Page images
PDF
EPUB
[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][graphic][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]

numerous articles to legal literature, and these enhanced by his capable administration. may especially be found in the Juridical! www.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

THE INNS OF COURT.

Review," of which he was a staunch supporter.soofy steal INNS
He has also been associated with several
standard law books, namely, as joint-editor
with Mr George Duncan of Aberdeen in con-
nection with an erudite and scholarly work on
"The Principles of Civil Jurisdiction as Applied
in the Law of Scotland." This work was
published in 1911. Professor Dykes' reputa-
tion is also enhanced by his edition of the late
Mr F. T. Cooper's standard work on "The Law
of Defamation and Verbal Injury," published
in 1906.

T

To the curious who visit London, the four Inns of Court the Inner Temple, the Middle Temple, Lincoln's Inn and Gray's Inn-must always present a phenomenon giving rise to much. speculation concerning their past, and generally no little uncertainty as to their present. How comes it that this closely-packed area, sandwiched between the city of London on the east and Westminster on the west, the Thames on the south and the lanes of Holborn on the It will come as a matter of knowledge to most north, should be the home of law and lawyers,

and that the hard, unbending sternness of the law should be asociated even nominally with the cheerful, comforting character of an inn? How this came about takes us back many centuries. We are apt to forget that until about the middle of the thirteenth century trained lawyers, apart from churchmen, were practically unknown, and it is only from the time that the Pope issued an edict forbidding churchmen to administer the common law of England that law as a profession in that country began to come into its own. To other causes is, perhaps, due the selection of this area as the lawyers' home. The Magna Charta had provided that a Court of Common Pleas should sit at Westminster and not follow the King from place to place; Henry III. had decreed that schools of law should not obtain within the city of London. It was natural, then, that with the business in the city and the Court at Westminster the lawyers should, as they generally do, take the via media and settle outside the city wall facing Westminster, around what was then the sparse suburb or village of Holborn.

With the London of to-day ever before us it is difficult to imagine green fields in such a part as Holborn, where the builder at the behest of ever-growing commerce has built monuments to his industry. A glance at the projected maps of the period, however, shew us a Holborn of more or less open country connected with Fleet Street and the Thames by a sloping path called Chancellor's Lane on account of the Palace hard by of a Bishop at one time Chancellor of England. The lane has long since disappeared, but the old chancellor dies hard, hence the present Chancery Lane. Several noblemen also had manor houses in the vicinity, particularly the Earl of Lincoln and Baron Gray de Wilton. At the foot of the Chancellor's Lane lay the lands of the famous Order of Knight Templars, that wealthy and puissant order whose church, standing to-day against the inroads of time, remains a monument to their departed glory. Within a century, however, this aspect of Holborn was entirely changed. Gone were Templars, Bishops, and Earls, and in their place had arrived the men of law. Where arrogant knights had less than a hundred years before held counsel, counsel now held consultation with his clients, and the Inner and Middle Temple had been established. Where my Lord of Lincoln had taken his ease, gentlemen of the long robe now tried to make fees, and Lincoln's Inn was in being. To the north my Lord Gray de Wilton no longer walked his pleasant gardens with his lady, his place had been taken by men of less exalted mien, who, out of gratitude perhaps for the generous terms accorded them, had adopted his name, and so began Gray's Inn.

Like most of our ancient institutions, the

[ocr errors]

records are not complete, and those extant do not enable us to tell in detail of the origin and development of the Inns from mere abodes of lawyers to well - organised well-organised institutions of authority. The oldest records we have are those of Lincoln's Inn, which begin in the reign of Henry VI., and these record for us the doings of a society then thoroughly organised and beginning to play an important part in the development of the English Judiciary. For a much more topical account we are indebted to Sir John Fortescue, a famous Lord Chief Justice who wrote about 1468. Among other things he tells us that the Inns were a sort of academy or gymnasium fit for persons of their station, where they learn singing and all kinds of music, dancing, and such other accomplishments as are usually practised at Court. At other times, out of term, the greater part apply themselves to the study of the law.' Here we sigh and say O tempora! O mores! Even in those days the practice of law was recognised as extremely precarious, for we read that 'knights, barons, and the greatest nobility of the kingdom often place their children in those Inns of Court, not so much to make the laws their study, much less to live by their profession, but to form their manners and to preserve them from the contagion of vice." Whether human nature triumphed over such good intentions is a question of history.

66

[ocr errors]

Call to the Bar in those far-off days was not the more-or-less expeditious procedure of to-day. In the leisurely days of Queen Elizabeth it is reckoned the process took about twelve years. Apart from the four Inns there existed about ten inferior inns under their supervision, and to one of the inferior inns came the legal aspirant. Here he was taught the elements of his profession and, when he had shewn sufficient aptitude, graduated into one of the four Inns and became an inner barrister. Seven long years were then his portion before he could become an outer barrister. In this capacity he was allowed to attend the Courts and assist with the education of inner barristers, and take part in the mimic lawsuits conducted in hall after dinner, called Moots. At the end of five years he became an Ancient and entitled to practise in the Court, and went forth like his descendants to-day elated at the prospect of an appreciative world awaiting his coming! If he wished to practise in the Court of Common Pleas, or had hopes of one day lording it over his fellows, he had to betake himself to the Sergeants' Inn in Fleet Street even down to a matter of sixty years ago. But the Sergeants' Inn is only a name now. True, a building still occupies the site and retains the name, but the substance of the Sergeants is scarcely remembered except by readers of Pickwick.

It must not be thought, however, that the Inns were merely the lodgings and seminaries of the lawyers. They were often, as history recorded, the scene of much revelry and recreation. It would appear, however, that their pastimes were regarded from the standpoint of developing literary taste and rhetorical powers rather than those ideals which dominate the recreations of to-day. Thus, masques and plays were the rule, and more than one young lawyer paved the way to legal preferment through a quick wit and a dashing gallantry displayed to advantage in some revel or play in which authors and actors did not scorn to assist, and to which even kings and queens were wont to lend their patronage. To-day all is changed. The gardens remain but the revellers ar e no more.

Except for the swish of the tennis racquet or the presence of some resident enjoying the cool of the evening, the spirits of the longdeparted are left in possession.

Apart from housing its members-a purpose now only partially served the Inns were always

Photo by]

That lawyers who have always been bound up with the growth of freedom and democracy should themselves be subject to what must to-day be an anachronism in institutions can only be marvelled at. It is the success of the system, however, that is its own justification. For centuries the Inns of Court have trained all who in their day have made English justice at once the envy and admiration of the world. From the jobbery of Holborn and the quackery of Fleet Street one may even to-day enter upon an atmosphere

[blocks in formation]

where
still count-tradi-

traditions

[graphic]
[blocks in formation]

MESSRS SILVER, YOUNG & COSн, solicitors and notaries, 46 Newmarket Street, Ayr, inform us that they have assumed into partnership Mr William Gardner, solicitor, Ayr, who has been associated with them in their business for about a year past. Mr Gardner qualified as a solicitor about ten years ago,

THE RETIREMENT OF MR JOHN
PATON, S.S.C.

DEPUTE-CLERK OF THE FIRST DIVISION.

principally concerned with education. To-day since when he has held positions of trust and that is substantially their function. They have responsibility in several important law offices. been aptly described as the Legal University of England. Each provides a library for its members, and in conjunction they provide courses of lectures for their students. Later they examine them before call to the Bar. Each Inn is all-powerful as regards its own members, and the four Inns possess the same powers and privileges regarding call to the Bar. One may readily learn of their powers, but would have difficulty in finding their authority. They do not possess any charter, neither are they the creatures of statute. Each Inn is governed by a Bench, whose election the members do not control and whose authority they may not question. Even the Courts will refuse to intervene in the domestic affairs of the Inns.

Mr Paton, the Depute-Clerk of the First Division, has retired in accordance with the Civil Service regulation which requires its officers to cease official duty at the age of seventy years.

The announcement has occasioned considerable surprise and disappointment among the practitioners who frequent the Parliament House-surprise on learning that the alert, vigorous, and courteous clerk of Court is really

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

threescore years and ten, and disappointment Mr Paton ought, therefore, to be well equipped on realising that they will no longer have for the rôle of Reminiscencer"; but, unMr Paton's advice and guidance in the many fortunately, there seems not the slightest hope difficult steps of Procedure that frequently for expecting from his pen any book of " Recoloccur and are not noticed by the text-book lections or Impressions. For the clerk of writers. In all such quandaries Mr Paton, Court, apart from his modesty and his venerawith his intimate knowledge of Court of Session tion for high legal authorities, has always been practice, has always, when asked, proved a too deeply engrossed in the subject-matter of willing and unerring guide and adviser. His each case-particularly cases of a Conveyancing knowledge of Scots Law and Conveyancing is or a Trust nature-to study (after the manner probably as profound as is his undisputed of his great predecessor in the principal clerkship mastery of Court Procedure, a fact which is of a century ago) the manners, idiosyncrasies, due to his innate habits of industry and to his and characters of the great actors in the forum. legal training, first in the office of Messrs J. & W. Macdonald, solicitors, Arbroath, where Mr Paton served his law-agent's apprenticeship, and later in the chambers of Messrs J. & F. Anderson, W.S., Edinburgh, where he occupied a responsible post in their Conveyancing and Trust Department. His academic knowledge of conveyancing he proved by his place as a prizeman in Professor Stuart Tytler's class in Edinburgh University.

Thus prepared, Mr Paton in due course passed his final examination as a law agent and, in 1893, was admitted a member of the S.S.C. Society.

Mr Paton's association with the Court of Session dates from December 1895, when Lord President Robertson appointed him his clerk and keeper of the First Division Rolls in succession to Mr Francis Laing who had died. These offices Mr Paton held for about nine months, when, on the resignation of Mr Jack, Mr Paton was forthwith appointed Depute-Clerk of the Division.

The thirty years which Mr Paton has thus passed in the Supreme Court of Scotland have doubtless afforded him many opportunities for "taking notes of the parts played by the striking personalities who have adorned the Bar and the Bench, and of the important cases, notable either for their intrinsic interest or because of the circumstances of the various

dramatis personæ. Of the eminent counsel whom he has heard in the First Division, Mr Paton can point to all the judges now on the Bench of the Court of Session. He has seen four members of the Bar promoted to the Lord Presidentship-Mr John Blair Balfour, Mr Andrew Graham Murray, Mr Alexander Ure, and Mr J. Avon Clyde; and in addition to his vivid recollections of the forensic styles of these advocates, Mr Paton recalls the debating habits of the late Alexander Asher, Sir Charles Pearson, Vary Campbell, Dugald M'Kechnie, Andrew Jameson, Charles J. Guthrie, and David Dundas; of those retired senators Lords Salvesen and Johnson, and of Lord Shaw, who, with Lord Dunedin, represents the Scots Bar in the House

of Lords.

By all in the Parliament House Mr Paton will be remembered with much esteem and affection for his high code of honour, his efficiency in carrying out his duties, and for the countless services done to counsel, agents, and clerks in the furtherance of their "Procedure in the Inner House.

[ocr errors]

His many friends in Mortonhall Golf Club, of which he is an original member, have now hopes of seeing him more frequently on the course.

[blocks in formation]

THE death took place at Elgin on 24th July of Mr James Allan, senior partner of Allan & Black, solicitors, Elgin, and one of the oldest and best-known members of the legal profession in Morayshire. A native of Forfarshire, Mr Allan was for a period chairman of Elgin Parish Council, and he was secretary to the Morayshire District Board of Control and the Lossiemouth Harbour Co., and a director of Forres Hydropathic. He was also joint-agent of the branch of the North of Scotland Bank, Elgin. Last year he was entertained to dinner by the Elgin Society of Solicitors on the completion of his jubilee as a

member.

SOME ASPECTS OF RENT RESTRICTION on the other hand, the contractual tenant has

[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors]

When the contractual tenancy has been determined and the purely statutory tenancy thereupon arises, the terms on which the statutory tenant will occupy the premises will be governed either by subsection (1) or subsection (3) of section 15 of the Act of 1920. In the case of an original tenancy, the statutory tenant, by virtue of section 15 (1) of the Act of 1920, will be under an obligation to observe, and at the same time will be entitled to the benefit of all the terms and conditions of the original contract of tenancy, so far as the same are consistent with the provisions of the Acts; and in the case of a subtenancy, where the mesne lessor drops out, the statutory "subtenant "--if I may use this expression--will, subject to the provisions of the Acts, be deemed to become the tenant of the landlord on the same terms as he would have held from the tenant if the tenancy had continued, in so far, again, as these terms are not inconsistent with the provisions of the Acts.

In this connection passing reference might usefully be made to the peculiar, and in all probability unforeseen, effect of the Notices of Increase Act, 1923, on the means of determining a tenancy of premises which come within the provisions of the Rent Restriction Acts. Ordinarily a term may be determined by mere effluxion of time or else by the service of a valid notice to quit, apart, of course, from any such means of determination as merger, surrender, forfeiture. According to the decision of a Divisional Court in Aston v. Smith ([1924] 2 K.B. 143), however, the service merely of a valid notice of intention to increase rent, in pursuance of the provisions contained in section 1 (1) of the Notices of Increase Act, 1923, will have the same effect for all purposes as the service of a valid notice to quit.

Once a tenant becomes a statutory tenant, the landlord immediately acquires the statutory right of increasing the rent to the extent permitted by, and subject to the conditions contained in, the Acts. He has, it should be observed, no such power to increase rent while the tenancy remains a contractual one, although,

the right to have his contractual rent reduced to the proper figure authorised by the provisions of the Acts. It might have been thought that where a contractual tenant had elected to exercise such a right and thereby to alter one of the essential terms of his contract of tenancy, the landlord would have equally had the right to consider the contractual tenancy as at an end, and to treat his tenant as if he were merely a statutory tenant; but in the recent case of Fumasoli v. Comyn & Fish (132 L.T.R. 490) a Divisional Court held that a tenant, by obtaining an apportionment of rent, did not avoid his lease or become a statutory tenant.

Similarly, when the contractual tenancy has been converted into a statutory tenancy, whether by effluxion of time, or by notice to quit, or by the service of a valid notice of intention to increase rent under the Notices of Increase Act, 1923, the landlord will become entitled to possession if he can at any time satisfy the Court that a judgment or order for ejectment or possession should be made under section 4 "5" of the Rent and Mortgage Interest Restrictions Act, 1923, as subsequently amended by the Prevention of Eviction Act, 1924. Before the landlord will be entitled to ask the Court to exercise its discretion in his favour under the above section, he must, in the first instance, satisfy the Court that he is entitled to possession, quite irrespective of any provisions contained in the Acts themselves.

Once a tenant has become a statutory tenant it is clear that no further notice to quit is required to be given by the landlord, notwithstanding the provision contained in section 16 (3) of the Act of 1920 to the effect that "where the landlord of any dwelling-house to which this Act applies has served a notice to quit on a tenant, the acceptance of rent by the landlord for a period not exceeding three months from the expiration of the notice to quit shall not be deemed to prejudice any right to possession." For, as Lush J. said in Davies v. Bristow ([1920] 3 K.B. at p. 438): "When once the notice to quit has expired, the position of the parties is precisely the same as it would be if the original lease had provided for the determination of the terms on the date mentioned in the notice. There is in that case no room for election by the landlord. The landlord and tenant may, of course, agree that a new tenancy shall be created on the old terms, and that is what in effect they do when they agree that the notice to quit shall be waived. But the agreement to continue the tenancy must be proved. It must be shewn that the parties are ad idem as to the terms. Although the landlord is not obliged to give notice to the statutory tenant, the statutory tenant must,

« PreviousContinue »