exception that service of process was made on an agent not having power to accept service, and suppose that this exception is, after six months, judged in favor of the insurance company; but in the meantime the twelve months have passed, has the insured no remedy? MARTYRS OF THE OLD BAILEY. Some time ago Sir James Mackintosh, a most cool and dispassionate observer, declared that, taking a long period of time, one innocent man was hanged in every three years. The late Chief Baron Kelly stated as the result of his experience, that from 1802 to 1840, no fewer than twenty-two innocent men had been sentenced to death, of whom seven were actually executed. These terrible mistakes are not confined to England. Mittermaler refers to cases of a similar kind in Ireland, Italy, France and Germany. In comparatively recent years there have been several striking instances of the fallibility of the most carefully constructed tribunals. In 1865, for instance, an Italian named Pellizzioni was tried before Baron Martin for the murder of a fellow countryman in an affray at Saffron Hill. After an elaborate trial he was found guilty and sentenced to death. In passing sentence the judge took occasion to make the following remarks, which should always be remembered when the acumen begotten of a "sound legal training" and long experience is relied on as a safeguard against error: "In my judgment it was utterly impossible for the jury to have come to any other conclusion; the evidence was about the clearest and most direct that, after a long course of experience in the administration of criminal justice, I have ever known......I am as satisfied as I can be of anything that Gregorio did not inflict this wound, and that you were the person who did." The trial was over. The Home Secretary would most certainly, after the judge's expression of opinion, never have interfered. The date of execution was fixed. Yet the unhappy prisoner was guiltless of the crime, and it was only through the exertions of a private individual that an innocent man was saved from the gallows. A fellow-country man of his, a Mr. Negretti, succeeded in persuading the real culprit (the Gregorio so expressly exculpated by the judge) to come forward and acknowledge the crime. He was subsequently tried for manslaughter and convicted, while Pelizzioni received a free pardon. Again in 1877, two men named Jackson and Greenwood were tried at the Liverpool Assizes for a serious offence. They were found guilty. The judge expressed approval of the verdict, and sentenced them to ten years' penal servitude. Subsequently fresh facts came to light, and the men received a free pardon. Once more, in 1879, one Habron was tried for the murder of a policeman. He was found guilty and sentenced to death. An agitation for a reprieve immediately followed. The sentence was commuted to penal servitude for life. Three years later, the notorious Peace, just before his execution for the murder of Dr. Dyson, confessed that he had committed the murder for which Habron had been sentenced. With these incidents fresh in our minds, let us turn once more to St. Giles and St. James, and listen to the indignant words of Douglas Jerrold: "Oh, that the ghosts of all the martyrs of the Old Bailey--and though our professions of faith may make moral antiquarians stare, it is our invincible belief that the Newgate Calendar has its black array of martyrs; victims to ignorance, perverseness, prejudice; creatures doomed by the bigotry of the council table, by the old haunting love of blood as the best of cures for the worst of ills-oh, that the faces of all these could look from the Newgate walls! That but for a moment the men who stickle for the laws of death as for some sweet domestic privilege might behold the grim mistake, the awful sacrilegious blunder of the past,and seeing make amendments for the future."— Fortnightly Review. INSOLVENT NOTICES, &c. James D. Anderson, wholesale clothier, Montreal, April 29. J. R. E. D'Anjou, trader, Rimouski, April 30. Joseph M. Dorion, Terrebonne, May 6. Re James D. Anderson.-W. A. Caldwell, Montreal, curator, April 29. Re J. R. E. D'Anjou, Rimouski.-H. A. Bedard, Quebec, curator, May 6. Re Dame Hermine Charpentier.-T. Gauthier, Mont real, curator, May 4. Re Charles Dubois, Victoriaville.-A. Quesnel, Arthabaskaville, curator, May 5. Re Remi Fortin.-Millier & Griffith, Sherbrooke, joint curator, April 30. Re Amédée Gagnon, grocer, River Quelle.-N. Matte, Quebec, curator, April 30. Re Lane & Boissonnault, boot and shoe manufacturers, Quebec.-N. Matte, Quebec, curator, May 6. Re W. H. Leprohon.-Bilodeau & Renaud, Montreal, joint curator, April 30. Re Joseph Grégoire Côté,Grondines.-H. A. Bedard, Quebec, curator, May 12. Re Gaspard Germain, currier, Quebec.-P. Guay, Quebec, curator, May 14. Re N. Girouard, St. Guillaume.-Kent & Turcotte, Montreal, joint curator, May 13. Re E. M. Haldimand & Co.-W. A. Caldwell, Montreal, curator, May 12. Re William Hunter, Montreal.-J. McD. Hains, Montreal, curator, May 11. Re Alex. J. Morison.-W. A. Caldwell, Montreal, curator, May 11. Dividends. Re William V. Gordon, Montreal.-First and final dividend, payable June 2, A. F. Riddell, Montreal, curator. Re L. Moquin, Lake Megantic.-First dividend, Re James O'Gorman.-C. Desmarteau, Montreal, payable June 8, Kent & Turcotte, Montreal, joint curator, April 30. Dividends. Re Théophile Chamberland, hotel-keeper, Quebec.-First dividend, payable May 26, H. A. Bedard, Quebec, curator. Re Guay & Co.-First and final dividend, payable at office of L. A. Lord, Yamachiche, May 26, O. Lesieur, Yamachiche, curator. Re Stephen S. Kimball, safe manufacturer.-First and final dividend, payable May 26, T. Gauthier, Montreal, curator. Re Robert Lanning.-First and final dividend, pay- Separation as to property. curator. Re Peltier & Guy, Montreal.-First and final dividend, payable June 8, Kent & Turcotte, Montreal, joint curator. Re Buckingham Pulp Co., Montreal.-First dividend, payable June 1, J. McD. Hains, Montreal, liquidator. Re F. X. Roy.-First and final dividend, payable GENERAL NOTES. BAR EXAMINATIONS.-At the last general meeting of the Bar of the district of Quebec the following resolution was adopted on a division, proposed by Mr, L. P. Emma Dubeau vs. Jean Baptiste Dubois, butcher Pelletier and seconded by the Hon. C. Langelier: "That and trader, St. Johns, May 6. Caroline Adéline Girouard vs. Nazaire Girouard, trader, parish of St. Guillaume d'Upton, May 6. Hannah Goodfellow vs. Charles Kenniburgh, Lachute, Jan. 17. Marie Louise Lavigne vs. Athanase Boucher, trader, St. Guillaume d'Upton, May 4. DISTRICT OF IBERVILLE. From May 15, every juridical day shall be a term day for the Circuit Court, district of Iberville. the Quebec Bar is of the opinion that the number of examinations of students to admission to study or practice of law ought to be reduced from two to one only, and that such examination ought to take place in the month of July or August of each year." WHAT A RAILWAY ACCIDENT MAY COST.-On the 12th June, 1889, an accident occurred to an excursion train on the Great Northern of Ireland, heavily laden with children and others, which resulted in the death of 80 and the injury of 262 of the passengers. As the accident was obviously due to the negligence or stupidity of one or more of the company's servants, the directors at once admitted their liability, and it then became a mere question of the amount of compensation to be paid in each case. Up to June last in 55 verdicts had been obtained. There were still Joseph Eugène Dion, trader, Robertson Station, been dealt with in the past six months, a sum of £30,over 150 claims to be settled, and most of these have May 8. Quebec Official Gazette, May 16. Judicial Abandonments. Willie Burque, furniture dealer, St. Hyacinthe, the directors had settled 438 claims out of court, and May 14. Curators appointed. 000 having been taken from the receipts for this purpose. Altogether a total of £148,544 has been paid as compensation in respect of this one accident-a sum Re J. R. E. d'Anjou, Rimouski.-H. A. Bedard, which will, no doubt, produce exemplary caution in Quebec, curator, May 6. the working of the line. find the fact of flight, forfeiture being looked upon since the vast increase of personal property of late years as too large a penalty for No. 21. an offence to which a man is prompted by the natural love of liberty.' There is at least one precedent-that of James Sadleir-for When the Court of Appeal met at Montreal in September last there were 96 cases on the printed list. The list for the May term of this year exhibits precisely the same number, so that the arrears have not been reduced. During the May term the ninetysecond case on the last September list was reached. The five terms were therefore insufficient to hear the list prepared for the first term. In other words, the work is more than a whole year in arrear. A good deal of delay is caused by the increased number of applications each term for leave to appeal from interlocutory judgments, motions for new security, etc. The Chief Justice took occasion during the term to direct the atten expelling a member who has fled from justice, without any conviction or judgment of outlawry; but in that case (which occurred in 1857) a true bill had been found, the offence being fraud. See May's Parl. Pr.' 9th ed. p. 66, from which, also, it appears that in 1796 one Colonel Cawthorne was expelled for conduct unbecoming the character of an officer and a gentleman;' also that 'expulsion is generally reserved for offences which render members unfit for a seat in Parliament, and which, if not so punished, would bring discredit on Parliament itself.' Modern opinion, however, would perhaps call for an immediate expulsion of a member tion of the bar to the expediency of giving proved to have fled from justice, on the the Judges in Chambers concurrent jurisdic-ground that constituencies are entitled to tion to dispose of these applications. This have vacancies so caused filled up with as change would work well in two ways. The little delay as possible." applications could be heard and disposed of immediately; and secondly, several hours of term time would be gained for the hearing of ordinary appeals. In connection with the warrants issued recently for the arrest of two members of the House of Commons (one of whom, Capt. Verney, subsequently returned, and being convicted on his own admission, was expel- | led from the House), the London Law Journal says:-"Where a member is convicted of felony and sentenced to penal servitude or any term of imprisonment with hard labour or exceeding twelve months, he forfeits his seat by virtue of 33 & 34 Vict. c. 23, but no such consequence follows a conviction for misdemeanour. The offence of flying from justice was in the case of a felony a separate offence, followed by forfeiture of goods, even although the offender should have been acquitted of the felony, until 7 & 8 Geo. IV. c. 28, s. 5; 'for,' as Blackstone says, 'the very flight was held an offence carrying with it a strong presumption of guilt,' though 'in modern times it became unusual for the jury to So. We think it is of Lord Brougham the anecdote is related that when he sat on a Good Friday, some one observed that he was the first judge since Pontius Pilate who had done An English judge, last Good Friday, proposed to follow the same course, but was deterred by the remonstrance of the Bar. The incident is thus described in the London Law Journal:-"The chairman of the County of London Sessions recently horrified his Bar by announcing that he was prepared to sit on Good Friday, the following Saturday, Easter Monday, and the Tuesday after. He had,' observed he never before had to sit on Good Friday, but he could remember cases in which judges on circuit had sat in the afternoon of that day.' The Solicitor-General at once protested against such an interference with ' arrangements which many had already made.' The chairman said 'his position was a painful one, and he was subjected to observations which made him wish to have it understood that, as far as he was concerned, he was ready to sit on those days;' but added that he should, of course, be swayed by the be deducted from whatever amount may then remain unpaid in the hands of the company. "The company may at any time, without notice, discharge any employee for incompetence, unfaithfulness, immoral or improper conduct, or for any wilful damage done the property of the company." It was proved that the employee asked for leave of absence on the 22nd December last, in the afternoon, in order to receive her father and mother, who were returning from the United States. Leave was refused. She absented herself, however, and another oper general feeling of the Bar, and would say at once that the Court would not sit on Good Friday. The allusion to alleged Good Friday sittings of judges on circuit makes the incident one of general importance. Our impression is that in the pre-Judicature Act times at least one judge once sat on Good Friday, but that since the passing of that Act there has been no such sitting. For what is the law under that Act? By section 26, subject to Rules of Court, the High Court and any judge thereof may sit 'at any time and at any place.' Read by itself, no doubt (as the Solicitors' Journal once put it), this sec-ative was put in her place. The next morntion might be taken to authorize a midnight sitting in mid-winter in the middle of Salisbury Plain; but it is expressly made subject to Rules of Court, and by the Rules of the Supreme Court, Order lxiii, rule 4, the Easter vacation commences on Good Friday, which, therefore, we submit, is a dies non." CIRCUIT COURT. SHERBROOKE, May 14, 1891. ing she went back to the factory and worked until 9 o'clock, when she was summarily dismissed and her wages for two weeks retained as being forfeited under the agreement. One of the overseers testified there was damage, but it was impossible to appreciate it. Belanger, for plaintiff, submitted that there was nothing in the regulations to warrant the course pursued by the defendants. The employee had not left their service, but absented herself without leave. She was not guilty of any of the acts mentioned in the FOURNIER V. THE HOCHELAGA COTTON MANU- second paragraph. No damage was proved. FACTURING CO. Master and servant. HELD:-That an employee paid fortnightly, who has bound herself to give two weeks' notice of her intention to leave service, and who absents herself for half a day without leave and against the will of her employer, but returns to her work the next morning and is discharged, notwithstanding her offer to work out her notice, does not, through her absence, forfeit two weeks' wages; and that she could only be held for damages, had any been proved. Action for wages due plaintiff's wife for work done at the Magog Print Works. Debt admitted by defendants, who pleaded that plaintiff's wife had submitted herself to the following rules and regulations: "All employees intending to leave the service of the company shall be held to give two weeks' notice of such intention to their overseers, and upon failure to comply with this stipulation, shall forfeit to the company the amount of two weeks' wages, which shall He cited Belanger v. Cree, 14 Leg. News, 92; The tender was declared insufficient. Judg ment for plaintiff with costs. Belanger & Genest for plaintiff. COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH— Responsibility-Force majeure-Fire-Fall of Held:-Affirming the judgment of LORANGER, J., M. L. R., 3 S. C. 283, That where a person pleads inevitable accident in answer to an action of damages, he is not relieved from responsibility if it appear that the accident was preceded by negligence or fault imputable to him, which conduced to the accident. And so where the damage complained To appear in Montreal Law Reports, 6 Q. B. levy annual taxes on wholesale liquor dealers and "generally on all commerce, manufactures, callings, etc.," does not sufficiently authorize the municipal council to impose a special and additional tax as compounders on persons who compound or bottle spirituous liquors for the purposes of their business as wholesale liquor dealers.-McManamy et of was caused by the fall of a wall during a high wind, seven days after a fire by which a building of defendant was destroyed and the wall in question left standing, and the defendant had taken no precautions to prevent the accident by pulling down the wall, although there had been ample time to do so, and he had been notified of the danger, it was held that it was not a case of inevitable ac-al. & Corporation of Sherbrooke, Dorion, C. J., cident, and that the defendant was liable. Nordheimer & Alexander, Dorion, Ch. J., Tessier, Cross, Baby, Bossé, JJ., June 26, 1889. Sale of real estate-Action by purchaser to en force sale-Putting vendor in default. Held:-Where by a contract for the sale of real estate the buyer is to pay part of the price in cash within a fixed delay, in order to put the vendor legally in default to execute a deed, the buyer must tender the cash payment within the delay, and in a suit to enforce the sale, and asking that the judgment be equivalent to title, he must renew the tender and pay the money into Court.Foster & Fraser, Dorion, C. J., Tessier, Cross, Bossé, Doherty, JJ., May 21, 1890. Constitutional law-47 Vict. (Q.), ch. 84, s. 8— Power of local legislature to authorize municipal corporation to tax wholesale liquor dealers-Statute imposing taxation must be specific. Held:-1. An Act authorizing a municipal corporation to levy an annual tax for municipal purposes, on wholesale liquor dealers doing business within the municipality, is within the powers of the local legislature. 2. Where an Act of the local legislature authorizes a municipal council to tax certain trades and occupations specially enumerated in the statute, and generally all commerce, manufactures, etc., exercised in the city, a by-law made by the council under the authority of such Act, taxing certain trades and occupations, and omitting to tax other trades and occupations, is not illegal on the ground of discrimination. 3. Where the legislature authorizes the council of a municipality to levy taxes for municipal purposes, the trades or occupations subjected to taxation must be clearly designated in the statute. Hence a power to Tessier, Cross, Bossé, Doherty, JJ., May 21, 1890. FIRE INSURANCE. (By the late Mr. Justice Mackay.) CHAPTER XII. PROCEEDINGS ON POLICIES. [Continued from p. 159.] In Willson v. The Etna Ins. Co.,1 the Supreme Court of Vermont held the condition, that the action was to be brought within twelve months, to be a good condition. And in Cray v. Hartford F. Ins. Co.2 it was held that where a condition of the policy provided that no action should be brought thereon, unless commenced within the term of twelve months after the cause of action should accrue, it was a binding and valid condition, and that it was a good defence to an action on the time specified. policy that it was not brought within the But the limitation ought not to avail the insurance company if it has brought about the result of no action within the time fixed, say, by proposing arbitration and so forth.3 Where the action is required to be brought within a fixed time, what is considered an action? Is it the lodging of a fiat only, or the service of a writ of summons? The latter is necessary. In Wilson v. The State Ins. Co. Judge Smith said the clause that the action shall be brought in six months is of no effect. "We have our own prescriptions." Judg |