poration or quasi corporation for certain purposes, and it is said that as the parson of the church is a corporation for the taking lands for the use and benefit of the church, and is not capable of taking goods or personalty (1 Black. Com. 393; 1 Hagg. 173) in that behalf, so the churchwardens are a corporation to take money or goods or other personal estates for the use of the church, but are not enabled to take lands. But even with respect to the personal property which they are capable of purchasing or taking in succession for the use of the parishioners, they are little else than a name to sue by, and in all actions, &c., by them it must be laid ad damnum parochianorum. (Viner's Abr. title Churchwardens.) In this manner, however, they may sue for the goods of the church, and bring an action of trespass for them, and this whether against the parson or a parishioner, and whether for goods taken in the name of their predecessors or in their own time. (See Roger's E. L., Churchwardens.) But although they may thus take goods, yet as they are a quasi corporation for the benefit and not for the prejudice of the parish, they cannot dispose of any of the church goods without the consent of the majority of the parishioners, legally declared in vestry, and the license of the ordinary. (Prideaux, 135; Ayl. Parer, 171.) The parishioners are in fact the owners, the churchwardens being temporarily entrusted by them with the custody, so that if the churchwardens should dispose of them, the parishioners would have no remedy to recover them, for it would be as if they had themselves parted with the goods. That churchwardens are a corporation so as to bind their successors and the parishioners whom they represent in matters beneficial to the church and parish is well exemplified by the rather singular case of the parish of Hammersmith, where the wife of the incumbent, Dr. Martin, having been annoyed by the ringing of the five o'clock bell, and being about to remove in consequence, it was agreed between him and the churchwardens that the former should at his own expense build a cupola and erect a clock and new bell; in consideration of his doing which the ringing of the five o'clock bell should cease during the lifetime of himself and wife. Some years afterwards, however, and after the cupola had been erected, the bell was again rung by order of the churchwardens; but Dr. Martin obtained an injunction from the Court of Chancery. (Martin v. Nutkin, 2 P. Wms. 267.) It appears, however, from

the judgment that in granting this injunction the Court was much influenced by the fact that what had been done was on the whole beneficial to the parish, and as such a matter must always be open to doubt, it is suggested that it would be very unsafe to deal with churchwardens in a similar manner, for if the agreement could not be clearly proved to be beneficial to the parish, it rather appears that it could not be supported." (The Laws of the Church and Clergy, by H. W. Cripps, Q.C., 5th ed., 196, 197.)

APPENDIX B.

QUESTIONS SET IN THE HONOURS EXAMINATION IN APRIL, 1883.

1. PRELIMINARY.

What is now your age?

Where and with whom are you serving your clerkship?

2. PRINCIPLES OF THE LAW OF REAL AND PERSONAL PROPERTY AND THE PRACTICE OF CONVEYANCING.

1. Land is conveyed by deed to the use of A. for life on condition that he do not marry B., with remainder to C. A. marries B. Who is entitled to the land? Would the result be the same if a similar settlement were made by will? Give the grounds of your

answer?

2. By what statutes is the limitation of actions for the recovery of real property now governed, and what were the principal changes in the law effected by such statutes, respectively?

3. By post-nuptial settlement real estate is limited to uses in strict settlement, power being reserved to the settlor to revoke the uses and resettle the estate. The settlor subsequently conveys the estate by way of mortgage, the proviso for redemption providing for the reconveyance to himself in fee. Upon whom will the equity of redemption devolve upon the death of the settlor? State the grounds of, and any authority for, your answer.

4. A tenant in tail contracts in writing to sell the fee simple of the entailed lands, but dies before completion. What effect has the contract on the remainderman?

5. A testator bequeaths his residuary personal estate to trustees, to be laid out by them in the purchase of land, which he directs them to settle to the use of his nephew for life, with remainders in favour of his (the nephew's) issue in tail. After the purchase of the land the nephew dies without issue. land?

Who is entitled to the

6. What is the effect of the following bequests :-(a) £1000 to children of A., B., and C.; (b) £1000 to children of A., B., and C., with a gift over of the share of any child dying under twentyone to his brothers and sisters; (c) £1000 to A. and B. as tenants in common for their lives, and after their deaths to their issue; (d) £1000 to A. and B. for life, and on the death of the survivor to the children of A. and B. ?

7. A married woman wishes to dispose of her reversionary interests expectant on her mother's death in the residuary personal estate bequeathed by the will of her grandfather who died in 1855, and in a sum of money bequeathed by the will of her father dated in 1878. In what way can she do this? Does the Married Women's Property Act, 1882, affect your answer to this question?

8. A sum of money is bequeathed to trustees upon trust to apply the same in payment off of a debt due by a charitable institution. The debt is partly secured by a mortgage of certain land held by the charity, partly by an equitable deposit of the title deeds of other land of the charity, and the remainder is unsecured. The money

is sufficient to pay off the entire debt. Is the bequest good?

9. What is the effect of a limitation to the next of kin of a married woman under the statute if she had died "intestate and unmarried," or "intestate and without having been married," or "intestate and without ever having been married," where the married woman dies leaving a husband, children, and other relatives?