mixed (as uses, commons, &c.), and personal (as money, annuities, &c.). An inheritance real may sound oddly, but it is strictly correct, as is the usual expression chattel real.

Our readers will, of course, please themselves about adopting this nomenclature; our only object has been to make them sensible that there is a deception about the terms in ordinary use, against which they will do well to guard themselves. If they bear this in mind, there will, perhaps, be no great harm in continuing to use the old expressions, which are, indeed, so engraven in the language of the law as to be ineradicable..

MOOT POINTS.

No. 40.-Devise subject to Annuity-Sale of Lands. A., by his will, devised and bequeathed all his real estate unto B. and his heirs, subject to the payment of an annuity of £150 to C. Can B. sell the estate without the consent of the annuitant, C. ? SIGMA.

No. 41.-Devise on attaining Twenty-one.

A., by his will, gave, devised, and bequeathed all his real and personal estate unto his nephews and nieces, and their respective heirs, when they arrived at the age of twenty-one years. One of the nephews died before he was twenty-one, without leaving lawful issue. To whom will his share go, to his next of kin, or be divided amongst the other nephews and nieces of A.?

SIGMA.

No. 42.-Devise over if die before becoming entitled. Testator by his will, dated the 19th August, 1842, gave all his real and personal estate unto his trustees, A. (his cousin), B., and C., upon trust, to receive and take the rents, profits, and proceeds of his said real and personal estate, and pay the same to his said testator's wife, or otherwise permit and suffer her, his said wife, to enjoy the same for and during the term of her natural life; and from and immediately after her decease, then for them, his said trustees, if he should leave any child him surviving, to stand possessed of his said personal estate, and the rents and profits of his said real estate, until the youngest of his, said testator's, children, if more than one, should attain the age of twenty-one years; and when and as soon as the youngest of his, said testator's, children, if more than one, should attain the age of twenty-one years, then he gave and devised to them, his said children, all the said trust estates, moneys, and pre

mises, to hold to them, his said children, their heirs, executors, administrators, and assigns, in equal shares and proportions, as tenants in common; and if but one child, then to such only child, his or her heirs, executors, administrators, and assigns for ever; provided always, that in case he should leave no such issue as aforesaid, or such issue should die under the age of twenty-one years, without leaving lawful issue, then he gave, devised, and bequeathed all the said trust estates, moneys, and premises, unto his, said testator's, sister-in-law, and A. (his cousin), their heirs, executors, administrators, and assigns for ever absolutely, to take as tenants in common, and not as joint tenants. But in case his said sister-inlaw should happen to depart this life before she should become entitled to such share of the said trust moneys, and premises, then he gave and devised the whole thereof unto his said trustee A., his heirs, executors, administrators, and assigns for ever. The widow died two years after said testator's sister-in-law, leaving no issue.

Are testator's sister-in-law's representatives and A. jointly, or is A. alone entitled to the property devised by the will? QUIS.

No. 43.-Law of Shipping-Collision at Sea.

When a collision between two ships takes place at sea, and some amount of negligence is attributable to each side, some writers lay it down that the loss must be apportioned between the owners of the two ships; others, that each side must bear its own loss. Which is the correct opinion?

Vide

The Woodross Sims," 2 Dodson, 83, 85, and Sir W. Jones on Bailments, 4th edit. Appendix, p. 32.

LUCAS CORDES (Newport).

No. 44.-Policy of Insurance-Deviation-Ship in Distress. Is a deviation from a ship's course, in order to succour a ship in distress, and tow her into the nearest port, such vessel being almost in a sinking state, such a deviation as would avoid a policy of insu rance effected on the first-named ship?

LUCAS CORDES (Newport).

No. 45.-Liability for Damage done by Man-of-War.

Who is liable for damage done by a man-of-war to a merchant ship, by running her down, under circumstances which, as between two merchantmen, would have rendered the owners of the ship causing the collision liable for the damage done to the other ship? LUCAS CORDES (Newport).

No. 46.-Inns of Chancery.

Can any of your readers inform me what is the constitution of the

several societies of Clifford's-inn, and the other inns of Chancery, how members are admitted, and generally what are their practical or theoretical uses? LUCAS CORDES (Newport).

No. 47.-Table-Moving-Pretended Satanic Agency.

The Rev. Mr. Dibdin, and several other clergymen, have lately convinced themselves, and a few of the more credulous of their disciples, that the table-moving and table-talking, of which we have lately heard so much, are the direct result of Satanic agency; and, undismayed by this somewhat alarming discovery, they assert that they are enabled to have, and that they do have, constant and intelligible intercourse, through the medium of a table, if not with the Father of Evil himself, at any rate with certain lesser evil spirits. Would an indictment lie against these gentlemen, under the 9 Geo. 2, c. 5, for pretending to use witchcraft," which term, it is to be observed, is in legal acceptation equivalent to "intercourse with evil spirits?" (Steph. Com. 3rd edit. vol. iv. p. 269.) The mooter apprehends it would. LUCAS CORDES (Newport). No.48.-Master and Servant—Dismissal of Servant for Misconduct.

A domestic servant committed an act of misconduct of a nature sufficiently heinous to justify his master in dismissing him on the spot, without paying him any wages for services rendered by him since his last monthly pay day. Instead of doing so, the master, however, gave him a month's notice to leave, his real motive for so doing being, not to spare the servant, but to suit his own convenience, by giving him time to look out for another servant in place of the one dismissed. The servant's subsequent conduct, however, being most unsatisfactory, although he did not commit any such fresh act as would of itself have justified an immediate dismissal, the master, about a week afterwards, ordered him to leave his service on the following day, which he accordingly did.

Was the master justified in so doing, or did he, by giving the month's notice, waive his right of immediate dismissal, and what remedy, if any, has the servant? Quare, also whether, under the above circumstances, the servant is not entitled to wages for the period of service which elapsed between the last periodical day of payment and the day on which the month's notice was given? LUCAS CORDES (Newport).

No. 49.-Accord and Satisfaction-Account Stated-Vingt-et-un. A. owed B. £100 for goods sold and delivered. Things being in this state, they one evening sat down to play vingt-et-un. No money passed between them, but, after every hand, a deduction was made from, or an addition to, A.'s debt, according to the

amount he had won or lost on the preceding hand, and each of them then jotted down the balance for the time being in their respective pocket books. They played for some time with varying success. A., however, having on the whole so much the best of the game, that, after some time, there was a balance in his favour of £10. Luck, however, subsequently turned, and on the conclusion of the game A. owed B. £15, as they both agreed, and he accordingly gave B. his IO U for that amount.

Can B. now recover anything from A., and if so, what? -and if not, under what plea can A. avail himself of the above circumstances? LUCAS CORDES (Newport).

No. 50.-Master and Apprentice-Indenture of Apprenticeship. A young man duly served his apprenticeship with a coach-maker. At the expiration of his time his master refused to deliver over to him the indenture of apprenticeship, falsely alleging that he had lost it.

What is the apprentice's best remedy for the recovery of the indenture and, supposing it to have been bona fide lost, what would be his rights as against his late master?

LUCAS CORDES (Newport).

No. 51.-Law of Evidence-Proof of Post-marks.

Does a post-mark on a letter prove itself, or is it necessary to call a post-master, or a stamper at the post-office, to prove it?

Vide Abbey v. Lill. 5 Bing. 299; Plumer's Case, R. and R. C. C. 264; and Cox and Lloyd's County Court Practice, 6th edit. p. 372. LUCAS CORDES (Newport).

No. 52.-Trust Estate-Mortgage Deed.

A., trustee for B., an infant, lends a portion of the trust-moneys on mortgage. Is it advisable to allow the trust to appear on the face of the deed? And if it does appear, would not the fact of its appearance oblige the purchasers, under the power of sale (if a sale takes place to recover the advanced money), to see to the application of the purchase money, notwithstanding a declaration to the contrary? The mooter believes that such would be the case, and would feel obliged to any gentleman who would bestow his particular attention on the point, as it is an important one. C. C. ELLIS (Ruthin).

No. 53. Promissory Note-Statute of Limitations.

About four o'clock in the afternoon of the 24th January, 1848, A. grants B. his promissory note for £50, payable on demand; and on the 24th January, 1854, at eleven o'clock in the morning, B.

entered a plaint against A. in the county court for the amount of the note.

Was the plaint entered in time to save the statute of limitations? C. C. ELLIS (Ruthin).

No. 54.-Statute of Limitations.

The landowners in the parish of L- -instruct B., an attorney, to proceed with the inclosure of the waste lands in the said parish. The inclosure business was not wholly completed for about eight years, and B. does not present his bill to the commissioners for some time after the close of the proceedings, or, rather, for a year after his part of the business was finished.

Could any part of B.'s bill be barred by the statute of limitations? C. C. ELLIS (Ruthin).

No. 55.-Negligence-Refusal to Pay Bill.

A., a solicitor, is employed in the registration of the district of During the business a mistake is made by one of his clerks in the dates of the objections to votes, which renders them all useless.

Can his employers, with any chance of success, refuse to pay his bill, on account of gross negligence? C. C. ELLIS (Ruthin).

No. 56.-Retainer by Executor.

A. dies, leaving the sum of £150, and no real property, devised by his will to pay his just debts. B. is his executor. B. has a simple contract debt of £100 against A., deceased. There are other specialty creditors to the amount of £80. B. retains his own debtviz., £100—and hands over the remainder (£50) to the other creditors.

Is B. right in so doing? The mooter apprehends not, and that the specialty creditors can compel B. to discharge their demands first in full before he retained his own. C. C. ELLIS (Ruthin).

No. 57.-Infant-Promissory Note.

A., an infant, lends a small sum of money upon a promissory note, out of his own allowance, without the knowledge of his guardian. Can A. sue, through his guardian, upon that note?

C. C. ELLIS (Ruthin).

No. 58.-Guardian and Ward.

A. is guardian to B., an infant. B. is stolen away by C. A. proceeds against C., and recovers damages to the amount of £100, which he appropriates to his own use.