; or the plaintiff may deliver a copy of such interrogatories within eight days after the appearance of such defendant (11 Cons. Ord. Rules 4 and 5; 5 L. C. 199; F. Bk. 284; 3 L. C. 390).

XII. Within what time must a plaintiff except to an answer for insufficiency?

ANS. The plaintiff must file exceptions within six weeks after the answer is filed, or the answer will be deemed sufficient (16 Cons. Ord. Rule 6; F. Bk. 286). When a further answer is put in, the plaintiff must set down the old exceptions within fourteen days, or the answer will be deemed sufficient. The Vacation is excluded from the six weeks (37th Cons. Ord. Rule 13).

XIII. May the plaintiff except to an answer for any other cause than insufficiency, and for what?

ANS. There is now no other ground of exception to an answer other than scandal and insufficiency, though formerly, if any pleading contained impertinent matter, the opposite party might take exceptions thereto, but by the 15 & 16 Vic. c. 86, s. 17, the practice of excepting for impertinence was abolished; but the court may direct the costs occasioned by any impertinent matter to be paid by the party introducing the same, upon application being made to the court for that purpose (F. Bk. 286; Ayckb. Pract. 312, 6th ed.). XIV. State in detail the steps to be taken to get money out of court by petition, when the money has been paid in by a railway company as the price of land taken by the company? ANS. The petition must be presented, answered, and then a copy served on the company. An affidavit must be made by the petitioners, not only verifying their title, but also state that they are not aware of any other right or claim to the money or any part thereof, or stating the particulars of any claim (3 Cons. Ord. Rule 3). A certificate of the fund in Court should also be obtained (Seton's Dec. 663, 2nd ed.).

XV. How may an affidavit be sworn by a person resident in Scotland?

ANS. By the 15 & 15 Vic. c. 86, s. 26, all affidavits in matters depending in the Court of Chancery may be sworn and taken in Scotland before any Judge, Court, notary public, or person lawfully authorised to administer oaths in such country; and the Judges and other officers of the Court of Chancery shall take judicial notice of the seal or signature, as the case may be, of any such Court,