and exhaustive work-was published in 1879 and at once took up a high place amongst Scottish law works, a position which time and experience have only confirmed throughout its various editions (the fourth edition having been published in 1909). "The Law of Leases in Scotland," which appeared in 1887, was characterised by the same profound learning, the same thoroughness, and the same mastery of legal principles which were the features of his earlier book. The work has now passed through three editions. And now, by a curious coincidence, on the same day as the announcement of Sir John's elevation to knighthood, there is just published his latest work: "The Law of Personal Bar in Scotland, collated with the English Law of Estoppel in pais"; which, compiled with his customary thorough workmanship and broad knowledge of case law, should rank high in the literature of law, and time and experience should confirm its value in no less degree than his previous works. To Professor Rankine also we owe several splendid editions of Erskine's "Principles "-so familiar to student and practitioner alike. In 1884 Sir John was appointed the legal member of the Commission sent to India by the Foreign Missions Committee of the Church of Scotland to take evidence and report in the then well-known Hastie case. His Alma Mater recognised his great eminence as a legal writer in conferring the degree of LL.D. He is also a Fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, and a Fellow of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland. His services in the public weal have been lengthy and valuable, as a member of the governing bodies of Edinburgh Royal Infirmary, the Royal (Dick) Veterinary College, the Edinburgh University Students' Union, and the Edinburgh Royal Asylum. office-bearers were re-elected for the ensuing year, and the following appointments were made: Members of Council (in room of Mr Erskine Dods and Mr Mill, who retire by rotation)-Mr James A. B. Horn and Mr Robert Miller, LL.B.; Censors-Mr William M. Whitelaw and Mr James A. Kessen; Auditors-Mr William C. L. Stark and Mr R. S. Carmichael. Mr Campbell Faill, Mr John N. Rae, Mr John M. Young, and Mr Peter Jolly Purves were appointed Examiners. WE regret to announce the death at 22 Queen's Crescent, Edinburgh, on Sunday last, of Mr Knight Watson, S.S.C. and N.P., at the age of sixty-four. Admitted a member of the S.S.C. Society in 1887, and becoming associated with the legal firm of Messrs Somerville & Watson, 16 Young Street, of which he had been sole partner for many years past, Mr Knight Watson acted as agent in many important litigations. Golf was his chief recreation, and he was a member of several of the more prominent clubs. He was of an exceedingly genial disposition, and had a large circle of friends, among whom his loss will be deeply felt. He is survived by his wife and three sons, two of whom are in the legal profession. LONDON LETTER. TEMPLE, 6th June 1921. Since my last letter the post of Lord Chief Justice of England has been filled, after some delay, by the appointment of Mr Justice Lawrence. He was raised to the Bench in 1904, and has done exceedingly valuable extra-judicial work in connection with compensation for war losses. This appointment has necessitated the addition of a new judge to the King's Bench Division, and for this the Junior Counsel to the Treasury on the Common Law side-in other words, one of the Attorney-General's "devils" -Mr Branson has been chosen. The new 'devil" is Mr Giveen. A notable character has passed away in the person of Lord Moulton, scientist, mathematician, and lawyer. His great contributions to patent law and above all is immense public services during the war in connection with explosives are too much a matter of public knowledge to be treated of in this letter. It is hardly possible adequately to deal with the various aspects of the appointment of his successor, Sir Edward Carson. I need only say that the Bar loses perhaps its greatest personality. There are some advocates of such character and individuality that a stranger listening to them in a court of law, if only for five minutes, is bound to ask "And who is that speaking now?" The present Lord Haldane was one of these, and so is Sir Edward Carson. It is not the intellect or the legal knowledge that impress one so much as the atmosphere of strength and determination to elicit what is wanted, and all this conveyed in the simplest language. Sir Edward has now taken the title of Lord Carson of Duncairn, though he was referred to in one paper as Lord Justice Carson. The feature of last term which appealed most to the public eye was the glut of divorce cases and the determination of the Lord Chancellor to deal with it. An ex-president of the Probate, Divorce, and Admiralty Division came back into harness, and the Lord Chancellor himself tackled the unending task. In addition to these Courts being devoted to the work, a temporary Court was set up. For a long time the amazing increase in divorce work has been put down to the greater facilities for poor people, but this explanation cannot now be considered adequate. The hasty marriages of the war or some more deep-seated cause may be at work, but one thing is certain, and that is that with the increase of divorce comes increase of perjury. In spite of the continual strictures passed by judges, notably Mr Justice Darling, it is now a notorious fact that the oath sworn by Almighty God is treated as a mere form in the process of obtaining a divorce. Unfortunately a judge at the trial can do little or nothing. Either perjury must be punished more severely than at present or else it must be recognised that the oath as a safeguard of truth is of very little value. The latter conclusion seems to-day to be the true one. The Court of Appeal has decided that goods exported from Russia under the trade agreement with that country are not liable to confiscation by English firms that consider Lenin's Government their debtors. The trade agreement made by this country and Russia contained a curious clause that seemed to leave this point to be decided by an English judge, and not by consultation between the representatives of the two countries. A Court of first instance was soon called upon to give its decision, and decided in favour of an English firm which wished to confiscate goods imported to another firm. The goods were a consignment of 3-ply wool, which seems to be the only article coming out of Russia at present. The case went up to the Court of Appeal and judgment was reversed on account of a singular fact. The judge below decided the case on the ground that we do not recognise Lenin's Government as a Government at all. In the Court of Appeal documents from the Foreign Office were read by consent of both parties which shewed that the Foreign Office at any rate had made up its mind on the point. The whole proceeding seems to be delightfully incoherent. The new Juvenile Courts for London have now been set up. There was a good deal of opposition to the Bill which created them from the London magistrates themselves, but it became law nevertheless. There are to be four Courts, and each will be presided over by a police magistrate. The distinctive feature of the Courts is that the magistrate will be assisted by one woman J.P. and one man J.P., specially chosen for the work. The chief objection raised about these Courts was that the creation of special courts, together with the appointment of special people to administer the law, would create an atmosphere of unhealthy sentimentality which would do more harm than good to the children. This will now be put to the proof. In view of the opinion constantly expressed that crime is bound to increase owing to the war, it is comforting to read that the prison population of England is 40 per cent. less than it was in 1914. In connection with this it is interesting to note that in 1914 the Criminal Justice Administration Act was passed, which enabled Courts of summary jurisdiction to commit a young offender to Quarter Sessions, in order that he might be sentenced to a Borstal institution. The results of the Borstal system are seen from the fact that 73 per cent. of the boys who have passed through it are never heard of by the police again. It seems as though there must be some connection between this reforming influence and the great decrease in the numbers of men undergoing penal servitude. There are conflicting views as to the object of punishment for crime. Is it to create examples, is it to execute vengeance, or is it to reform? With children, surely, it should be first and foremost to reform. To Miss Clapham belongs the distinction of being the first woman to pass the final of the Bar examination. She is a member of the Middle Temple and took a third class. There were three firsts taken by women in the Trinity examination-two in Criminal Law and one in Real Property. DECISIONS IN THE ENGLISH COURTS. Jeffrey & Co. v. Bamford. GAMING-PARTNERSHIP-ACTION BY FIRM OF BOOKMAKERS TO RECOVER MONEY PAID BY CHEQUE, IN RESPECT OF RACING BETS-LEGALITY AND RIGHT TO SUE OF PARTNERSHIP IN BETTING BUSINESS.-A firm of bookmakers sued for the recovery from a client of sums paid to her by cheque in respect of betting transactions. The defence was that no partnership was possible in law for betting purposes, and that an action raised by such a partnership would not lie. Held that a partnership can lawfully exist for bookmaking and betting business, and that an action brought by such a partnership in the firm name to recover money paid in respect of bets will lie.-K.B. Div. (M'Cardie J.).—16th Bar. To a large extent Professor Rankine has March 1921. Baker v. James Bros. & Sons Ltd. MASTER AND SERVANT - NEGLIGENCE — DEFECTIVE MOTOR-CAR SUPPLIED BY MASTER FOR BUSINESS USE BY SERVANT—INJURY TO SERVANT THEREFROM-EFFECT ON RIGHT OF SERVANT TO CLAIM DAMAGES AND ON LIABILITY OF MASTER OF THE KNOWLEDGE OF EACH OF THEM OF THE DEFECT. The plaintiff, a commercial traveller, was injured owing to a defect in a motor-car supplied to him by his employers, the defendants. He had repeatedly drawn their attention to the defect but they had done nothing to remedy it. Held that the plaintiff had suffered injury owing to the negligence of the defendants, and that although the plaintiff had continued to make use of the car notwithstanding his knowledge of the defect, he did not thereby undertake nor consent to undertake the risk caused by the employers' negligence and by the defect, and was not guilty of contributory negligence.-K.B. Div. (M'Cardie J.).-23rd March 1921. SHIP The "Caroline." broken new ground; for the reader would have no little difficulty in searching out for himself the law and the authorities which are here collected and collated in a masterly fashion. A sub-title indicates that a part of the author's plan is to collate the Scottish legal doctrines with the corresponding English law of estoppel in pais. Under the influence of a common court of appeal the two systems of law have been closely assimilated in respect of the matters here discussed, while each has retained its peculiar nomenclature. The result of reading the present work is to impress on the student's mind the importance to which the whole subject has grown in modern law, and the corresponding importance of classifying under the appropriate legal "species" the multifarious ways in which a person may preclude himself by his own actings from taking up a certain position in law which would otherwise be open to him. We welcome this book, which shews all the erudition and power of exposition which we associate with the author's name, as a valuable and important addition to the library of the Scots lawyer. The following have been registered for week ending 3rd June: Street, Glasgow (private company), to manufacture and deal in weighing machines, etc.-Capital £500 in £1 shares. 11729--Automatic Scale Co. (Scotland) Ltd., 68 Bath COLLISION - WAR RISK OR MARINE JOINT-STOCK COMPANIES IN SCOTLAND. RISK. Where a vessel sailing in convoy during the war was sunk by a collision due to confusion resulting from one of the ships in the convoy being blown up by enemy action, neither of the colliding vessels being guilty of negligence, held that the collision being the direct consequence of a warlike operation, the war risk underwriters were liable to pay.-K.B. Div. (Shearman J.).-14th April 1921. LAW LIBRARY. BOOK NOTICE. A Treatise on the Law of Personal Bar in Scotland; 35s. net. A new contribution to legal literature from the pen of Professor Rankine is assured of an eager welcome from the whole profession. The high standard of scholarship which has marked his previous work will raise correspondingly high expectations; and the subject which he has chosen will attract both those whose interests in law are mainly academic and the larger class of those whose reading is directed to more practical ends. In the present volume will be found an exhaustive treatment of such topics as Rei Interventus, Acquiescence, Homologation, and kindred subjects which the Scots lawyer groups under the general designation, Personal 11733-Star Hotel (Kingussie) Ltd., 183 West George Hotel, Kingussie, and carry on business there. CapitalStreet, Glasgow (private company), to acquire the Star £5000 in £1 shares. 11734-Kelvinside Academy War Memorial Trust, an association, limited by guarantee, to acquire part or whole of the shares of the Kelvinside Academy Co. Ltd., to erect in or about the Academy, a suitable tablet, figure, monument, or piece of sculpture as a lasting memorial to the former pupils of the school who fell in the war, and to acquire the school, including the ground and buildings at Kirklee, Glasgow. A statement in lieu of prospectus was filed. 11735-D. H. Munro Ltd. (private company), to carry on business as importers, exporters, refrigerators, shipowners and builders. Capital-£1000 in £1 shares. The subscribers' addresses are in Glasgow. 11736-The Picture House (West Kilbride) Ltd. (private company), to acquire the subjects forming Nos. 36 and 38 Ritchie Street, West Kilbride, and an adjoining strip of ground, and to erect a cinema theatre there. Capital£6000 in £1 shares. 11737-Mid Argyll Farmers' Mart Ltd., Lochgilphead, to carry on the business of auctioneers, etc. Capital-£2000 in £1 shares. 11738-R. C. Aitken, Film Service Ltd., 79 Dunlop Street, R. C. Aitken, Film Service." Capital-£10,000 in £1 Glasgow (private company), to acquire the business of shares. Dundee private company), to take over the Queen's Hotel. 11739-The Queen's Hotel (Dundee) Ltd., Nethergate, Capital-£10,000 in £1 shares. 11740 The Glasgow Dental Depot Ltd., 136 Renfield Street, Glasgow (private company), to manufacture and deal in dental, anatomical, orthopedic, and surgical appliances and goods. Capital £25,000 in £1 shares. 11741-The Portland Picture House Co. Ltd., 50 Wellington Street, Glasgow (private company). Capital—£10,000 in £1 shares. 11742-Aimers, M'Lean & Co. Ltd., Waverley Iron Works, Aimers, M'Lean & Co, engineers, millwrights, and ironGalashiels (private company), to acquire the business of founders, in Galashiels. 'Capital-£25,000 in £1 shares. THE PROFESSION AND THE CON VEYANCING BILL. of their Report, where mention is made of a certain circular of objections to the proposal in the Bill to dispense with any reference to the property in transmissions and discharges of heritable securities, and all that is said is that these objections "will have to be considered. We are not sure of the locus standi of these particular objections, but all will agree that at any rate the subject referred to requires consideration, and it goes without saying that the profession, the Conveyancing Committee, and the Law Officers would have attached much weight to the verdict of a body of practical conveyancers of the ability, and possessing the experience, of the Glasgow Faculty. We go further and say that the profession, the Conveyancing Committee, and the Law Officers were entitled to be put in possession of the Faculty's considered judgment whichever way it might go. This episode is typical; what the Faculty has produced is literally only a "report" in the barest acceptation of the term, a résumé of the contents of the Bill with an occasional express, and a constantly implied, satisfied acceptance. We are now in possession of the official expressions of the views of the leading legal Faculties and Societies on the Conveyancing Bill, which is the bulkiest and the most important of the three Bills, the productions of the Conveyancing Committee, which were introduced in last Parliamentary session. Their introduction at that time was for this very purpose of their being critically studied by the profession, so that when they are re-introduced it may be in such improved form as may result from the multitude of counsellors, after their wisdom has been collated by the Committee and finally by the Law Officers for Scotland. In this article we confine attention to the Conveyancing Bill. It is certainly not an heroic measure. Neither does it regard the unities; on the contrary it is avowedly an omnibus Bill, sweeping in all the subjects which in the judgment of the Committee require handling but which have not been dealt with in any of their special Bills. And it is not a consolidation Bill; it leaves the 1868 and 1874 Acts in force; it may super- It was hardly surprising that the result of sede them in some respects, but it repeals prac- this was to stir Dr Murray to table a dissent, tically no substantial part of them. It is not and to issue his circular of 5th May, both dissent our purpose to set down aught in criticism, and circular being couched in language of vigour whether expository or otherwise; we desire to and root and branch opposition. As it is deal, not so much with the Bill, as with the possible that not all of our readers may have profession's handling of it in the various Reports seen these papers we hasten to add-though those to which reference has been made. It may be who know Dr Murray will not need to be told— said at once that it is a long time since any that there is in them nothing of the reactionary ; Scottish legal Bill has come in for so much very much the reverse. So far from the pose of adverse professional comment, and certainly in the laudator temporis acti, we have references to that respect it is unique among the output of the 1868 Act as "inartistic and almost slovenly," the Conveyancing Committee. The facts which to the present "antiquated, confused, and we have very briefly stated at the commence- cumbrous system," its "glaring defects," and the ment of this paragraph are, it seems to us, the pressing call for "the repeal of the whole of the main reasons which have led to this result. It conveyancing statutes from 1845 onwards." In is at any rate abundantly evident that much passing we may say that we do not know how time and attention have been bestowed on the Dr Murray would view it, but there is strong Bill by the representative committees of the ground for believing that the "simple and different Faculties and Societies. It is all to concise code" and the "short, simple, and the good that independent thought has been intelligible statute" which he so strongly almost lavished on the subject, the thought being desiderates will be attained only in and through in most cases not more self-evident than the a system of registration of title. Professor independence, for no advantage can be gained Wood has left on record his verdict to that from lazy indifference or from a mentally sub-effect, and he is not the only technical expert, servient claque. It is known that the Bill as it stands is a compromise of differences in the Conveyancing Committee, and one prominent member of that Committee has pointedly invited the application to it of fresh minds. The Report which shews by far the greatest tendency to take the Bill as presented without venturing upon original, or indeed any, criticism is that of the Faculty of Procurators in Glasgow; they put forward only drafting amendments and very few even of these. This we respectfully venture to think is hardly fair either to the Bill or to themselves. How far it goes is seen on p. 18 steeped in all the learning of the Scottish system, who has been forced to the same conclusion, largely we believe owing to the not very satisfactory results of the prolonged labours of the Conveyancing Committee as seen in the present Bill. The action of the Incorporated Society of Law Agents in Scotland is different from that of the Glasgow Faculty, but not more original or more helpful. They have put on some suggested amendments, but they are few in number, and not one of them goes to any question of principle. We pass to the opposite extreme when we take t up the Report of the Society of Advocates of Aberdeen. They are strongly of opinion "that the measure as framed should be dropped," and that the efforts of the whole profession should be concentrated on the creation of "a clarified, self-contained, cohesive system" by the carrying of "a comprehensive and consolidating measure of conveyancing reform," towards which this Bill in their opinion would not be even a step. That is from their point of view a conclusion of necessity; for in dealing with the Bill in detail they are reluctantly driven to describe one part as calculated to produce "bewilderment to the student, doubt and difficulty to even the experienced practitioner "; another part as "so vague as to be almost grotesque"; generally the Bill is viewed as "tinkering," and very seldom does the Report rise above the "faint praise," and the innuendo, implied in the term "unobjectionable." So much, on a general view, for Glasgow and Aberdeen. The three Edinburgh Reports-those of the Faculty of Advocates and of the W.S. and S.S.C. Societies-differ very considerably from each other in many points of varying importance, but they all have the common feature of greater discrimination than the other Reports to which reference has been made. They are unanimous in favour of the Bill generally, but undoubtedly if their common dissents are to receive effect, it will be a very considerably truncated Bill which will obtain the Royal sanction. Briefly it will be the Bill minus its clauses dealing with the law of succession. measure. THE SUCCESSION PROPOSALS. Here we are at once up against the main difficulty which has resulted from this Bill being largely of the nature of a residual or omnibus All three Edinburgh Reports are down on these succession proposals being obtruded into a conveyancing Bill. The proposals in the Bill in this respect may be summarised as follows: : 1. The recognition of a destination of heritable property to "executors," with the result, as stated by the Advocates, that the property "may be diverted from the heirs in heritage to heirs in mobilibus artificially selected without regard to the domicile of the owner," and that such heritage "is brought within the sweep of the legal rights of jus relicte, jus relicti, and legitim." 2. Ground annuals would become moveable as regards succession unless destined to heirs in heritage. 3. All heritable securities, including real burdens and ground annuals, would contribute to jus relicta, jus relicti, and legitim. 4. All personal bonds, unless destined to heirs in heritage or excluding executors, would contribute to jus relicte and jus relicti. The Society are far from saying that the time is Indeed this would appear to be an opportune time not ripe for a complete review of succession law. for that purpose, especially in view of the farreaching proposals on that subject contained in the English Law of Property Bill which has been introduced by the Lord Chancellor. That Bill, by its own proposals, brings up the suggestion of assimilating the law of the two countries. Certainly the and not merely a fragmentary, treatment of the great English example encourages the idea of a complete, subject of succession. The Society have already ascertained that views, both trenchant and divergent, are held by the profession. Those reasons lead the Society to be emphatically of opinion that it would be better to separate and delay the succession proposals in the Scottish Bill with a view to early and self-contained treatment. S.S.C. SOCIETY. Of these changes the Society entirely disapprove. It is certainly desirable to consider changes in the law of succession, but it is neither desirable nor ex pedient to introduce these in a Conveyancing Bill. The Society of Advocates of Aberdeen do not share this antipathy to conveyancing and succession being dealt with together, nor do the Glasgow Faculty, and our final quotation is from Dr Murray : The Bill has two distinct objects: the one relates to conveyancing and the other to alterations upon the substantive law. These two matters ought to be kept entirely distinct. It is right to say that nowhere is there evidence of any serious objection to a revision of the law of succession as a subject per se. That is not surprising, for the influences which have led to the introduction of the Lord Chancellor's Bill operate at least as strongly in Scotland. In passing it may be said that the principles embodied in the succession part of the English Bill are-(1) abolition of primogeniture; (2) assimilation of real and personal succession; (3) unity of administration; (4) absolute equality of the sexes; (5) abolition of dower and curtesy. Sex equality is carried to a degree of which we have as yet hardly a conception, father and |