4 :. 
 

 T,/iLE^T STREET, | 
 
 OKTH, 
 
 Dr. Tristram’s 
 Practice. 8vo. 
 
 Probate Court 
 
 grany 
 
 ^ )S. 
 
 (Contenticms' Business) 
 
 (Very nearly reday.) 
 
 Davis’s Labour Laws of 1875. With Introducti<>n and 
 Notes. 8vo. 12s. bloth. ^ -pj-x 
 
 Davis’s County Courts Practice and Evidence. 5th Edit. 
 
 1874.. y^itfi Supplement, containing the Act ot 1876, the New Con¬ 
 solidated’Rules,^Orders and Fees, 1875, and the other Acts afiecting 
 County Courts.’ 8vo. cloth. 
 
 Davis’s Coun^ Courts Practice in Equity, Bankruptcy, and 
 other Jurisdictions. 8vo. 18s. cloth. 
 
 Bund’s Agricultural Holdings Act, 1875. 12mo. 5s. cloth. 
 Rogers’ Law and Practice of the Supreme Court of 
 
 Judicature. 8vo. 21s. cloth. 
 
 Powell’s Principles and Practice of the Law of Evidence. 
 
 Fourth Edition, by Cutler and Griffin. Post 8vo. 18s. cloth. 
 Higgins’s Digest of Cases on the Law and Practice of Letters 
 Patent tor Inventions. 8vo. ^Is. cloth. 
 
 Crump’s Law of Marine Insurance and General Average. 
 
 Royal 8vo. 21s. cloth. 
 
 Collier’s Law of Contributories in the Winding-up of Joint 
 
 Stock Companies. Post 8vo. Ps. cloth. 
 
 Pulton’s Manual of Constitutional History. Post 8vo. 
 7s. 6^/. cloth. ^ 
 
 Gaches’ Town Councillors & Burgesses Manual. Post 8vo. 
 
 7s, cloth. , 
 
 Chute’s Equity in relation to Law. Post 8vo. 9s. cloth. 
 Stephen’s Blackstone’s Commentaries. 7th Ed. 4 vols. 8vo. 
 
 • 4/, 4s. doth. 
 
 De Cb^ar’s Law of Guarantees. 8vo. 14s. cloth. . 
 
 Bund’s Law of Salmon Fisheries. Post 8vo. 15s. cloth. 
 Underhill’s Law of Torts or Wrongs. Post 8vo. 6s. cl. ^ 
 Sir T. Erskine May^s Parliamentary Practice. 7th Edit. 
 
 fevo. 40s. cloth. 
 
 Grant’s Law of Bankers and Banking. Third Edition. 
 
 By R. A. Fisher. In 8vo. 28s. cloth. 
 
 Kelly’s Conveyancing Draftsman. Post 8vo. 6s. cloth. 
 Baylis’s Law of Domestic Servants. 4th Edition. By 
 Mo^’CKTO^^ Foolscap 8vo. 2s. cloth. 
 
 Chadwick’s Probate Court Manual. Royal 8vo. 12s. cloth. 
 Redman’s Law of Arbitrations and Awards, 8vo. 12s. cl. 
 Hunt’s Law of Frauds and Bills of Sale. Post 8vo. 9s. cl. 
 Seaborne’s Law of Vendors and Purchasers of Real Pro¬ 
 perty, and Supplement to 1874. Post 8vo. 9s. cloth. 
 
 Fawcett’s Law of Landlord and Tenant. 8vo. 14s. cloth. 
 Saunder’s Law of Negligence. 1 vol. Post 8vo. 9s. cloth. 
 Cutler’s Law of Naturalization. 12mo. 3s. 6d. cloth. 
 Davis’s Law of Registrations and Mections. 12mo. 15s. cl. 
 Rouse’s Practical Conveyancer, 
 meut, as to Stamps and other matters. 
 
 3rd Edit., with Supple- 
 2 vols. 8vo. 80s. cloth. 
 
Hunt ’5 Law of Boundaries, Fences and Foreshores.' 2nd 
 
 Edition. cloth. 
 
 Shelford’s Law of Joint Stock Companies. 2nd Edition. 
 
 By B. Pitcairn and F. L. Latham, Esqrs. 8vo. 215. cloth. 
 
 Shelford^s Law of Railways. 4th Edition. By W. C. Glen, 
 Esq. 2 Vols. Royal 8vo. 63*. cloth. 
 
 Bainbridge's Law of Mines & Minerals. 3rd Ed. 8vo. 30s. 
 Brabrook’s Law of Co-operative, Industrial and Provident 
 Societies. 12mo. 65. cloth. 
 
 Ingram’s Law of Compensation for Lands, Houses, See, 
 Second Edition. By J. J. Elmks. Post 8vo. 125. cloth. 
 
 Dowell’s Income Tax Laws. 8vo. 12s. 6d. cloth. 
 
 Dowell’s Stamp Duties and Stamp Laws. 8vo. 12s. 6d. cl. 
 Coombs’ Solicitors’ Bookkeeping. 8vo. lOs. 6d. clbth. 
 Clark’s Digest of House of Lords Cases from 1814 tp the 
 
 prei«ut Time. Royal 8vo. 315. 6cL cloth. 
 
 Coote’s Practice of the Admiralty, the Privy Council, and 
 in the County Courts. Second Edition. 8vo. 105. clotli. 
 
 Clifford and Stephens’s Practice of the Court of Refdrees. 
 
 Void, 1 and 2. Royal 8vo. 705. cloth 
 Scriven’s Law of Copyholds, &c. 5th Ed. ByH.Stalm^n. 
 
 In l voi. Royal 8vo. 305. cloth. “ 
 
 Sir R. Phillimore’s Commentaries on International Law. 
 
 Second Edition. 4 voU. 8vo. 6/. 35. cloth. 
 
 Trower’s Church Building Acts, and New Parishes Acts, 
 continued to 1874. Post 8vo. 95. cloth. 
 
 Rouse’s Copyhold Enfranchisement Manual. 3rd Edition. 
 
 12nio. lU5. cloth. 
 
 Mr. Justice Lush’s Common Law I^actice, 3rd Edition. 
 By J. Diaon. 2 vols. Slro. 404. cloth. 
 
 Latham’s Law of Window Lights. Post 8vo. lOs. ClotJi. 
 Dixon’s Law of Partnership. 1 vol. 8yo. 22s. cloth. 
 Barry’s Practice of Conveyancing. 8vo. 18s. doth. 
 
 Barry’s Forms in Conveyancing. 8vo. 21s. cloth.. 
 Woplrych’s Law of Sewers, with the Drainage Acts; 3rd 
 
 Edition. 8 VO. 125. cloth. 
 
 Tudor’s Leading Cases on Real Property, Conveyancing: 
 
 with xNoi<»s. Stnrund Edition. ItovKi 8vo. 425. cloth. 
 
 Davis’s Criminal Law Consolidation Acts. 12mo. lOs. cl. 
 Tudor’s Charitable Trusts. 2nd Edit. Post 8vo. 18s. cl. 
 Phillips’s Law of Lunacy. Royal 12mo. 18s. cloth. 
 Powell’s Law of Inland Carriers. 2nd Ed. 8vo. 14s. cloth. 
 Shelford’s Succession, Probate and Legacy Duties. 2nd 
 
 Edition. 12niu. 105. 
 
 Christie’s Crabb’s Precedents in Conveyancing, with 
 Common and Commercial Forms. Filth Edition, by 5)heltord. Two 
 thick volumes. Royal 8vo. 3/. cloth. 
 
 Pry on the Specific Performance of Contracts, including 
 those of Public Companies. 8vo. 105. cloth. 
 
 Wigram’s Extrinsic Evidence in Aid of the Interpretation 
 
 of Wills. Fourth Edition. 8vo. 115. cloth. 
 
 Grant’s Law of Corporations in General, as well Aggregate 
 as ijole. Royal 8vo. 205. boards. 
 
THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 I 
 

 s. 
 
 K-, 
 
 V 
 
 
 \ 
 
 * 
 
THE 
 
 LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 BY 
 
 JAMES EDWAKD DAVIS, 
 
 OP THE MIDDLE TEMPLE, BARRISTER-AT-LAW; 
 
 LATE POLICE MAGISTRATE FOR SHEFFIELD. 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 BUTTEKWOETHS, 7, FLEET STREET, 
 
 ILafa ipubU0f)crg to ti)i dSiicen’s most cicelUnt Iflajcgtg. 
 
 T. & T. CLARK AND BELL & BRADFUTE, EDINBURGH. 
 
 SMITH & SON, GLASGOW. HODGES, FOSTER & CO., GRAFTON STREET, DUBLIN. 
 aiELBOURNE : GEORGE ROBERTSON. 
 
 1875. 
 
LONDON; 
 
 printed by C. ROWORTH and SONSj 
 NEWTON STREET, W.C. 
 
TO THE 
 
 EIGHT HONBLE. THE EAEL OF LICHFIELD. 
 
 Dear Lord Lichfield, 
 
 There is no one to whom a critical examination, 
 divested of all party considerations, of the changes effected in 
 the Labour Laws of this country could be more appropriately 
 dedicated than to your Lordship. 
 
 I therefore hope you will permit me to connect your name 
 with these pages, and thus give me an opportunity of saying 
 what a lively recollection I have of hours of earnest conver¬ 
 sation at Shugborough and elsewhere on various public ques¬ 
 tions, and how sincerely 
 
 I am 
 
 Your Lordship’s faithful Servant, 
 
 JAMES EDWAED DAVIS. 
 
 The Temple, 
 
 Ist October, 1875. 
 
rilEFACE. 
 
 To any one who has carefully observed, step by 
 step, the progress of the great change effected in 
 the Labour Laws of this country, no explanation is 
 necessary for my present appearance as Editor of 
 the Statutes of last Session. 
 
 Others, who have not watched so closely, I will 
 merely refer to the Introductory Chapters. 
 
 Having taken up the position of an expositor of 
 the Acts, my object has been to combine a popular 
 comment with a strictly practical treatise. 
 
 To the Magistrates—the great majority of whom 
 will be called on for the first time to exercise the 
 duties of Judges trying civil causes and assessing 
 damages on strictly legal principles—some guide is 
 essential; while lawyers practising in the Courts of 
 Summary Jurisdiction, however experienced, will, 
 in dealing with the New Law, find many questions 
 requiring careful consideration. I hope this edition 
 of the Statutes will meet their wants. 
 
 I offer no apology for giving in the earlier 
 chapters some account of the changes previously 
 effected in the law of Employer and Employed. 
 
 The legislation of 1867 (to which it seems to me 
 but scant justice has been done in Parliament), 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 viii 
 
 although designed to attain much of what we may 
 now hope has been effectually secured, failed from 
 the want of a due appreciation, on the part of its 
 administrators, of the spirit in which it was framed. 
 
 The successful working of the Labour Laws of 
 1875 must depend, to a great extent, on a perfect 
 comprehension by Courts of Summary Jurisdiction 
 of the views ultimately adopted by the Legislature 
 on several subjects on which conflicting opinions 
 were entertained. 
 
 In this volume I have included the existing; law, 
 comprised in a great variety of Acts of Parliament, 
 on matters closely affecting Workmen and their 
 Employers. Such Statutes as the “Truck Act'’ 
 and other allied provisions, and the Laws of 1872 
 on Mines and Mining, are of course essential to be 
 borne in mind in relation to contracts of service 
 in the most important of our manufactures and 
 productive industry. 
 
 One illustration will suffice to show how this 
 past legislation is interwoven with the Labour Laws 
 of the present year. 
 
 The Employers and Workmen Act, 1875, con¬ 
 tains a clause respecting the deduction, from wages, 
 of forfeitures for absence or for leaving work. 
 
 Without attempting to state the effect of this 
 new provision, I will give its history:— 
 
 One of the numerous questions arising on that 
 very perplexing Statute, the Truck Act of 1831, 
 came before the Court of Queen’s Bench as to the 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 IX 
 
 legal right of a Nottingham manufacturer to make 
 a variety of agreed deductions. The Court, in con¬ 
 formity with an earlier case, decided in favour of 
 that right. On appeal to the higher Court the 
 Judges were equally divided in opinion (a). 
 
 The Legislature last year stepped in with an Act 
 intended to settle the question, so far as regards the 
 hosiery trade, in which the question originated, by 
 prohibiting the deductions. Owing to the usual 
 absence of clearly expressed views, a question as to 
 the effect of this offspring of the Parent Truck Act 
 on stipulated deductions for absence, came before 
 the Court of Queen’s Bench, and in June last it 
 was decided by the Court that if the Legislature 
 intended by the Act of 1874 to put a stop to them, 
 it has not done so. 
 
 Thence the hasty introduction of a sort of com¬ 
 promising clause in the Employers and Workmen 
 Act, 1875. 
 
 Whether this grandchild of the Truck Act will 
 escape the attacks made on its progenitors is, of 
 course, doubtful. One thing is clear, that it has 
 no fair chance unless the Magistrates (the first 
 interpreters of this branch of the law) are cognisant 
 
 (a) It is a notion equally popular and erroneous that the deeisions of 
 the Courts of Law involve mere technicalities. Not only for the display 
 of careful reasoning by a mind of the highest powers, but for the informa¬ 
 tion contained in it, I recommend for study the judgment of Baron Bramwell 
 in Archer v. Janies. The general scope of the Truck Laws, with theii* 
 advantages and disadvantages, are treated in a way that statesmen might 
 read with advantage. 
 
X 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 of its intended sphere of operation, and to know 
 this they must be familiar with its history. 
 
 It follows from what I have said that the Statutes 
 are accompanied by a summary of the decisions of 
 the Courts of Law in relation to them. 
 
 If this work is destined to a favourable reception 
 I shall be inclined to attribute the success to the 
 attempt to treat the subject in a comprehensive 
 spirit. 
 
 J. E. D. 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Summary provisions respecting breaches of labour con¬ 
 tracts PRIOR TO LORD ELCHO’S MASTER AND SERVANT ACT, 
 
 1867 .1 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 Lord elcho’s master and servant act, 1867 . 15 
 
 CHAPTER HI. 
 
 The combination laws and the criminal law amendment 
 ACT, 1871 .28 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 The LAW OF conspiracy in relation to employer and em¬ 
 ployed . 
 
Xll 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Keport of the royal commission on labour laws .. .. 49 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 The legislation of 1875 .80 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 Procedure under the employers and workmen act, 1875 .. 105 
 
 Sect. 1. The Tribunal for hearing and determining “ Dis¬ 
 putes” .. .. .. .. .. .. 105 
 
 2. The Jurisdiction as to Persons and Things.. .. 110 
 
 3. Process of the Courts of Summary Jurisdiction pre¬ 
 
 liminary to the Hearing .. .. .. ,. 122 
 
 4. Proceedings on the Hearing .. .. .. .. 127 
 
 5. Orders of the Court of Summary Jurisdiction .. 131 
 
 6. The Award of Damages .. .. .. ..134 
 
 7. The Enforcement of Orders .. .. .. ..140 
 
 8. Force and Ejffect of Orders .. .. .. .. 145 
 
 9. Apprentices.150 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 Procedure under the conspiracy and protection of pro¬ 
 perty ACT, 1875 . 154 
 
 Sect. 1. Offences under the Act .. .. .. .. 154 
 
 2. The Tribunal and Mode of deciding Cases.. .. 159 
 
 38 & 39 ViCT. c. 90. 
 
 Act to enlarge the powers of County Courts in respect of disputes 
 between Employers and Workmen, and to give other Courts a 
 limited civil jurisdiction in respect of such disputes .. .. 104 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 Xlll 
 
 RULES 
 
 PAGE 
 
 For carrying into effect the jurisdiction given to court 
 
 OF SUMMARY JURISDICTION IN ENGLAND BY THE EMPLOYERS 
 AND WORKMEN ACT, 1875, 38 & 30 VICT. C. 00.175 
 
 Form 1. Summons to appear .. .. .. .. .. 170 
 
 2. Summons to Witness .. .. .. .. .. 170 
 
 3. Judgment for Plaintiff .. .. .. .. 180 
 
 4. Judgment for Defendant .. .. .. .. 180 
 
 5. Judgment Summons .. .. .. .. .. 181 
 
 0. Order of Commitment .. .. .. ..182 
 
 7. Certificate for the Discharge of a Prisoner from 
 
 Custody .. .. .. .. .. .. 183 
 
 8. Warrant of Distress for Payment of Money by 
 
 Plaintiff . .. 184 
 
 0. Warrant of Distress for Payment of Money by 
 
 Defendant. .. .. 185 
 
 10. Undertaking in Writing by Defendant to perform 
 
 Contract .. .. .. .. .. .. 186 
 
 11. Order on an Apprentice to perform his Duties .. 187 
 
 12. Order rescinding a Contract of Apprenticeship .. 187 
 
 13. Committal of an Apprentice.. .. .. .. 188 
 
 14. Acceptance of Security for Performance of Contract 
 
 by an Apprentice.188 
 
 15. Application for the summoning of a Bondsman for 
 
 an Apprentice .. .. .. .. ..189 
 
 16. Summons to a Bondsman for an Apprentice .. 190 
 
 17. Order on a Bondsman for an Apprentice to pay 
 
 Damages .. .. .. .. .. .. 190 
 
 18. Plaint and Minute Book .. .. .. .. 191 
 
 Costs .191 
 
 38 & 39 ViCT. c. 86. 
 
 An Act for amending the Law relating to Conspiracy, and to the 
 
 Protection of Property, and for other Purposes .. .. .. 192 
 
 [APPENDIX. 
 
XIV 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 APPENDIX 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Of unrepealed statutes relating to employers and work- 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 209 
 
 1 Anne, stat. 2, c. 22 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 209 
 
 9 Geo. 1, c. 27 .. 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 210 
 
 12 Geo. 1, c. 34 .. 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 210 
 
 13 Geo. 1, c. 26 .. 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 211 
 
 13 Geo. 2, c. 8 .. 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 211 
 
 15 Geo. 2, c. 27 .. 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 213 
 
 22 Geo. 2, c. 27 .. 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 215 
 
 27 Geo. 2, c. 7 .. 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 217 
 
 30 Geo. 2, c. 12 .. 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 218 
 
 5 Geo. 3, c. 51 •. 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 219 
 
 14 Geo. 3, c. 25 .. 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 219 
 
 14 Geo. 3, c. 44 .. 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 221 
 
 17 Geo. 3, c. 11 .. 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 222 
 
 17 Geo. 3, c. 55 .. 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 223 
 
 17 Geo. 3, c. 56 .. 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 224 
 
 28 Geo. 3, c. 55 ,. 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 229 
 
 32 Geo. 3, c. 56 .. .. ^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 231 
 
 39 & 40 Geo. 3, c. 77 .. ^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 231 
 
 43 Geo. 3, c. 86 .. 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 232 
 
 5 Geo. 4, c. 96 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 232 
 
 1 & 2 Will. 4, c, 37 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 233 
 
 5 & 6 Will. 4, c. 27 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 247 
 
 7 Will. 4 & 1 Viet. c. 67 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 247 
 
 2 & 3 Viet. c. 71.. 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 248 
 
 3 & 4 Viet. e. 91.. 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 249 
 
 5 & 6 Viet. e. 68.. 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 249 
 
 6 & 7 Viet. e. 40.. 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 250 
 
 7 & 8 Viet. e. 15.. 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 260 
 
 8 & 9 Viet. e. 77.. 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 265 
 
 8 & 9 Viet. e. 128 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 265 
 
 14 & 15 Viet. c. 92 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 265 
 
 24 & 25 Viet. c. 94 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 267 
 
 24 & 25 Viet. c. 96 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 268 
 
 24 & 25 Viet. e. 97 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 271 
 
 24 & 25 Viet. e. 100 .. 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 276 
 
 25 & 26 Viet. e. 50 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 278 
 
 25 & 26 Viet. e. 101 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 278 
 
 26 & 27 Viet. e. 103 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 279 
 
 28 & 29 Viet. e. 86 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 280 
 
 30 & 31 Viet. c. 105 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 281 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 XV 
 
 APPENDIX— continued. 
 
 30 & 31 Viet. c. 130 
 
 
 
 
 
 PAGE 
 
 .. 281 
 
 32 & 33 Viet. e. 71 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 281 
 
 33 & 34 Viet. e. 30 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 282 
 
 34 & 35 Viet. e. 31 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 282 
 
 35 & 36 Viet. e. 46 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 283 
 
 35 & 36 Viet. e. 76 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 285 
 
 35 & 36 Viet. e. 77 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 291 
 
 37 & 38 Viet. e. 48 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 292 
 
 38 & 39 Viet. e. 17 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 293 
 
 Mutiny Aets 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 294 
 
 38 & 39 Viet. e. 69 
 
 
 
 
 
 .. 298 
 
 INDEX 
 
 301 
 
W. ' • 
 
 - . 
 
 - 
 
 
 '-ir' .; 
 
 '''- TV -' 
 
THE LABOUE LAWS. 
 
 INTRODUCTORY CHAPTERS. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 SUMMARY PROVISIONS RESPECTING BREACHES OF LABOUR 
 CONTRACTS PRIOR TO LORD ELCHO’S MASTER AND SER¬ 
 VANT ACT, 1867. 
 
 By the common law of this country, that is to say, the 
 law irrespective of any act of parliament, breaches of 
 contract or duty on the part of servants towards their 
 masters, as well as on the part of masters towards their 
 servants, are the subject of a civil action by which damages 
 are awarded. But from a very early period a remedy of 
 another kind, so far as relates to breaches of duty by some 
 descriptions of servants and workmen, was created by act 
 of parliament, and extended from time to time: that is to 
 say, a summary remedy by taking the offending person 
 before a justice of the peace—a corresponding remedy 
 being also given to certain classes of servants for recovery 
 of wages. 
 
 Former legislation, however, went much further in its 
 interposition than providing a tribunal and machinery for 
 enforcing contracts. It sought to enforce work, and to 
 regulate the price paid for it; and these various acts of 
 parliament and their history form a very interesting and 
 D. ' B 
 
the labour laavs. 
 
 L„„.ive for hU.-i.o., poUficl —!■« 
 
 “ih”" taSn of n.«er ond oorrant, aming out of the 
 form Of contract known to the law under the name of 
 hiring and service, embraces many varieties of service. 
 AYe have, in the first place, the broad distinction betiveen 
 domestic servants and every other class of servants. Next 
 to these come servants employed in trade and business, 
 such as clerks, shopmen, and the like. With the fore¬ 
 going classes of servants the legislature has never thought 
 it necessary to interfere. The respective rights and obli¬ 
 gations of master and sen^ant, as arising from the contract 
 between them, have been left to be determined by the 
 common law of the land, and any differences between 
 them to be dealt ivith by the ordinary tribunals. The 
 contract of hiring and service, so far as relates to servants 
 
 (fl) The Report of the Labour 
 Laws Commissioners, 1875, con¬ 
 tains an interesting popular account 
 of the statutes of labourers. 
 
 I have in another non-legal work 
 called attention to the contrast 
 between the freedom enjoyed by 
 workmen in the reign of Edward III. 
 and in the reign of Victoria. To 
 enlarge the castle of Windsor, con¬ 
 temporaneously, or nearly so, with 
 the institution of the Order of the 
 Garter, in the middle of the four¬ 
 teenth century, writs were sent to 
 the sheriffs of London and twelve 
 counties to impress stonemasons and 
 others to work at the king’s wages, 
 under the control of William of 
 Wykeham, who was the surveyor 
 (himself in receipt of wages of one 
 shilling a day). Many of the work¬ 
 men so impressed absconded in 
 order to work for other persons at 
 higher wages, and the works at the 
 castle being retarded, writs were 
 directed, in 1362, to the sheriffs of 
 
 London, commanding them to make 
 proclamation prohibiting any per¬ 
 son, “ whether clerk or layman,” 
 from employing any of the men, on 
 pain of forfeiting all their goods; 
 and also commanding the sheriffs 
 to arrest the absent workmen and 
 commit them to Newgate. Passing 
 to the nineteenth centnry we find 
 early in the present reign a strike 
 among the workmen employed in 
 building the Queen’s new palace at 
 Westminster (the Houses of Parlia¬ 
 ment). In the winter of that year 
 they availed themselves of the 
 vacant scats in her Majesty’s Court 
 of Queen’s Bench as affording a 
 place of shelter and repose. There 
 I saw them day after day enjoying 
 the warm, if not wholesome, atmo¬ 
 sphere of the court, and lulled to 
 sleep by the monotonous proceedings 
 in banc, their slumbers undisturbed 
 by any fear of writs or other com¬ 
 pulsory process to force them to re¬ 
 turn to their work. 
 
SUMMARY PROVISIONS PRIOR TO 18G7. 
 
 3 
 
 of these two classes, is only incidentally referred to in 
 these pages. 
 
 Passing by these classes of servants, we come to the 
 numerous class who serve by placing at the service of 
 their employers their labour, whether rude or skilled, 
 according to the branch of productive industry or manu¬ 
 facture to w hich they belong. 
 
 It is to this class, including labourers in husbandry, 
 miners, quarrymen, and the like, and to manufacturers, 
 artificers, and others employed in the various forms of 
 creative industry, that statutory legislation has been 
 directed (b). 
 
 It may be w^ell to state that those provisions which 
 relate to the prevention of crime (in its strict sense) are 
 beyond the scope of the present inquiry; such, for example, 
 as provide for the punishment of larceny and embezzlement 
 by servants (c), and the substitution of a penalty for the 
 former felonious appropriation by a servant of corn to 
 feed his master’s horses. So, provisions enforcing the 
 contracts and duties of persons employed in the service of 
 the state are not the subject of investigation here. An 
 important class of statutes enforcing the performance of 
 contracts for manual services, express or implied, between 
 employer and employed, has for the cliief object the 
 public weal rather than the immediate advantage of the 
 parties to the contract. To this class belong provisions 
 to prevent the creation or permission of nuisances (such 
 as the emission of smoke and deleterious gases). Another 
 class of provisions has the health, education and physical 
 comfort, and moral welfare of the employed as their 
 object. The Factory Acts, and some provisions of the 
 
 (b) Report of the Labour Laws and some still remaining unrepealed. 
 
 Commissioners, 1875. dealing with the summary jurisdic- 
 
 (c) The fraudulent misappropria- tion of magistrates for breaches of 
 tion of articles and materials of contract. The unrepealed provi- 
 manufacture are, however, included sions of this description will be 
 in many statutes, some repealed, found in the Appendix, post. 
 
 B 2 
 
4 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 recent Coal and Metalliferous Mines Acts (35 & 36 Vict. 
 cc. 76, 77), are leading illustrations of this class. 
 
 The prohibition of the payment at public-houses of 
 miners’ wages may be put in this category, although 
 capable of being referred to other grounds. 
 
 Another class of statutes has for its object the per¬ 
 sonal safety of the employed in life and limb. Legislative 
 provisions, contained in the acts already cited and others, 
 as to the conduct of mining operations and the fencing of 
 machinery and the sweeping of chimnies, are familiar 
 examples. 
 
 All these provisions stand on grounds distinct from 
 statutes enforcing duties and obligations, and which, 
 although founded on and only capable, if penal, of being 
 maintained on public grounds, are put in operation in the 
 immediate interests of the complaining person, whether 
 employer or employed, and have reference to the perform¬ 
 ance of the terms of contracts, express or implied {d). 
 
 Without attempting to give a history of this last branch 
 of legislation, the law, as it existed immediately before the 
 Master and Servant Act, 1867, may be concisely stated, so 
 far as relates to the jurisdiction of magistrates. 
 
 In England, servants, excepting domestic serv^ants, 
 might summon their masters for wages not exceeding 10/. 
 in the case of servants in husbandry, and 5/. in other 
 cases; and the justices might order payment of the 
 amount due, with or without costs. In case of non¬ 
 payment, the amount might be levied by distress; and 
 in case of no available distress, the master might be 
 imprisoned for a period not exceeding three months. 
 When the master resided at a distance and employed 
 agents, foremen or managers, the latter might be pro¬ 
 ceeded against instead of the master. 
 
 (<?) The Truck Act (1 & 2 lating the giving of tickets with 
 
 Will. 4, c. 37), regulating labour work given out to be manufactured, 
 Contracts of many kinds, is not arc only partially affected. The 
 touched by the legislation of 1875. Truck Act and allied provisions 
 The statutes of the same class rcgu- will be found in the Appendix 
 
SUMMARY PROVISION'S PRIOR TO 1867. 
 
 5 
 
 If the master did not appear on a summons, a warrant 
 might issue for his apprehension. 
 
 Servants might be summoned by their masters for ab¬ 
 senting themselves from service, or for any other miscon¬ 
 duct or misdemeanor in the execution of the contract of 
 service, or otherwise respecting it, or a warrant might be 
 issued in the first instance on an information on oath, at 
 the discretion of the magistrate. 
 
 In the case also of a servant having entered into a 
 written signed contract, and not entering upon the service 
 in accordance with its terms, he might be summoned or 
 arrested by warrant. 
 
 If the offence were proved, the magistrate might adopt 
 one of three courses. The sers^ant might be committed 
 to the house of correction for a period not exceeding three 
 months (the wages, if any, being abated, i, e., not accruing 
 due, during the imprisonment); or the whole or any part 
 of the wages might be abated; or the magistrate might 
 discharge the servant from his contract, i, c., put an end 
 to the service. 
 
 Various provisions existed in reference to particular 
 trades and descriptions of employment, which it is un¬ 
 necessary to particularize here. Some of these are still in 
 force, and will be specially referred to hereafter. 
 
 With respect to apprentices, the laAv in England stood 
 thus:— 
 
 Apprentices could summon their masters before justices 
 for ill-treatment or ill-usage; and upon such summons 
 the apprentice might be discharged. 
 
 Apprentices could also summon their masters for 
 wages, provided the sum in question did not exceed 10/.; 
 and payment might be enforced by distress. 
 
 Masters could proceed either by summons or by warrant 
 against their apprentices for any misdemeanor, misconduct 
 or ill-behaviour, or for absconding ; the punishment being 
 an abatement of wages or imprisonment. 
 
 The jurisdiction of justices in the case of apprentices. 
 
6 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 wliether on complaints by or against them, applied to 
 parish apprentices, and to other apprentices, where either 
 no premium was paid or where a premium was paid not 
 exceeding 25Z. 
 
 In order to constitute an offence by a servant, it was 
 not only necessary for the master to prove that the absent¬ 
 ing was wrongful (i. e., that the servant had no right to 
 leave), but it must have also appeared that the act was a 
 wilful or guilty act on the part of the servant. If, there¬ 
 fore, the servant acted bond fide under a fair and reason¬ 
 able belief in his mind that he had a right to go away, he 
 could not be convicted, although that belief might have 
 been unfounded in point of fact; and the master had no 
 remedy, except by action in a civil court, to recover 
 damages, which was practically no remedy at all (e). 
 
 As has been already stated, where a master complained 
 against his servant, the magistrate had power to issue a 
 warrant, instead of a summons, upon a statement of the 
 facts on oath. 
 
 The act in general operation relating to master and 
 servant (the 4 Geo. 4, c. 34) gave no discretion. The 
 master was served with a summons at the instance of the 
 servant; the servant was arrested on a wan’ant issued on 
 
 (c) Rider v. Wood, 2 E. & E. 338; 
 29 L. J. Rep. (N. S.), M. C. 1, was 
 the first case in which this doctrine 
 was applied to cases o£ master and 
 servant. In that case the servant 
 had given a notice to leave, but 
 the justices thought it was insuf¬ 
 ficient, and convicted him for leav¬ 
 ing the service. The Court of Q. 
 B. directed the justices that unless 
 the servant absented himself with¬ 
 out lawful excuse, and was aware 
 that he had no lawful excuse, he 
 ought not to be convicted. This case, 
 although acted upon ever since, was 
 narrowed by Unwin v. Clarhe, Law 
 Rep. 1 Q. B. 417; 35 L. J. Rep. 
 
 (N. S.), M. C. 193, where it was 
 held (by Blaclihurn, J., and Mel- 
 lor, J.; Slice, J., dissenting) that 
 an absenting from the service under 
 a bond fide but mistaken belief in 
 law, as distinguished from a mis¬ 
 take of fact, was not within the 
 rule laid down in Rider v. Wood. 
 The decision in Univiii v. Clarke 
 accords with Cooper v. Simnions, 
 7 H. & N. 707; 31 L. J. Rep. 
 (N. S.), M. C. 138 (the case of an 
 apprentice); but conflicts with the 
 opinion of Pollock, C. B., and 
 Brainwell, B., in Youle v. Mappin, 
 6 H. & N. 753; 30 L. J. Rep. (N. 
 S.), M. a 234. 
 
SUMMARY PROVISIOXS TRIOR TO 1867. 
 
 7 
 
 the complaint on oath of the master. After the passing 
 of Jervis’s Act (11 & 12 Yict. c. 43), which gave justices 
 power to issue a summons in all cases in the first instance, 
 the practice was gradually introduced in England of sum¬ 
 moning servants instead of issuing warrants in the first 
 instance; and the issuing of warrants was in general con¬ 
 fined to cases where a defendant had absconded or was likely 
 to abscond, or where he did not appear to a summons. 
 
 It was a popular notion, and one strongly urged upon 
 the attention of the legislature, that the law was very un¬ 
 equal in giving magistrates the power to inflict imprison¬ 
 ment as a punishment in the case of servants, when there 
 was no direct power to imprison masters; and it was 
 further urged that, independently of the inequality, the 
 law made the mere breach of a contract the subject of 
 proceedings which were in their nature criminal. 
 
 In reference, if not in answer, to the first objection, on 
 the ground of inequality, it has been observed that the 
 servant had a right to an order for his wages, if due, 
 although the master might have refused payment, honestly 
 believing that he had a right to mthhold them—and in 
 almost all cases of claims for wages, there is a hona Jide 
 dispute between the parties. Very few cases come before 
 a magistrate where the master is knowingly and wilfully 
 wdthholding the amount. As it would be manifestly un¬ 
 just to give even the power to send a man, whether master 
 or seiwant, to prison, in the case of a bond fide dispute, 
 the law merely provided for enforcing payment of the 
 amount adjudged to be due from a master to his servant, 
 in the first instance by distress; and then in default of 
 distress, imprisonment might be awarded. 
 
 In actual practice, therefore, servants had in one re¬ 
 spect an advantage over their masters; that is to say, in 
 being able to get a magistrate’s order for payment of 
 whatever might be due to them, no matter on w’^hat 
 ground the w’^ages were withheld; while the master had no 
 relief before the magistrates unless the absence was wilful. 
 
8 
 
 THE LABOUR LAT\T;. 
 
 As to the objection, which was frequently urged, that 
 imprisonment should not be awarded for the breach of a 
 contract, it was said there were two modes of dealing with 
 it, either of which took away from the objectors all 
 ground for speaking of tlie law in the strong terms some¬ 
 times made use of. In the first place, there is, it was 
 urged, a breach of contract, but there is something more 
 when a workman wilfidly leaves his work unfinished ; 
 there is something of a public wrong, considering how 
 many persons, often fellow-Avorkmen in the same class of 
 life, suffer from the sudden neglect of work. In the 
 second place, imprisonment may be viewed as a mode of 
 compelling the performance of contracts. The law of 
 England in a variety of cases allows imprisonment as the 
 mode of compelling the performance of contracts and 
 duties, quite apart from imprisonment for debt. In many 
 instances the law no doubt considers the payment of 
 damages as an equivalent for performance, but in other 
 cases, where damages are not an equivalent, absolute per¬ 
 formance is enforced. An agreement to sell an estate is 
 a familiar illustration, where the law of this country wiU 
 compel actual performance, and will not allow the owner 
 of the estate to keep it and merely pay damages for the 
 breach of his contract; and although, in general, com¬ 
 pensation may be substituted for the performance of per¬ 
 sonal engagements, there are cases where the doing of 
 definite work will be enforced by the Court of Chancery 
 on the pain of imprisonment. In some cases, damages 
 might recompense a master for the breach of a contract 
 by his servant, but the latter is seldom in a condition to 
 pay damages, and therefore, in the absence of any other 
 remedy, he might set his employer at defiance. Has not 
 the master a just right to say, Satisfy me either in 
 damages, or by performance of your engagement. The 
 former you cannot do, therefore the latter you must do, 
 even on the pain of imprisonment for refusal”? {f), 
 
 (/) In Scotland attempts were of service in forma specijica^ by 
 frequently made to enforce contracts compelling the service. Proceed- 
 
SUMMARY PROVISIONS PRIOR TO 1867. 
 
 9 
 
 This argument is, however, open to the observation that, 
 in the instances referred to of enforcing performance of con¬ 
 tracts by imprisonment, it is only in the shape of attachment 
 for disobedience to the order of a court that imprisonment 
 is inflicted; whereas, in the case of neglect by a workman, 
 imprisonment might under the former state of the law 
 follow without an opportunity given to him to comply 
 with the decision of the magistrate (^). 
 
 The extensive alterations in the law of England as to 
 arrest for debt no doubt made the direct imprisonment of 
 ■workmen and labourers stand out in greater contrast. As 
 long as the first step in an ordinary action to enforce pay¬ 
 ment of a debt was taking the debtor into custody, there 
 ■w^as no great practical distinction felt between that arrest 
 and the imprisonment under a magistrate’s order, although 
 in law standing on a totally different footing. But when 
 imprisonment for debt under mesne process was got rid 
 of, and this step was followed by the abolition of direct 
 imprisonment in almost all cases, even after judgment 
 obtained, the exceptional nature of a law' which punished 
 the neglect to perform a contract for w'ork became apparent 
 to the popular eye. 
 
 Another ground of objection to the former law', strongly 
 urged, w'as the power to issue a warrant against men in the 
 first instance without any previous summons, and various 
 
 iugs for this purpose might be taken 
 before justices, with an appeal to 
 the Court of Session, but they were 
 usually taken before the sheriffs’ 
 substitute by citation and written 
 proofs. But the delay was so great, 
 that frequently before the cause was 
 finished the term of service was 
 done. If completed, however, be¬ 
 fore the expiration of the service, 
 the servant, if unable to find caution 
 (bail) to return to service, was com¬ 
 mitted to prison and remained there 
 to the end of his term, at the cost of 
 
 the master, who had to maintain 
 him in prison. (See the evidence 
 of Mr. Sheriff Barclay before the 
 Select Committee of the House of 
 Commons on Master and Servant, 
 1865.) 
 
 (^) The above and some subse¬ 
 quent observations on the then state 
 of the law are to be found in my 
 letter to Lord Elcho in 1866, printed 
 in the Appendix to the Report of 
 the Committee of the House of 
 Commons of that year on Master 
 and Servant. 
 
10 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 cases of aUeged hardship were brought forward. On the 
 other side of the question, it was said, that without this 
 discretionary power, men wovdd be enabled to avoid all 
 punishment by removing from one place to another. 
 
 A distinct ground of complaint was founded on the 
 power given to one justice to deal with most cases of 
 master and servant, and on the fact that many of these 
 cases were dealt with in a private manner, before a magis¬ 
 trate at his own house and without any publicity, not¬ 
 withstanding the pro\isions of Jervis’s Act, 11 & 12 Viet, 
 c. 43, making all courts of petty sessions, for hearing 
 cases determinable on summary conviction, public courts 
 and open to all persons as a matter of right. 
 
 Whatever might be the view taken of the power of im¬ 
 prisonment and other matters, the former state of the law 
 was objectionable in some important respects. In a claim 
 for wages, the master as well as the servant could be exa¬ 
 mined upon oath as to the facts; but on a complaint for 
 neglect of work, the serv^ant w^as not a competent witness. 
 The distinction arose in consequence of proceedings to 
 compel jDayment of w^ages being by way of order,” 
 whereas the determination of the masristrate asrainst a 
 servant w^as termed a conviction and by the existing 
 general law of the country" a defendant is a competent 
 witness in the case of proceedings for an order,” but he 
 is not a competent witness in the case of proceedings for 
 a conviction.” 
 
 Another objection to the law^, as it stood before the 
 Act of 1867, Avas the inability of the magistrate to deal 
 with cases of complaints by masters against serA'ants, by 
 the infliction of a fine. Direct impnsonment, or abate¬ 
 ment of Avages, or discharge from the contract, Avere the 
 three modes of dealing Avith these cases. Discharge, 
 although at first sight a desirable course to adopt, Avas im¬ 
 practicable as a punishment (and therefore impracticable 
 as a remedy), oAving to the demand for labour in many 
 branches of manufacture and the ability of men to get 
 
SUMMARY PROVISIONS PRIOR TO 1867 . 
 
 11 
 
 work elsewhere. In fact the neglect of work not un- 
 frequently arose from the desire to be discharged. Direct 
 imprisonment is obviously undesirable, until other methods 
 have failed. 
 
 Abatement of wages worked, in some branches of 
 manufacture at least, better than might be expected ; but 
 in many cases it was not a desirable remedy. In the first 
 place, it was open to the observation, that, as the effect of 
 the order is to allow the master to stop wages, it was 
 putting so much money in the master’s pocket. A second 
 objection to the abatement of wages was, that it made the 
 punishment depend on the return to work, and therefore 
 held out an inducement to the servant not to return, but 
 to go and work elsewhere, where his wages would not be 
 subject to deduction or to abatement. 
 
 In Ireland, the jurisdiction of justices extended to all 
 claims for wages to any apprentice, artificer, labourer, 
 servant or other person to the amount of 10/., enforceable 
 by distress; and, on the other hand, artificers, labourers 
 and servants absenting themselves, or neglecting to 
 perform their contracts, or guilty of any misconduct or 
 misdemeanor, or, having signed a 'written agreement, not 
 commencing or entering on the service, might be punished 
 by a fine not exceeding 5/., enforceable by imprisonment 
 not exceeding three months. The justices could also 
 abate wages and discharge the servant from his service if 
 they thought fit. 
 
 Masters were punishable by fine not exceeding 40^. for 
 ill-usage of their apprentices. 
 
 Cases of wilful damage by artificers, workmen, journey¬ 
 men, apprentices, servants or labourers to goods, wares, 
 work or materials committed to their care were also 
 punishable summarily, if the damage was under 5/., by 
 compensation, and a fine not exceeding 40^., or imprison¬ 
 ment not exceeding one month. 
 
 The procedure in any of these cases might be by sum¬ 
 mons or warrant, and the cases might be heard in general 
 by one or more justices in or out of petty sessions. 
 
12 
 
 the labour laws. 
 
 With respect to Scotland, the cases in which justices 
 exercised jurisdiction were substantially the same as in 
 England Qi), and the process against a servant might be 
 a citation (summons) or warrant of apprehension in the 
 first instance. 
 
 The power to issue a warrant in the first instance 
 against a servant instead of a summons was, however, 
 more generally exercised in Scotland than in England, 
 and apparently for this reason :— 
 
 Jervis’s Act (11 & 12 Viet. c. 43), which gave the 
 option to issue a summons under the Master and Servant 
 Act, applied only to England, and it was not until the 
 passing of the Summary Procedure Act, 18G4, for Scot¬ 
 land (27 & 28 Viet. c. 53), that the corresponding option 
 was given; and in 1865 the general course still followed 
 was to grant a warrant for the apprehension and interim 
 detention of the respondent. 
 
 The Scotch procedure was therefore subject to the 
 
 (/<-) As to the application of the 
 statutes to Scotland, Mr. Sheriff 
 Barclay (sheriff substitute of Perth¬ 
 shire, eastern district), in giving his 
 evidence before the committee of 
 the House of Commons on master 
 and servant, in 1865, said;—“I 
 may mention to the committee, as 
 being well worth noting, the three 
 statutes which I have taken note of, 
 namely, 20 Geo. 2, c. 19, passed in 
 the year 1747; the G Geo. 3, c. 25, 
 passed in the year 1776; and the 
 4 Geo. 4, c. 34, passed in the year 
 1823 (extended to some other trades 
 by the 10 Geo. 4). It so happens 
 that all these statutes are put down 
 in our Leading Treatises on Jus¬ 
 tices, which Sheriff Tait of Edin¬ 
 burgh published in the year 1828 as 
 not being applicable to Scotland; 
 and I thoroughly believe that they 
 were never intended to be applicable 
 to it. I never knew a case under 
 the 20 Geo. 2, or the 6 Geo. 3. The ' 
 
 statute of Geo. 4 is the one that we 
 act upon; and it is a remarkable 
 fact, that although convictions with¬ 
 out number have gone up to our 
 high criminal Court of Justiciary, 
 there never yet has been taken that 
 objection that they do not apply to 
 Scotland; but I think any Scotch 
 lawyer, reading the statute of the 
 4 Geo. 4, would say that was never 
 intended to apply to Scotland. Of 
 course the committee know better 
 than I that an act is considered to 
 be a British act unless it is said that 
 it docs not apply to Scotland nega¬ 
 tively, or unless affirmatively it is 
 said that it docs apply only to Eng¬ 
 land aud Ireland, or some particular 
 locality.” Chairman: —“ As far as 
 Scotland was conccraed, the only 
 law that yon had was the common 
 law in these matters until the 
 4 Geo. 4; was it not?” “That 
 is so.” 
 
SUMMARY PKOVISIONS PRIOR TO 18G7. 
 
 13 
 
 same popular objection as in England, that there was a 
 distinction between the master and servant prejudicial to 
 the latter (z). The value of this objection has been 
 already adverted to. 
 
 An objection to the ordinary tribunal of justices existed 
 with greater force in Scotland than in England, owing, in 
 some measure at least, to the absence in Scotland of 
 stipendiary magistrates. 
 
 On the other hand, the sheriffs’ substitutes of the counties 
 and districts in Scotland, being ex officio justices of the 
 peace, exercised in that character jurisdiction in cases of 
 master and servant, in addition to their ordinary civil and 
 criminal jurisdiction, and the ordinary justices consulted 
 with the sheriffs’ substitutes as stipendiary magistrates. 
 
 In Scotland the state of the law mth reference to the 
 arrestment of wages gave rise to considerable dissatisfaction, 
 and formed part of the vexed question of the relationship 
 of master and servant. 
 
 Arrestment of wages ” is the right that exists in Scot¬ 
 land, in every creditor holding a civil decree or judgment, 
 to attach the funds or moveable property of his debtor in 
 the hands of a third party, corresponding to the process of 
 attachment which existed in the city of London, and sub¬ 
 sequently applied to England (A). 
 
 (i) The popular view taken of 
 the law on this subject is thus given 
 by Mr. George Newton, a Glasgow 
 potter: “ The inequality (of the 
 then existing law) consists in this, 
 that a breach of contract of service 
 on the part of a workman renders 
 him liable to a criminal prosecution, 
 while a breach of contract on the 
 part of the employer only renders 
 him liable to a civil action for da¬ 
 mages \ the process also bjr which 
 the one is brought before the court 
 is very different indeed to that by 
 which the other is brought before 
 
 the court; while the servant may 
 be dragged as a criminal to the bar, 
 and not unfreqnently is dragged 
 there in that way; while he may be 
 taken there manacled, the employer 
 is taken into court as a gentleman; 
 he is simply summoned there and 
 treated with the respect which is 
 due to mankind generally.”—Re¬ 
 port of Committee of House of 
 Commons on Master and Servant, 
 186fr. 
 
 (Ji) See the 23 & 24 Viet. c. 126, 
 s. 28, et seq. 
 
14 
 
 THE EABOUR LAWS. 
 
 The process in Scotland and its effects may be thus 
 stated in popular language ;— 
 
 The creditor, having obtained his decree, proceeds by a 
 process termed forthcoming ” (that is to say, making the 
 subject forthcoming) to call the party holding the funds 
 or moveable property into court to ascertain what he has, 
 in order that it maybe paid over in liquidation of the debt. 
 But besides having the privilege of arresting in this way 
 upon a judgment or decree, the creditor generally has the 
 further privilege of using such power of arrestment upon 
 the dependence ” of any suit; that is to say, along with 
 the writ or summons for bringing the parties into court in 
 a civil case there is combined a warrant to an’est, so that 
 the property arrested remains in the hands of the third 
 party until the issue of the suit, and judgment is given. 
 This right, belonging to all civil creditors, is limited by 
 statute in the case of workmen’s wages. The statute 
 constituting the Small Debt Sheriffs’ Courts in Scotland 
 (1 Viet. c. 41) declares (sect. 7), that workmen’s w^ages are 
 not arrestable, except so far as there may be a surplus after 
 what is requisite for maintenance; and the statute 8 & 9 
 \ ict. c. 39, abolished arrestment of wages on the dependence 
 of Sheriff Small Debt actions. The practice under the 
 1 \ ict. c. 41, s. 7, of some courts where forthcomings ” 
 are brought on aiTestment of workmen’s wages, is to award 
 to the creditor one-half the wages; in other courts a more 
 fluctuating rule is folloAved, more favourable to the debtor. 
 
 Apart from objections of political economists to a system 
 which leads to credit, these arrestment proceedings against 
 workmen, miners and others were so annoving, that 
 when once a man gets into the position that his wages are 
 arrested, it generally ends in his leaving the locality and 
 going elsewhere”(/). 
 
 (0 Evidence of W. Burns, Esq., before tbe House of Commons Com¬ 
 mittee in ISGQ. 
 
( 15 ) 
 
 CHAPTER IL 
 
 LORD ELCHO'S MASTER AND SERVANT ACT, 1867. 
 
 It was under the circumstances and condition of the law 
 stated in the preceding chapter that the House of Commons, 
 in I 860 , appointed a select committee ‘^to inquire into 
 the state of the law as regards contracts of service between 
 master and sers^ant, and as to the expediency of amending 
 the same.” 
 
 This committee was re-appointed in 1866, with Lord 
 Elcho as chairman, and reported to the House that they 
 had unanimously agreed upon the following resolutions:— 
 
 1 . That the law relating to master and servant as it 
 now exists is objectionable. 
 
 2 . That all cases arising under the law of master and 
 servant should be publicly tried, in England and Ireland 
 before two or more magistrates or a stipendiary magistrate, 
 and in Scotland, before two or more magistrates or the 
 sheriff. 
 
 3. That procedure should be by summons in England 
 and Ireland, and by warrant to cite in Scotland, and 
 failing appearance of defendant in answer to summons or 
 citation, the court should have power to grant warrant to 
 apprehend. 
 
 4. That punishment should be by fine, and, failing 
 payment, by distress or imprisonment. 
 
 “5, That the court should have power, where such a 
 course is deemed advisable, to order the defendant to fulfil 
 the contract, and also, if necessary, to compel him to find 
 security that he will duly do so. 
 
 6 . That in aggravated cases of breach of contract, 
 causing injury to person or property, the magistrates or 
 
THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 16 
 
 sheriff should have the power of awarding punishment by 
 imprisonment instead of fine. 
 
 7. That the arrest of wages in Scotland in payment of 
 fines should be abolished. 
 
 8. That, a suggestion having been made to the com¬ 
 mittee, viz., that in all cases of breach of contract between 
 master and servant, it should be competent to examine 
 the parties to the action as in civil cases, although the 
 offence be punishable on summary conviction, the com¬ 
 mittee are not prepared themselves to recommend the 
 adoption of such a principle, involving, as it does, 
 departure from the law of evidence in such cases as now 
 settled” (a). 
 
 (a) Having had some conversa¬ 
 tion with Lord Elcho, and also with 
 Mr. Gathorne Hardy, on several 
 points of the then existing law, 
 and more especially in reference to 
 orders for the performance of con¬ 
 tracts, I, at Lord Elcho’s request, 
 embodied my views in a letter to 
 his lordship. After stating the 
 general features of the law as it 
 then stood, I said: “ The alterations 
 I venture to suggest are as fol¬ 
 lows:—With respect to claims by 
 masters against men, it seems de¬ 
 sirable to get rid of the existing 
 distinction between a mere wrongful 
 breach and a wilful or guilty act. 
 
 The distinction is seldom under¬ 
 stood by masters or men, and not 
 always by magistrates. As a neces¬ 
 sary consequence of getting rid of 
 this distinction, the power of direct 
 imprisonment must cease for a first 
 offence. The adjudication on a first 
 complaint, if proved, should be 
 either an order to return to work, 
 with or without a fine [or a fine] to 
 a limited amount, and with or with¬ 
 out costs. The fine or costs, or both. 
 
 if ordered, to be enforced by im¬ 
 prisonment on failure to pay within 
 a given time. 
 
 “ The disobedience of the order 
 to return to work, or a second 
 breach under the same contract, to 
 be punishable by increased fine, or 
 by direct imprisonment for a limited 
 time, in the discretion of the magis¬ 
 trate. 
 
 “ There is another mode of en¬ 
 forcing the performance of contracts 
 which I should like to see iutro- 
 duced, as I am confident it would 
 work well. I would give power to 
 the magistrates, in cases where the 
 defendant had not returned to his 
 work at the time of the hearing of 
 the summons, to call upon him to 
 enter into a recognizance, with or 
 without sureties, in a limited amount, 
 for the future performance of the 
 contract; and I would confer the 
 same power in all cases of a second 
 complaint, or for disobeying an order 
 of the court. The recognizance in 
 any case to be either in addition to 
 or in substitution for a fine. 
 
 “ 1 think I should even go so far 
 
LORD ELCHO’S MASTER AND SERVANT ACT, 1867. 17 
 
 The act of 30 & 31 Viet. c. 141, intituled, The 
 Master and Servant Act, 1867,” and sometimes called 
 
 as to provide that, on findiog a 
 surety for the performance of a 
 contract, any direct imprisonment 
 should cease, just as in the case of 
 parties imprisoned for want of sure¬ 
 ties to keep the peace or to be of 
 good behaviour. 
 
 “ For want of a power of this 
 kind, I have on many occasions 
 availed myself of the power of ad¬ 
 journing cases for a fortnight or a 
 month, on the defendant entering 
 into a recognizance with a surety 
 for his appearance, with the under¬ 
 standing that if he returned and 
 continued his work nothing more 
 would be heard of the case, and I 
 have found this course to be attended 
 with beneficial results. A direct 
 power of the kind I have indicated 
 would be, I am convinced, of the 
 greatest advantage to all parties. 
 
 “ With reference to minor points, 
 I may add that wages should not 
 accrue due during any imprisonment 
 under the order of the magistrates, 
 but any order not to affect the con¬ 
 tinuance of the contract. 
 
 “ The process for a first offence 
 should be a summons ; for a second 
 offence, a summons or warrant, at 
 the discretion of the magistrates. 
 
 “ An order, or dismissal, to be in 
 lieu of any proceeding in another 
 court. 
 
 “ The servant in all cases to be 
 a competent witness. 
 
 “ In order to avoid numerous dis¬ 
 putes that would otherwise be mul¬ 
 tiplied in consequence of the in¬ 
 creased scope of the inquiry, it may 
 be desirable, at least in the case of 
 some trades, to confine the juris- 
 D. 
 
 diction of the magistrates, so far as 
 relates to complaints by masters, to 
 cases where there is a written con¬ 
 tract or printed rules, and where the 
 defendant has had a copy given to 
 him either at the time of entering 
 into it, or before the breach com¬ 
 plained of. 
 
 “ This would not interfere with 
 the right of persons to make verbal 
 agreements, but in those cases the 
 masters would be left to their civil 
 remedy for damages in the county 
 court. 
 
 “The present jurisdiction in 
 claims for wages by sen^ants against 
 masters, may be retained, abolish¬ 
 ing, however, any distinction be¬ 
 tween the amount of wages over 
 which jurisdiction is given. A 
 general limit of lOZ. might be im¬ 
 posed, and a power, perhaps, given 
 to impose a fine on the masters, in 
 addition to the wages, if the magis¬ 
 trates thought in any case the wages 
 were withheld without any fair or 
 reasonable ground of dispute. Such 
 fines to be applied as other fines, 
 and not to go to the complainants. 
 Costs to be as at present, in the 
 discretion of the magistrates, and 
 the amount enforceable by impri¬ 
 sonment. 
 
 “ In order to prevent dissatisfac¬ 
 tion on the part of men as to the 
 tribunal, rather than to guard 
 against any real ground for that 
 dissatisfaction, it may be desirable 
 to make the employment by a magis¬ 
 trate of workmen in similar branches 
 of manufacture, a disqualification 
 for hearing disputes.” 
 
 The summary of Lord Elcho’s 
 C 
 
THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 18 
 
 Lord Elcho’s Act/’ was framed upon, and embodied, 
 many of the resolutions of the committee. 
 
 The act was introduced into the House of Commons by 
 Lord Elcho early in the session of 1867. After passing 
 that House it was entrusted to the care of the Earl of 
 Lichfield, and underwent considerable amendment in the 
 House of Lords, and received the royal assent on the 
 20 th August, 1867. 
 
 In order to understand the legislation of 1875, this act 
 of 1867 requires to be carefully considered. After a 
 definition of the meaning of the term contract of ser¬ 
 vice,” it proceeded in the third clause to refer for the con¬ 
 tracts within the act to no less than seventeen acts of parlia¬ 
 ment enumerated in the schedule (b). However, it may 
 be taken that all contracts with servants in husbandry, 
 labourers, artificers, and workmen were within its pro¬ 
 visions. Its object and effect was to subject disputes 
 arising out of such contracts between employers and their 
 servants to the juiisdiction of the justices of the peace^ 
 It provided, that if either employer or employed shall 
 neglect or refuse to fulfil any such contract, or if the 
 employed shall neglect or refuse to enter upon the service, 
 or shall absent himself from it, or wherever any question, 
 difference, or dispute shall arise as to the rights or lia¬ 
 bilities of either of the parties, or touching any misusage, 
 misdemeanor, misconduct, ill-treatment, or injury to the 
 person or property of either of the parties, an information 
 or complaint may be laid before a justice of the peace.” 
 
 Act, given in the text, will show 
 how far these suggestions were 
 adopted. My subsequent views, 
 carrying the civil treatment of these 
 questions still further, will be seen 
 in another chapter. 
 
 (ft) These acts will be found men¬ 
 tioned in a note to sect. 17, of the 
 “ Conspiracy and Protection of Pro¬ 
 perty Act,” post. I remarked soon 
 after Lord Elcho’s act passed, that 
 
 the want of congruity apparent in it 
 was mainly due to the introduction of 
 the third section and other amend¬ 
 ments in the House of Lords. It is 
 only right to state, however, that 
 the third section and schedule re¬ 
 straining the otherwise very exten¬ 
 sive scope of the act was framed by 
 a very skilful and experienced par¬ 
 liamentary draftsman. 
 
LOKD ELCIIO’S MASTER AND SERVANT ACT, 18G7. 19 
 
 In dealing with the complaint the magistrate is to deal 
 with it according as the subject-matter falls within one or 
 the other of two distinct categories; for the statute dis¬ 
 tinguished between simple breach of contract and the 
 case where the breach has been accompanied by circum¬ 
 stances of an aggravated character.” The former class 
 of cases was provided for by the 4th and 9th sections of 
 the act, the latter by the 14th. The 9 th section was 
 drawn in an inartificial and confused manner, but its 
 effect may be stated thus:—It enabled the magistrate, 
 where a contract has been broken, and a complaint has 
 been duly preferred according to the procedure prescribed 
 by the 4th section, to do one of several things: 
 
 First, he might order an abatement of the whole or any 
 part of any wages then due to the employed. 
 
 Or, secondly, he might direct that the contract shall 
 be fulfilled; in which case he might further direct that 
 the party complained against shall find security by recog¬ 
 nizance or bond, with or without sureties, for the fulfil¬ 
 ment of the contract. 
 
 Or, thirdly, he might annul the contract, discharging 
 the parties from it, and apportioning the amount of wages 
 due up to the period of service completed. 
 
 Or, fourthly, he might assess and determine the amount 
 of compensation or damage, together with the costs, to be 
 made to the party complaining, inclusive of any wages 
 abated, and direct the same to be paid, whether the con¬ 
 tract were ordered to be annulled or not. 
 
 Or, lastly, if no amount of compensation or damage 
 could be assessed, or pecuniary compensation would not, 
 in his opinion, meet the circumstances of the case, he 
 might impose a fine not exceeding ‘20/., of which he might 
 direct that a part not exceeding one-half shall be paid to 
 the complainant; and it was further provided that the 
 magistrate, in addition to the annulling of the contract 
 of service, might, if he thought fit, impose the fine 
 authorized by the act. 
 
 c 2 
 
20 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 If tlie order directed the performance of the contract, 
 and that the party complained against should find security 
 for its fulfilment, then, unless such party complied with 
 one or other of these alternatives, he might be committed 
 to the common gaol or house of correction till he found 
 such security. But he was not to be detained for more 
 than three months. 
 
 By the 11th section, where an order was made for the 
 payment of money and the amount was not paid, it might 
 be levied by distress or poinding of goods and chattels, 
 and in default thereof the party might be imprisoned, but 
 for not more than three months, and without hard labour. 
 Thus, it is seen that by this statute imprisonment which, 
 under the former acts, the magistrate was authorized to 
 impose in the first instance as a punishment for a breach 
 of the contract, was taken away, except as ancillary to the 
 jurisdiction, as the consequence of disobedience to the order 
 of the court. And whereas it might under the former acts 
 have been accompanied by hard labour, the power to order 
 hard labour was here taken away. 
 
 So much for cases of simple breach of contract as dis¬ 
 tinguished from those of an aggravated character dealt 
 with by the 14th section. By that section, where any 
 injury has been inflicted on the person or property of the 
 party complaining, or the misconduct, misdemeanor, or 
 ill-treatment complained of has been of an aggravated 
 character, and has not arisen or been committed in the 
 hona Jide exercise of a legal right existing, or bond fide 
 or reasonably supposed to exist, and where any pecuniary 
 compensation or other remedy provided by the act would 
 not meet the case, the magistrate might at once commit 
 the party complained against to the common gaol or house 
 of correction, there to be imprisoned, with or without 
 hard labour, for a period not exceeding three months. 
 On a conviction under the latter section an appeal was 
 given to the next quarter sessions {Jj), 
 
 (d) The above abstract of the act Report of the Rojal Commission on 
 is taken for the most part from the Labour Laws, 1875. 
 
LORD ELCHO’S MASTER AND SERVANT ACT, 1867. 21 
 
 In some respects the recommendations of the com¬ 
 mittee were departed from. Instead of adopting the sug¬ 
 gestion that punishment should be by fine (and failing 
 payment, by distress or imprisonment), with a collateral 
 power to compel the performance of contracts by means 
 of a surety, the legislature provided for a system of com¬ 
 pensation by awarding payment of money to a com¬ 
 plainant in respect of damages of all kinds, apparently 
 extending to unliquidated as well as to liquidated damages. 
 
 Although the committee shrank from recommending 
 that defendants should be made competent witnesses, the 
 suggestion to that effect made to the committee was 
 adopted by the legislature, and presented one of the most 
 important features of the act. 
 
 It must be borne in mind that neither this act nor any 
 of the previous acts interferes with the right of a master 
 to dismiss his servant for misconduct, nor with the right 
 of a servant to leave his service, if the master neglects to 
 perform his part of the contract. 
 
 The retention of the power to impose direct imprison¬ 
 ment under aggravating circumstances appears to have 
 reference to those cases where serious injury had resulted 
 to persons or property from, or where the safety of either 
 persons or propei’ty had been jeopardized by, such care¬ 
 lessness or wilful absence as fell short of punishment by 
 any other existing law. 
 
 The neglect of a man at a windlass or engine whereby 
 a number of men might have been precipitated to the 
 bottom and killed, though they were warned in time and 
 escaped, or neglect whereby mines might be flooded, or 
 otherwise seriously damaged, are illustrations that appear 
 to have been in the minds of the committee of the House 
 of Commons Avhen recommending the retention of this 
 power. 
 
 The operation of the act, on the arrest of wages in 
 Scotland, was confined to providing that no wages accru¬ 
 ing due to the employed, after the date of an order, shall 
 
22 
 
 THE EABOUR LAAVS. 
 
 be assessed to the amount of compensation or damages 
 and costs directed to be paid by him under any such order 
 or warrant of distress or poinding, or be seizable or arrest¬ 
 able under the same.” 
 
 The act did not create any fresh jurisdiction, so far as 
 relates to the parties or cases Avithin its operation. In 
 Scotland it created a new tribunal, and in England it 
 removed the former jurisdiction of a single justice of the 
 peace; but the subject-matter of the complaint and the 
 parties to it remained Avithout any fresh restriction on the 
 one hand, or limitation on the other. 
 
 Such Avas the general scope of Lord Elcho’s Act. It 
 was at the time receiA^ed Avith great satisfaction by those 
 against Avhom master and servant law has principally to 
 be enforced, for the clear intention of the act Avas to get 
 rid of direct imprisonment as a punishment for simple 
 breaches of contract (c). 
 
 The great defect of the act Avas that its administration 
 might be conducted on various and essentially distinct 
 principles. In respect of the very same breach of contract 
 different remedies might be applied—compensation, fine, 
 ])erformance of the contract, or the contract annulled ; and 
 further, if the breach amounted, in the opinion of the 
 magistrates, to aggravated misconduct, direct imprison¬ 
 ment Avith hard labour might be imposed. Xot merely 
 might magistrates take different AueAvs of each case, but 
 the latitude given permitted the indulgence by them of 
 their particular vieAvs as to Avhether breaches of contract 
 l^etAveen employer and employed should be dealt Avith cri¬ 
 minally or civilly; and if the former, whether by fine Avitli 
 imprisonment only in the event of non-payment, or by 
 direct imprisonment in the first instance. These im¬ 
 portant distinctions only existed in the application of the 
 act against the employed, claims by the employed being 
 
 (o') The present Prime Minister, on it, and on Lord Elcho, at Edin- 
 Mr. Disraeli,passed a high eulogium burgh, in the autumn of 1867. 
 
LORD ELCHO'S MASTER AND SERVANT ACT, 1867 . 23 
 
 almost always for wages, and consequently enforced by an 
 order for payment, witli imprisonment in default (c?). 
 
 Thus, for example, in the courts of the Metropolitan 
 police magistrates, the law appears to have been enforced, 
 so far as relates to the employed, by orders for compensa¬ 
 tion, or the imposition of small fines and costs (e) ; and in 
 Sheffield by calling on the persons summoned for breaches 
 
 (^d) Although I had on the passing 
 of the act observed that the 9th sec¬ 
 tion appeared to he imperfect in 
 containing no reference to the pay¬ 
 ment of wages simpliciter, and 
 that an order for wages must be 
 treated as an order for compensation 
 or damages, some text writers on 
 master and servant law, and on the 
 practice of courts of summary juris¬ 
 diction, suggested that wages were 
 not recoverable under the Master 
 and Servant Act, 1867, but under 
 the act 20 Geo. 2, c. 19, and this 
 view was adopted in many districts. 
 The practical difference was not 
 great in the majority of cases. 
 
 “ The general opinion has been 
 that the recovery of wages is not 
 within Lord Elcho’s Act. I must 
 say I entertain a different opinion 
 myself; but the text writers who 
 govern the practice of the magis¬ 
 trates’ courts, the late Mr. Oke, Mr. 
 Stone, and I think Mr. Manley 
 Smith, all regarded the act as not 
 including wages, and, therefore, I 
 yielded to that, and to the practice 
 which I found prevailing at Sheffield 
 when I went there. The magis¬ 
 trates’ clerks continued to issue all 
 the summonses under the act 20 
 Geo. 2. * * * Practically it 
 
 has not made any great distinc¬ 
 tion. * * * They are both 
 
 governed by Jervis’s Act. The pay¬ 
 ment of a definite sum of money 
 
 would be regulated by Jervis’s Act, 
 subject to the Small Penalties Act 
 governing both.” (Evidence of 
 J. E. Davis before the Royal Com¬ 
 mission on Labour Laws.) The 
 commissioners in their report ob¬ 
 served : “ that a question had been 
 raised whether wages could be re¬ 
 covered under the provisions of this 
 act, and that a difference of practice 
 on this point existed in various 
 courts in the kingdom; and that 
 while in some districts masters were 
 frequently summoned under the pro¬ 
 visions of the act, and not question¬ 
 ing the jurisdiction, were ordered to 
 pay and did pay wages due to their 
 workmen, in others the magistrates 
 had refused to grant summonses 
 under this act. 
 
 'We are of opinion that upon the 
 proper construction of the act wages 
 can be sued for under its provisions, 
 but we would suggest that some 
 amendment should be made in the 
 act in order that this part of the 
 law may be freed from any possible 
 doubt.” 
 
 The Court of Queen’s Bench sub¬ 
 sequently held (Field, J., dissenting) 
 that wages were within the act. Mil- 
 lett V. Colemariy Trinity Term, 1875. 
 
 (<?) See the evidence of Mr. 
 Hannay, metropolitan police magis¬ 
 trate. First Report of the Royal 
 Commission on Labour Laws, 1874. 
 
24 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 of subsisting contracts to give security, either with or with¬ 
 out a surety for performance (/); while, on the other 
 hand, in many places imprisonment was applied almost 
 without discrimination 
 
 It is to be observed that although the Master and 
 Servant Act, 1867, required the remedy sought for to 
 be stated in the summons, yet that as a summons is issued 
 l)y the magistrate’s clerk, he had inevitably the power, in 
 almost every instance, to control the remedy; and further, 
 it seems to have been clear that the magistrates might 
 amend a summons so as to allow of direct imprisonment 
 for what they were pleased to consider an aggravated 
 breach, althougli the summons had asked for an adju¬ 
 dication under the ninth section. 
 
 (/) “I mainly put in force 
 the provision of the act enabling 
 the magistrates to call upon the per¬ 
 son summoned to perform his con¬ 
 tract ; in fact, a rough specific per¬ 
 formance of the contract by means 
 of the defendant fgenerally, of 
 course, the defendant was the em¬ 
 ployed) undertaking by recogni¬ 
 zance to perform his contract with 
 or without a surety. ♦ ♦ * 
 
 The employer wants his contract 
 performed, not damages or fine. 
 The w'ay to get it performed is to 
 call upon the man to do it, and in a 
 way that can be enforced, namely, 
 by his own recognizance, accom¬ 
 panied, if he can fiud one, and 
 if it is reasonable to require it, by u 
 surety (in bl. generally).” Evidence 
 of J. E. D., First Report of the 
 Commission. 
 
 (/7) See notes of cases, First Re¬ 
 port of Royal Commission on Labour 
 Laws, pp. 57, 58, 59, 108, 109, 110, 
 
 111, 118, 119, &c. “ Mr. Boa, the 
 
 second witness, who complained of 
 the act, and who represented an as¬ 
 sociation called the Criminal Law 
 
 Repeal Association, consisting of 
 about sixty-two trades in the west 
 of Scotland, numbering in all about 
 140,000 men, stated that, as he un¬ 
 derstood the feeling in Scotland, it 
 was considered ‘ a very good act if 
 the 14th danse were taken out, and 
 the 9th amended ’; that the prin¬ 
 cipal complaints in Scotland were 
 against the 14th section, and sug¬ 
 gested that aggravated cases, as ex¬ 
 plained by him, should be tried be¬ 
 fore stij)endiary magistrates, and 
 the real damage assessed and the 
 man treated for the offence civilly ; 
 for that in consequence of the dis¬ 
 cretion given to the justices of the 
 pence, a case too often unwarrant¬ 
 ably assumed the character of an 
 aggravated offence, and that this 
 arose from want of knowledge of the 
 law on the part of the judge, and 
 sometimes from the fact that per¬ 
 haps in some cases the magistrate, 
 who occupies a position above the 
 W’orking man, was moved by class 
 views.” (Second and Final Report 
 of the Royal Commission on Labour 
 Laws.) 
 
LORD ELCHO’S MASTER AND SERVANT ACT, 1867. 25 
 
 Apart from numerous cases, in wliicli, although the 
 spirit of the act was violated, a strictly legal course was 
 pursued, great confusion appears to have arisen from the 
 act having blended together so many remedies, leading to 
 great irregularities (h). 
 
 From a careful observation of the cases of conviction 
 under this act which have taken place at petty sessions, 
 it certainly appears that the act has been misconstrued 
 and misunderstood in many points, and that many of the 
 convictions, if made the subject of appeal, would in all 
 probability have been quashed, for we find cases where 
 imprisonment in case of non-payment of a fine imposed 
 has been awarded for a longer period than the law allows. 
 Hard labour has been made part of the sentence where 
 the term of imprisonment, in default of the payment of 
 the fine, has been fixed by the court, whereas by the 11th 
 section it is specially proHded that no such imprisonment 
 should be with hard labour. Adjudications have been 
 double, that is to say, requiring the defendant to do two 
 or more things legally inconsistent. Defendants have 
 been brought into court without knowing what the com¬ 
 plainant required, the amount of compensation, damages, 
 or other remedy being omitted from the summons, con¬ 
 trary to the direction contained in section 4, which ex¬ 
 pressly requires that these particulars shall be stated in 
 the summons. 
 
 And in cases in which complainants have asked for 
 small specific sums as compensation, or have asked for 
 security for performance of the contract, the sentence has 
 been direct imprisonment with hard labour for considerable 
 periods, without any option of tendering the compensation 
 or finding the security asked for, thus making useless the 
 provision intended for the protection of the defendants. 
 
 (/i) It is right to point out that, criminal clause in the act to the 
 as originally introduced into the quarter sessions in England and 
 House of Commons, it was proposed Ireland, and to justices of quarter 
 to leave the administration of the sessions in Scotland. 
 
26 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 In many cases, too, it appears that where the defendant 
 has pleaded guilty, the sentence, without any evidence 
 being heard, has been more severe than the remedy 
 demanded by the summons ” (^). 
 
 It is not a matter for wonder that after the act had been 
 in force for some years, the estimation in which it was 
 held was as various as its administration. 
 
 Metropolitan police magistrates spoke very favourably 
 of it (/i), and so, as compared wdth the previous law, did 
 the late police magistrate for Sheffield (wffio had previously 
 for a period both before and subsequent to the Act of 1867 
 lield the office of stipendiary magistrate for Stoke-upon- 
 Trent) (Z). Even the employed bore indirect testimony 
 to its advantages where it had been mildly administered (? 72 ). 
 
 (i) Second and final Report of the 
 Royal Commission on Labour Laws. 
 
 {k) “ Mr. llannay, police magis¬ 
 trate at Worship Street, who had 
 had great experience of the opera¬ 
 tion of the act, classified the cases 
 which had come under his notice 
 under the two heads of, first, dis¬ 
 putes between masters and men in 
 the trades of cabinet maker and 
 tailors, mostly foreigners: and, 
 secondly, complaints against idle 
 apprentices. He pointed out clearly 
 tbc process under the act, the ad¬ 
 vantage obtained from the fact that 
 the respondent himself is heard, the 
 (piestion being, in fact, well dis¬ 
 cussed and understood ; and par¬ 
 ticularly pointed out that imprison¬ 
 ment under the 0th section is only 
 in consequence of non-payment of 
 the fine or non-conipliancc with 
 the order of the court, that the act 
 is really made equally for man and 
 for master, and that in many cases 
 compensation for withholding wages 
 has been paid under the stress of a 
 summons under the act, and that 
 
 without imprisonment in case of 
 non-payment of fine it would be 
 impossible to enforce the act at all.” 
 (Second and Final Report of the 
 Royal Commission on Labour Laws), 
 
 Mr. Bridge, police magistrate for 
 the Hammersmith and Wandsworth 
 district, said of the act: “ It works 
 beneficially and easily in my expe¬ 
 rience.” ( Zi/., Appendix, p. 64.) 
 
 (Z) “Mr. Davis, relying upon 
 tbe great experience he had had in 
 the matter, insisted upon the great 
 use of the 9th section as a means of 
 enforcing specific performance of a 
 contract.” (Second and Final Re¬ 
 port of the Royal Commission on 
 Labour Laws.) 
 
 (w) Mr. Hannay, police magis¬ 
 trate at Worship Street, “stated that 
 the men were very fond of this act, 
 and if refused a summons under it, 
 departed much disappointed, as the 
 costs were higher and the delay 
 greater in the county than in the 
 police courts.” (Second and Final 
 Report of the Royal Commission 
 on Labour Laws). Mr. Bridge, 
 
LORD ELCHO’S IVIASTER AND SERVANT ACT, 1867 . 27 
 
 The act presented a widely different aspect to those 
 w^ho had experienced the harsher mode of its application 
 already adverted to; and the law itself was (not un¬ 
 naturally) condemned as expressly visiting simple breaches 
 of contract by the employed with fine and imprisonment, 
 while it was the administration of the law, or the too wide 
 discretion given by it, that was really in fault. 
 
 police magistrate at Hammersmith 
 and Wandsworth, stated that the act 
 “ worked beneficially and easily,” 
 and that it was used “almost en¬ 
 tirely by the workmen to get their 
 contracts performed by the masters 
 if they are illegally dismissed.” {Id., 
 Minutes of Evidence.) Mr. Sale, 
 Bccretaiy of a trades union, and the 
 
 first witness examined before the 
 Commission, speaking of the effect 
 of the act at Sheffield, where (as has 
 been already stated) the act was 
 carried out by orders for perform¬ 
 ance, said “ the men have generally 
 obeyed the order of the magistrates 
 and returned to their work.” (First 
 Report, Minutes of Evidence.) 
 
28 
 
 THE LABOUR LAAVS. 
 
 CHAPTER HI. 
 
 THE COMBINATION LAAVS AND THE CRIMINAL LAAV 
 AMENDMENT ACT, 1871. 
 
 The dissatisfaction felt by Avorkmen Avdth the mode of 
 dealing A^Tth breaches of contract under the Master and 
 Servant Act, 1867, Avas exceeded probably by the distaste 
 for the Criminal LaAV Amendment Act, 1871; the former 
 act liaving reference to the relations of master and servant 
 inter se, the latter haAnng reference to the disturbance of 
 those relations from Avithout (a). 
 
 In order to comprehend the changes of the laAvin 1875, 
 it is absolutely necessary that the provisions of the act of 
 1871 should be understood, and to make them thoroughly 
 intelligible it is essential, in turn, to revieAv concisely the 
 combination laAvs. 
 
 As to combination at common laAv, ‘^each person has a 
 right to choose Avhether he Avill labour or not, and also to 
 choose the terms on Avhich he Avill consent to labour, if 
 labour be his choice. The poAver of choice in respect 
 of labour and terms, Avhich one person may exercise and 
 declare singly, many after consultation may exercise 
 jointly, and they may make a simultaneous declaration 
 of their choice, and may la^vflllly act thereon for the im¬ 
 mediate purpose of obtaining the required terms ; but they 
 cannot create any mutual obligation liaATiigthe legal effect 
 of binding each other not to Avork or not to employ unless 
 upon terms alloAved by the combination. Any arrange¬ 
 ment for that purpose, Avhatever may be its purport or 
 
 (a) Sec Report of the Royal Commission on Labour Laws, 1875. 
 
THE COMBINATION LAWS. 
 
 29 
 
 form, does not bind as an agreement, but is illegal, though 
 not unlawful, on account of restraint of trade, and there¬ 
 fore void. Every party to it, who chooses to put an end 
 to it, is thenceforward as free to claim his own terms for 
 his own labour, as if such arrangement had never been 
 made; and any attempt to enforce, by unlaAvful coercion, 
 performance of any such supposed agreement, against a 
 party who chooses to break from it, and labour or contract 
 for labour upon different terms, is an attempt to obstruct 
 him in the lawful exercise of his right to freedom to trade, 
 and is thus a private wrong. It is also a violation of a 
 duty towards the public—that is to say, of the duty to 
 abstain from obstructing the exercise of the right to the 
 free course of trade. A person can neither alienate for a 
 time his freedom to dispose of his own labour, or his own 
 capital, according to his own will (Z>), nor alienate such 
 freedom generally, and make himself a slave (e); it follows 
 that he cannot transfer it to the governing body of a 
 union ” (d). 
 
 For many centuries the statute law of England, infringing 
 the common law right of combination, bore unjustly and 
 oppressively on the labouring classes. The labourer was 
 not permitted to take advantage of favourable circum¬ 
 stances which would have enhanced the marketable value 
 of his labour. The rate of wages, and the amount of work 
 to be done to entitle him to such wages, were either set¬ 
 tled by statute or fixed by persons invested with statutory 
 authority for that purpose. Of course a legislation framed 
 in such a spirit would not tolerate any combination on the 
 part of the labouring class to improve its condition in 
 either of these respects, and a series of statutes, known 
 
 (J) See Hilton v. Echersley^ 6 
 E. & B. 47. 
 
 (c) See the argument of Har¬ 
 grave in the negro SommerseVs 
 case, 20 State Trials, 23. 
 
 (d) Memorandum by Sir William 
 Erie, late Chief Justice of the Com¬ 
 
 mon Pleas, on the law relating to 
 trade unions, appended to the 
 Eleventh and Final Report of the 
 Royal Commission on the Organiza¬ 
 tion and Rules of Trade Unions and 
 other Associations. The American 
 jurists take the same general view. 
 
30 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 under the name of the Combination Laws, prohibited, 
 under severe penalties, all combinations having for their 
 object either the raising of wages" or the interfering with 
 the hours of labour. That the policy on which this legis¬ 
 lation was founded was mistaken and unsound is now 
 universally admitted. The interest of the man who 
 desires to employ the labour of others, and that of the 
 man who seeks to dispose of his labour, may be in a cer¬ 
 tain sense antagonistic, as the interest of the buyer, who 
 seeks to buy at the lowest possible rate, and that of the 
 seller, who seeks to sell at the highest, must necessarily 
 be; but the state has no interest in upholding the one at 
 the expense of the other, but, in the interest of all parties 
 concerned, the community as consumers included, should 
 leave both to adjust the true mean between their conflict¬ 
 ing interests with reference to the economic laws by 
 which the value of all marketable commodities, labour 
 included, will, if things are left to themselves, be deter¬ 
 mined. And, not only does this hold good as to the 
 adjustment of the terms of hiring, but also as to the 
 power of combining on either side to obtain more advan¬ 
 tageous terms than might be obtained by individual effort. 
 More especially is this so as regards the labourer, who iu 
 any contest as to the terms of hiring, meets the employer 
 at a great disadvantage, arising from the superior means 
 possessed by the latter, whereby he is enabled to wait 
 with comparatively little inconvenience, while the other, 
 living as it were from day to day, and possessing 
 no fund to fall back upon, soon finds his resources 
 exhausted, and has no alternative but to submit. But 
 the case is altogether different when the workman becomes 
 one of an organized body, combined under a constituted 
 government, possessing funds resulting from regular con¬ 
 tributions, and acting as a united whole under the guid¬ 
 ance and direction of shrewd and intelligent leaders. 
 
 So circumstanced, the working man is enabled to meet 
 the employer on equal terms. He is no longer helpless 
 
THE COMBINATION LAAVS. 
 
 31 
 
 or without resources. He has the body to which he 
 belongs to uphold him, and the common purse to support 
 him till the employer shall have consented to better and 
 more advantageous terms. That in a free country men 
 should be at liberty to combine for the protection of their 
 common interest, so long as they do not interfere with the 
 rights of others, and are guilty of no breach of the law, 
 ought not to admit of question. But it was not till 
 political economy had become a science, and the laws by 
 which the value of labour, as an element of production, 
 and its relation to capital, had been made apparent, that 
 the unsoundness of the prior legislation was seen, and its 
 repeal resolved on by the legislature. 
 
 It is now half a centiwy ago since by the statute of the 
 5 Geo. 4, c. 95, all the prior acts relative to combina¬ 
 tions of workmen or of masters, as to raising or lowering 
 the rate of wages, or altering the hours or quantity of 
 work, or regulating the manner of carrying on business, 
 were at once swept away. After a repeal of all the 
 former statutes it was by the 2nd section expressly pro¬ 
 vided that journeymen, workmen, or other persons who 
 shall enter into any combination to obtain an advance, or 
 to fix the rate of wages, or to lessen or alter the hours or 
 duration of the time of working, or to decrease the 
 quantity of work, or to induce another to depart from his 
 service before the end of the time or term for which he is 
 hired, or to quit or return his work before the same shall 
 be finished, or not being hired, to refuse to enter into 
 work or employment, or to regulate the mode of carrying 
 on any manufacture, trade or business, or the management 
 thereof, shall not therefore be subject or liable to any 
 indictment or prosecution for conspiracy, or to any other 
 criminal information or punishment whatever, under the 
 common or the statute law.” A corresponding liberty 
 was given by the 3rd section to the employer. Lest, 
 however, the liberty thus conceded of combining to 
 induce others to quit work or to refuse to enter employ- 
 
32 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 ment, or to regulate the mode of carrying on business, 
 might be abused by the use of violence or intimidation 
 for the purpose of coercion, two enactments were super- 
 added which were the forerunners of the Criminal Law 
 Amendment Act. 
 
 By the 5th section it was enacted that if any person 
 by violence to the person or property, by threats, or by 
 intimidation, shall unlawfully or maliciously force another 
 to depart from his hiring or work before the end of the 
 time or term for which he is hired, or return his work 
 before the same shall be finished, or damnify, spoil, or 
 destroy any machinery, tools, goods, wares, or work, or 
 prevent any person not being hired from accepting any 
 work or employment; or if any person shall wilfully or 
 maliciously use or employ \dolence to the person or pro¬ 
 perty, threats, or intimidation towards another on account 
 of his not complying with or conforming to any rules, 
 orders, resolutions, or regulations made to obtain an 
 advance of wages, or to lessen or alter the hours of work¬ 
 ing, or to decrease the quantity of work, or to regulate 
 the mode of carrying on any manufacture, ti’ade, or busi¬ 
 ness, or the management thereof, or if any person by 
 violence to the person or property, by threats or by inti¬ 
 midation, shall wilfully or maliciously force any master or 
 mistress manufacturer, his or her foreman or agent, to 
 make any alteration in their mode of regulating, managing, 
 conducting, or carrying on their manufacture, trade, or 
 business ; every person so offending, or causing, procuring, 
 aiding, abetting, or assisting in such offence, being con¬ 
 victed thereof, in manner hereafter mentioned, shaU be 
 imprisoned only, or imprisoned and kept to hard labour, 
 for any term not exceeding two calendar months.” 
 
 Scarcely, however, had this statute become law when it 
 was found that the liberty granted by the second and 
 third sections was likely to be attended mth mischievous 
 consequences. Extensive associations were found to exist 
 with an elaborate and effective organization, the avowed 
 
THE COMBINATION LAWS. 
 
 33 
 
 purpose of which, going far beyond the protection of their 
 own interests with reference to wages or conditions of 
 labour, was to control the masters in the conduct of their 
 business, and to ruin such of them as refused to submit to 
 their dictation ; others sprang into existence in the course 
 of a few months. In one of these associations, by one of 
 its articles, delegates, v>^ho were to be regularly appointed, 
 were to point out the masters whom they disliked,” and 
 were to warn such masters of the danger in which they 
 were placed,” and “ to try everything which prudence 
 might dictate to put such masters out of the trade.” In 
 another of these combinations, the Seamen’s Union, the 
 effect of one of the rules of the association, viz., that men 
 thus employed should not do anything which they had 
 never before been called on to do as seamen, led, on the 
 occasion of a vessel getting on a sand-bank, when it 
 became necessary to shift the ballast, to a refusal on the 
 part of the men to do this work, as not having been done 
 by them before ; the consequence of which was that other 
 assistance had to be sought, and that the owners had to 
 pay a considerable sum for salvage. 
 
 In the ensuing year, a motion having been made in the 
 House of Commons, by Mr. Huskisson, for the appoint¬ 
 ment of a select committee to inquire into the effects of 
 the act of the 5 Geo. 4, c. 95, in respect of the con¬ 
 duct of workmen and others in different parts of the 
 United Kingdom, and to report their opinion how far it 
 might be necessary to repeal or amend the act, a committee 
 was appointed accordingly. After a full investigation, the 
 committee reported, recommending a repeal of the act of 
 the preceding session, thereby to restore the operation of 
 the common law in the instances in which it was suspended 
 by the second and third clauses of the act; at the same 
 time recommending that exception should be made to its 
 operation in favour of meetings and consultations, amongst 
 either masters or workmen, the object of which was peace¬ 
 ably to consult upon the rate of wages to be either given 
 
 D. D 
 
34 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 or TGccivodj fliiid. to to cO”OpGr3/tG witli Gticli otliGr m 
 
 GndGavouring to raisG or lowGr it, or to settle the hours of 
 labour ; an exception,” it was said, which, while it gave 
 to those in the different classes of masters and workmen 
 ample means of maintaining their respective interests, would 
 not afford any support to the assumption of power or dic¬ 
 tation in either party to the prejudice of the other, least 
 of all to that assumption of control on the part of the 
 workmen in the conduct of any business or manufacture, 
 which was utterly incompatible with the necessary authority 
 of the master, at whose risk and by whose capital it was 
 to be carried on.” 
 
 In recommending that liberty of associating and co¬ 
 operating together, so far as wages or hours of labour 
 were concerned, should be preserved, alike to masters and 
 workmen, the committee ‘^deemed it essential to the 
 regard which was due to the free exercise of individual 
 judgment,” to propose that the resolutions of any such 
 association should be allowed to bind only parties actually 
 present, or personally consenting; ” adding that all 
 combination beyond this ought to be at the risk of the 
 parties, and open, as theretofore, to the animadvei’sion of 
 the common law, and should be dealt with according to 
 the circumstances of each case.” The committee further 
 recommended that every precaution should be taken to 
 insure a safe and free option to those who, from whatever 
 motive, might have no inclination to take a part in such 
 associations. ‘‘ The most effective security,” they observe, 
 should be taken that legislative enactments can afford, 
 that in becoming parties to any association, or subject to 
 their authority, individuals should be left to act under the 
 impulse of their own free will alone; and that those who 
 wish to abstain from them, should be enabled to do so, 
 and continue their service or engage their industry on 
 whatever terms or to whatever master they may choose, 
 in perfect security against molestation, insult, or personal 
 danger of what kind soever.” For the punishment of 
 
THE COMBINATION LAWS. 
 
 35 
 
 offences of the nature alluded to, the committee recom¬ 
 mended that a summary jurisdiction should be established, 
 with a provision that would afford greater facility to its 
 operation, by permitting conviction to take place on the 
 oath of one credible witness, and by giving a discretion 
 in respect to the punishment to be inflicted in case of 
 conviction, to the extent of six months imprisonment, 
 with or without hard labour, according to the circum¬ 
 stance of the case. 
 
 A bill, passed in conformity with these resolutions, 
 was forthwith introduced into parliament and became 
 law as the 6 Geo. 4, c. 129. It repealed the former 
 act, but at the same time repealed the statutes which it 
 had been the primary purpose of that act to abrogate, 
 leaving the combinations which had been authorized by 
 the 2nd and 3rd sections of the prior act to be dealt with 
 at the common law. 
 
 The act retained, and in a stiU more comprehensive 
 and stringent form, the provisions of the former statute 
 relative to the coercion or intimidation of others. The 
 3rd section enacted that, if any person by violence to 
 person or property, or by threats or intimidation, or by 
 molesting, or in any way obstructing another,— 
 
 1. Shall force or endeavour to force any journeyman, 
 manufacturer, workman, or other person, hired or em¬ 
 ployed in any manufacture, trade, or business, to depart 
 from his hiring, employment, or work, or to return his 
 work before it is finished, or prevent or endeavour to pre¬ 
 vent any journeyman, manufacturer, workman, or other 
 person not being hired or employed, from hiring himself 
 to or from accepting work or employment from any 
 person; 
 
 2. Or shall use such means for the purpose of forcing 
 or inducing such person to belong to any club or associa¬ 
 tion, or to contribute to any common fund, or to pay any 
 fine or penalty on account of his not belonging to any 
 particular club or association, or of his not having con- 
 
 D 2 
 
36 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 tributed or having refused to contribute to any common 
 fund or to pay any fine or penalty, or on account of his 
 not having complied, or of his refusing to comply with 
 any rules, orders, resolutions, or regulations made to 
 obtain an advance or to reduce the rate of wages, or to 
 lessen the hours of working, or to decrease or alter the 
 quantity of work, or to regulate the mode of carrying on 
 any manufacture, trade, or business, or the management 
 thereof; 
 
 3. Or to force or endeavour to force any manufacturer 
 or person canying on any trade or business, to make any 
 alteration in his mode of regulating, managing, conducting, 
 or carrying on such manufacture, trade, or business, or to 
 limit the number of his apprentices, or the number or 
 description of his journeymen, workmen, or servants,— 
 
 Such person shall be liable, with any person aiding, 
 abetting, or assisting therein, to three months imprison¬ 
 ment, with or without hard labour (e). 
 
 Thus the law remained till the year 1867. In the 
 meantime the statutes prohibiting combination having 
 been removed, trade unions had sprung up in great 
 numbers, and it soon became manifest that, while emi¬ 
 nently effective for the j^rotection of the interests of the 
 workman, they were also capable, in the hands of violent 
 and unscrupulous men, of being converted into instru¬ 
 ments of intolerable tyranny and oppression. The or¬ 
 ganized strikes, which at first were \fiewed with much 
 disapprobation, might be only the form in which a legiti¬ 
 mate contest with the employer could be carried on. But 
 the outrages at Sheffield and Manchester could but excite 
 general indignation, and the proceedings of the Tailors’ 
 
 (e) Sir William Erie, late Chief the Law relating to Trade Unions 
 Justice of the Common Pleas, has appended to the Eleventh and 
 expressed his opinion that the act Final Report of the Royal Commis- 
 C Geo. 4, c. 129, was “declaratory siononthe Organization and Rules 
 of the common law as to the offence of Trade Unions and other Associa- 
 and operative only to make a sum- tions. 
 mary remedy.’’ Memorandum on 
 
THE COMBINATION LAAVS. 
 
 87 
 
 Association in the metropolis, and the undisguised 
 attempts then made by incessant molestation to compel 
 persons not belonging to the association to act under its 
 dictation, was felt to amount to an unendurable tyranny 
 which must be put down by the law. 
 
 On the other hand, legal decisions had taken place 
 which showed that while combinations to affect the rate of 
 wages, or the hours of work, had ceased to be criminal, 
 these associations, being, according to the ancient legal doc¬ 
 trine, in restraint of trade, and therefore against public 
 policy, had no legal status, and could not invoke the aid 
 of the law for the protection of property and other civil 
 rights. 
 
 It being doubted whether under all the circumstances 
 the existing state of the law was satisfactory, in the year 
 1867 a commission was issued to inquire into and report 
 on the organization and rules of trades unions and other 
 associations, whether of Avorkmen or employers, and to 
 inquire into and report on the effect produced by such 
 trades unions and associations on the workmen and em¬ 
 ployers respectively, and on the relations between work¬ 
 men and employers, and on the trade and industry of the 
 country; with power to investigate any recent acts of 
 intimidation, outrage, or AATong alleged to have been pro¬ 
 moted, encouraged, or connived at by such trades unions 
 or other associations, and also to suggest any improve¬ 
 ments to be made in the law with respect to the matters 
 aforesaid, or Avith respect to the relations betAveen work¬ 
 men and their employers, for the mutual benefit of both 
 parties. 
 
 From the inquiry instituted by that commission, the 
 evidence taken by it, the very able but conflicting reports 
 of the commissioners, and the public discussion of the 
 subject, there ensued two contemporaneous acts of the 
 legislature, the 34 & 35 Viet. c. 31, and the 34 & 35 
 Yict. c. 32. 
 
 In the first of these statutes, entitled An Act to 
 
38 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 amend the Law relating to Trades Unions,” any possible 
 criminality which by the common law still attached to a 
 combination in the nature of a trade union, as being in 
 restraint of trade, and therefore a conspiracy to carry out 
 an illegal purpose, was removed, and the status of trade 
 unions with reference to civil rights was materially im¬ 
 proved. It was provided that— 
 
 1. The pui'poses of any trade union shall not, by 
 
 reason merely that they are in restraint of trade, 
 be deemed to be unlawful, so as to render any 
 member of such trade union liable to criminal 
 prosecution for conspiracy or otherwise. 
 
 2. The purposes of any trade union shall not, by 
 
 reason merely that they are in restraint of trade, 
 be unlawful so as to render void or voidable any 
 agreement or trust. 
 
 These enactments are followed by express provision— 
 evidently intended to prevent persons from binding them¬ 
 selves to remain members of any such imion in perpetuity, 
 and to secure to them perfect freedom in this respect— 
 that certain agreements, viz.,— 
 
 1. Any agreement between members of a trade 
 
 union, as such, concerning the conditions on 
 which any members for the time being of such 
 trade union shall or shall not sell their goods, 
 transact business, employ or be employed: 
 
 2. Any agreement for the payment by any person of 
 
 any subscription or penalty to a trade union : 
 
 3. Any agreement for the application of the funds of 
 
 a trade union, to provide benefits to members, 
 or to furnish contributions to any employer or 
 workman, not a member of such trade union, in 
 consideration of such employer or workman 
 acting in conformity with the rules or resolu¬ 
 tions of such trade imion; or to discharge any 
 fine imposed upon any person by sentence of a 
 court of justice; or any agreement made between 
 
THE CRIMINAL LAW AMENPMENT ACT, 1871. 39 
 
 one trade union and another; or any bond to 
 secure the performance of any of the above- 
 mentioned agreements,— 
 
 shall not be affected by the statute so as to make 
 such agreement available in a court of law on the one 
 hand or unlawful on the other. 
 
 To prevent any partial administration of the law the 
 act provided that any complaint made under it should 
 be heard by a metropolitan police magistrate, or other 
 stipendiary magistrate, if arising where such magistrates 
 have jurisdiction, or before the Lord Ma 5 ’or or an aider- 
 man, if arising within the city of London; in all other 
 cases before two justices of the peace. It excluded any 
 person from acting in such a case who is a master, or 
 father, son, or brother of a master in the particular manu¬ 
 facture, trade, or business in, or in connexion with, which 
 the offence shall be charged to have been committed. 
 
 It appears from the returns made to the House of 
 Commons, in the years 1873-4, that the total number of 
 convictions between the years 1871-3, in England and 
 Wales, amounted to 135, with 10 appeals, in 6 of which 
 the conviction was quashed, and in 4 affirmed ; in Scot¬ 
 land to 12, and in Ireland to 17. That between 1st 
 January, 1873, and 1st April, 1874, the convictions in 
 England and Wales were 39, whereof 12 were the subject 
 of appeal to quarter sessions, 8 of them being quashed, 
 and 4 affirmed; in Scotland 9, and in Ireland 12. 
 
 The act further provided, while it excluded trade unions 
 from registration under the Friendly Societies Acts, and 
 the Industrial and Provident Societies Act, that such 
 unions might be registered under the provisions of the 
 act itself. 
 
 The concomitant statute, passed on the same day, was 
 an act to amend the Criminal Law relating to violence, 
 threats, and intimidation, commonly called the Criminal 
 Law Amendment Act, 1871, being the act as to the 
 working of which we are directed by the present commis¬ 
 sion to report. 
 
40 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 The majority of the Commissioners of 1867 had reported 
 in favour of maintaining the law as established by the 
 act of the 6 Geo. 4, c. 129, and parliament, after the 
 experience of the previous ten years, was not disposed to 
 do away with a law passed for the purpose of keeping 
 these associations from abusing their power in coercing 
 others to submit to their dictation. But complaints 
 having been made of the vagueness and uncertainty of 
 the terms intimidation,” molestation,” and obstruc¬ 
 tion,” used in the previous act, and of the latitude which 
 w^as thereby afforded in administering the law under it, 
 care Avas now taken to make the law clear by a full 
 definition of Avhat Avas meant by these terms. 
 
 The laAv, as established by the act, may be stated thus:— 
 Any person aaIio, AAuth a atcav to coerce another— * 
 
 1. Being a master, to dismiss or to cease to employ 
 
 any AA^orkman, or being a Avorkman to quit any 
 employment or to return work before it is 
 finished; or, 
 
 2. Being a master, not to offer, or being a workman 
 
 not to accept any employment or work; or, 
 
 3. Being a master or workman, to belong or not to 
 
 belong to any temporary or permanent associa¬ 
 tion or combination ; or, 
 
 4. Being a master or AA^orkman, to pay any fine or 
 
 penalty imposed by any temporary or permanent 
 association or combination ; or, 
 
 5. Being a master, to alter the mode of carrying on 
 
 his business, or the number or description of any 
 persons employed by him,— 
 
 Shall do any one or more of the following acts, 
 viz. :— 
 
 1. Use violence to any person or any property ; or, 
 
 2. Threaten or intimidate any person in such manner 
 
 as Avould justify a justice of the peace, on com¬ 
 plaint made to him, to bind OA^er the person so 
 tlireatening or intimidating to keep the peace; 
 or. 
 
THE CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT ACT. 1871. 41 
 
 3. Molest or obstruct any person in manner defined 
 by the section, that is to say:— 
 
 a. By persistently following such person about 
 from place to place ; 
 
 b. By hiding any tools, clothes, or other pro¬ 
 perty owned or used by such person, or depriv¬ 
 ing him of, or hindering him in the use thereof; 
 
 c. By watching or besetting the house or other 
 place where such person resides or works, or 
 carries on business, or happens to be, or the 
 approach to such house or place, or if with two 
 or more other persons to follow such person in 
 a disorderly manner in or through any street or 
 road— 
 
 shall be liable to imprisonment, with or without hard 
 labour, for a term not exceeding three months. 
 
 To these enactments were added two important pro¬ 
 visions : 
 
 That nothing in this section shall prevent any person 
 from being liable under any other act, or other¬ 
 wise, to any other or higher punishment than is 
 pro^dded for any offence by this section, so that no 
 person be punished twice for the same offence. 
 
 That no person shall be liable to any punishment for 
 doing or conspiring to do any act on the ground 
 that such act restrains or tends to restrain the free 
 course of trade, unless such act is one of the acts 
 hereinbefore specified in this section, and is done 
 with the object of coercing as hereinbefore men¬ 
 tioned (/). 
 
 Unlike the Master and Servant Act, 1867, it does not 
 appear that the act on the whole was imperfectly adminis¬ 
 tered (^). 
 
 (/) The preceding summary of {g') Second and Final Report of 
 the combination laws is taken from the Royal Commission on Labour 
 the Second and Final Report of the Laws. 
 
 Royal Commission on Labour Laws. 
 
42 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 Nevertheless, as has been stated, great desire was ex¬ 
 pressed on the part of trade unions for a repeal of the act, 
 and that the offences dealt with by it should be left to the 
 common or ordinary criminal law of the land. The first 
 ground upon which this repeal was insisted upon was that 
 the act was vague that it was a moral wrong ” as 
 against the working man, because it dealt only with acts 
 committed by one class of the community, and with 
 offences which should be dealt with by the ordinary cri¬ 
 minal law ; that it was one-sided, in that under the act it 
 was impossible to convict masters, in consequence of the 
 impossibility of obtaining evidence against them, though 
 these witnesses were convinced that crimes similar in 
 result to those for which the men were punished were 
 constantly committed by the masters; that black lists 
 were analogous in effect to coercion and intimidation as 
 practised by the men. 
 
 Complaint was also made that the law was vague, in that 
 “intimidation” and “molestation” w'ere so insufficiently 
 defined that by the act means of punishing a workman were 
 put into the hands of a judge w^hich the common law of 
 the land could hardly furnish him with ; and it was stated 
 that many acts were improperly held to be picketing,"' 
 w hile they amounted to little more than the communication 
 to union men of the existence of a strike. It appeared 
 that, in fact, that part of the first section of the act which 
 deals with picketing “was, to the objectors, the most 
 objectionable part of it.” It w^as said that that part of the 
 section was “ overdrawn,” and that wffiat were really no 
 offences were often made such under the act. Another 
 complaint was that the word “ coerce ” was interpreted to 
 mean nothing more than to “ induce ” or “ persuade.” 
 And it was further said that objection existed to the tri¬ 
 bunal before which offences under the act were tried on 
 the ground of prejudice on the part of the judge. Lastly, 
 it was said that the option of being tried by a jury or by a 
 
THE CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT ACT, 1871 . 43 
 
 stipendiary magistrate, should the act still he retained, 
 would be a more satisfactory mode of trial (A). 
 
 On the other hand, the act was regarded by employers 
 of labour as a very useful act. To its effect they attri¬ 
 buted the, if not entire cessation of the practice of picket¬ 
 ing, yet the alteration in its character which had rendered 
 the relation existing between master and men much more 
 satisfactory, and the adjustment of trade disputes much 
 more easy ( 2 ). 
 
 (^) Second and Einal Report of the 
 Royal Commission on Labour Laws. 
 
 (i) Id. In reference to the evi¬ 
 dence given on the part of em¬ 
 ployers before the Commissioners on 
 this subject, the Report observed :— 
 “All their evidence was rather in 
 the nature of an induction from 
 their former experience of the in¬ 
 timidating and coercive effects of 
 picketing, that its present altered 
 character was entirely to be attri¬ 
 buted to the operation of the act. 
 
 “ Some part of the evidence given 
 by the witnesses who objected to 
 the act, was in reply to that part of 
 the evidence of the employers of 
 
 labour, in which they had expressed 
 their conviction that the better feel¬ 
 ing which existed between labour 
 and capital was very much to be 
 attributed to the existence of this 
 act, and explained the more peace¬ 
 able relations, which they admitted 
 now existed, to a better and daily 
 growing understanding of the rela¬ 
 tion between labour and capital, to 
 the introduction of the principle of 
 arbitration, to the continued pros¬ 
 perous state of trade, and predicted 
 that if the act should remain in 
 force and trade become worse, the 
 act would have to be more fre¬ 
 quently put in operation.” 
 
44 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 CHAPTEK IV. 
 
 THE LAW OF CONSPIRACY IN RELATION TO EMPLOYER 
 AND EMPLOYED. 
 
 Although closely connected with the subject of the last 
 chapter, the law of conspiracy in relation to employer and 
 employed having been affected by the legislation of 1875 , 
 it is desirable to give separately a concise statement of its 
 jwevious position. 
 
 Conspiracy has been concisely defined as an agreement 
 to defraud or injure the public or any indmdual person («), 
 or, more fully expressed, the crime of conspiracy con¬ 
 sists in an agreement by two persons (not being husband 
 and wife), or more than two persons, to commit a crime, 
 or fraudulently or maliciously to injure or prejudice the 
 public or any individual person ” (b), and every agree¬ 
 ment to defraud and despoil any other person of any pro¬ 
 perty, and every malicious agreement with intent to injure 
 or prejudice any other in his person, reputation, office, 
 profession, occupation, state or condition in society, or to 
 disturb or annoy him in the possession or exercise of any 
 civil right, or to destroy or damage any of his property,” 
 is within the meaning of the above definition (c). 
 
 ‘‘ The law protecting the relation of master and servant, 
 cmi)loyer and employed, from interference by third parties 
 
 (a) Fourth Report of Criminal 
 Law Commissioners, 1848, under 
 the Commission of 1845. 
 
 (5) Seventh Report of Criminal 
 Law Commissioners, 1843. 
 
 (6*) Ibid. “Conspiracy is the 
 corrupt agreeing together of two 
 or more persons to do, by concerted 
 action, something unlawful, cither 
 
 as a means or an end. The unlaw¬ 
 ful thing must either be such as 
 would be indictable, performed by 
 one alone; or not being such, be of 
 a nature particularly adapted to 
 injure the public or some individual 
 by reason of the combination.” 
 New York Criminal Code Commis¬ 
 sioners, cited 2 Bishop, § 172. 
 
THE LAW OF CONSPlllACY, ETC. 45 
 
 is supplemented by this common law relating to con¬ 
 spiracy. This law becomes applicable not only where 
 two or more persons combine to do any act which is in 
 itself an offence, and would be criminal if done by any 
 one of them, but also in many instances in which the act 
 which is the purpose of the conspiracy if done by one 
 would not be criminal, as, for instance, where several, with 
 the malicious intention to injiue, combine to ^dolate a 
 private right, the violation of which by a single individual, 
 though not criminal, would be wrongful, and would give 
 a right of civil action to the party aggrieved {d). 
 
 The first objection made to the existing law is that it 
 is anomalous and inconsistent, as it enables men to be 
 punished for things as criminal, which, if done by them 
 singly, would not be criminal at all. Secondly, it is 
 objected that this law makes men liable to be more heavily 
 punished, under a charge of conspiracy, for things for 
 which they would be liable only to a less severe punish¬ 
 ment if done by each of them singly, as 'where men are 
 charged with conspiring to do any of the acts made penal 
 by the Criminal Law Amendment Act, and to which a 
 specific punishment is attached by that act. 
 
 A third objection is, that by the application of the law 
 of conspiracy men may be convicted and punished for acts 
 which ought not to be dealt with as offences, and in 
 respect of which the tendency of recent legislation has 
 been to afford immunity from liability to punishment. 
 
 It is suggested that the law of conspiracy should be 
 amended by limiting the offence to cases in which the act, 
 which is the subject of the conspiracy, would be a crime if 
 done by any single individual. Why, it is said, should 
 that be a crime in many, which in one is innocent ? 
 Every act must, in its nature, be either criminal or inno- 
 
 id) Second and Final Report of extract from this report necessarily 
 the Royal Commission on Labour refers to the law as existing previous 
 Laws. It must be observed that the to the Labour Laws of 1876. 
 
 “ existing law ” spoken of in the 
 
46 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 cent. If innocent in A., how does it become criminal 
 because B. joins in committing it ? 
 
 This argument is a very specious one, and at first sight 
 seems to have reason on its side. But those who urge it 
 appear to us to overlook the true ground on which the 
 law is founded and the principle involved in it. Although 
 it is true that an act may form the subject-matter of a 
 charge of conspiracy which would not be a crime in a 
 single individual, it is a mistake to suppose that an act in 
 itself innocent can be made the subject of a charge of con¬ 
 spiracy if done by several. Conspiracy, in the form which 
 we have here to deal mth, always pre-supposes an act or 
 an end in itself criminal or wrongful, or which if done by 
 a single individual w^ould give a right of action, or other 
 civil remedy, as being a violation of another’s right. 
 
 “ Conspiracy may be divided into three classes:—First, 
 Avhere the end to be accomplished would be a crime in 
 each of the conspiring parties, a class which offers no diffi¬ 
 culty. Secondly, where the purpose of the conspiracy is 
 lawful, but the means to be resorted to are criminal, as 
 w here the conspiracy is to support a cause believed to be 
 just by peijured evidence. Here, the proximate or im¬ 
 mediate intention of the parties being to commit a crime, 
 the conspiracy is to do something criminal, and here, 
 again, the case is consequently free from difficulty. The 
 third and last case is, wdiere, with a malicious design to do 
 an injury, the purpose is to effect a wrong, though not 
 such a wrong as when perpetrated by a single individual 
 would amount to an offence under the criminal law. 
 Thus, an attempt to destroy a man’s credit and effect his 
 ruin by spreading reports of his insolvency w^ould be a 
 wTongful act, which would entitle the party wdiose credit 
 w as thus attacked to bring an action as for a civil -wrong; 
 luit it would not be an indictable offence. If it be asked 
 on what principle a combination of several to effect the 
 like wu’ongful purpose becomes an offence, the answer is— 
 upon the same principle that any other civil wrong, when 
 
THE LAW OF CONSPIRACY, ETC. 
 
 47 
 
 it assumes a more aggravated and formidable character, is 
 constituted an offence, and becomes transferred from the 
 domain of the civil to that of the criminal law. All 
 offences, it need hardly be observed, are either in their 
 nature offences against the community, or are primarily 
 offences against individuals. As regards the latter class 
 every offence against person or property or other individual 
 right, involves a civil wrong, which would have entitled 
 the person injured to civil redress, were it not that, owing 
 to the aggravated nature of the wrong, and the general 
 insecurity to society which would ensue from such acts 
 if allowed to go unpunished, the state steps in and, merg¬ 
 ing the wrong done to the party immediately interested in 
 the larger wrong done to the community, converts the 
 wrong done by the infraction of individual right into a 
 crime, and subjects the wrong-doer to punishment, to pre¬ 
 vent, as far as possible, the recurrence of the offence. 
 Thus the dividing line between private wrongs, as entitling 
 the party injured to civil remedies, and private wrongs 
 thus converted into public wTongs, in other words, into 
 offences or crimes, is to be found in the more aggravated 
 and formidable character which the violation of individual 
 rights under given circumstances assumes. It is upon 
 this principle that the law of conspiracy, by which the 
 violation of private right, which if done by one would only 
 be the subject of civil remedy, when done by several is 
 constituted a crime, can be vindicated as necessary and 
 just. It is obvious that a wrongful \dolation of another 
 man’s right committed by many assumes a far more 
 formidable and offensive character than when committed 
 by a single individual. The party assailed may be able 
 by recourse to the ordinary civil remedies to defend him¬ 
 self against the attacks of one. It becomes a very different 
 thing when he has to defend himself against many com¬ 
 bined to do him injury. To take the case, put by way 
 of illustration, that of false representations, made to ruin 
 a man’s business by raising a belief of his insolvency. 
 
48 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 Sucli an attempt made by one might be met and repelled. 
 It would obviously assume very different proportions and 
 a far more formidable character if made by a number of 
 persons confederated together for the purpose, and who 
 should simultaueously, and in a variety of directions, take 
 measures to effect the common purpose. A variety of 
 other instances illustrative of the principle might be put. 
 The law has, therefore, and, as it seems to us, wisely and 
 justly established that a combination of persons to commit 
 a wrongful act with a view to injure another shall be an 
 offence, though the act, if done by one would amount to no 
 more than a civil wrong ” (e). 
 
 It may be observed here, that under a statute of New 
 York, whereby conspiracies are indictable whose object is 
 ‘‘ to commit any act injurious to trade or commerce,” a 
 combination of journeymen workmen of any trade or 
 handicraft, to compel master workmen or other journey¬ 
 men to obey rules established by the conspirators for 
 the regulation of the price of labour, is within the 
 prohibition {f). 
 
 The man who owns an article of trade or commerce 
 is not obliged to sell it for any particular price, nor is the 
 mechanic obliged by law to labour for any particular price. 
 He may say that he will not make coarse boots for less 
 than one dollar per pair; but he has no right to say that no 
 other mechanic shall make them for less. The cloth mer¬ 
 chant may say that he Avill not sell his goods for less than 
 so much per yard; but has no right to say, that any other 
 merchant shall not sell for a less price. If one individual 
 does not possess such a right over the conduct of another, 
 no number of individuals can possess such a right. All 
 combinations, therefore, to effect such an object, are in¬ 
 jurious not only to the individuals particularly oppressed, 
 but to the public at large ” {g). 
 
 (e) Second and Final Report of (/) 14 Wendell, Rep. cited 2 
 the Royal Commission on Labour Bishop, § 226. 
 
 Laws. (^) Id. • 
 
( 49 ) 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 REPORT OF THE ROYAL COMMISSION ON LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 Such was the state of the law on the several subjects 
 mentioned in the preceding pages, when a Royal Com¬ 
 mission was, in March, 1874, appointed to inquire into 
 the working of the Master and Servant Act, 1867, and 
 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act (34 & 35 Viet, 
 c. 32), and whether any, and if any, what amendment or 
 alteration in the provisions of those acts, or either of them, 
 is desirable ; and also to inquire whether it is expedient 
 to limit or define the law relating to conspiracy, either 
 generally, or as affecting the relation of masters and work¬ 
 men ” (a). The Commissioners were required to make 
 their report with as little delay as possible, in order to 
 facilitate immediate legislation, should any be required. 
 
 It is a remarkable circumstance that, nobvithstanding 
 the objection to the then existing law was chiefly by the 
 representatives of the working men, decided opposition 
 was manifested to the inquiry. 
 
 The proceedings under the commission are thus stated 
 by the Commissioners:— 
 
 “ The several branches of our inquiry being in our 
 opinion, though intimately connected, yet sufficiently dis¬ 
 tinct for us to consider them separately, we determined to 
 consider first the Master and Servant Act, 1867, then the 
 
 {a) The Commissioners were Sir 
 Alexander Cockbnm, Chief Justice; 
 Lord Winmarleigh ; the Honour¬ 
 able E. P. Bouverie, M.P.; Russell 
 Gurney, Q.C., Recorder of London, 
 M.P.; Sir Montague Edward Smith, 
 Member of the Judicial Committee 
 D. 
 
 of the Privy Council (late Judge of 
 the Common Pleas) ; J. A. Roebuck, 
 Q.C., M.P.; Thomas Hughes, Q.C.; 
 Gabriel Goldney, M.P.; and Alex¬ 
 ander Macdonald, M.P.; with F. H. 
 Bacon, Barrister-at-Law, as Secre¬ 
 tary. 
 
 E 
 
50 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1871, and finally, the 
 law of conspiracy; and in pursuance of such determina¬ 
 tion, having collected evidence as well documentary as oral 
 on the subject of the Master and Servant Act, 1867, 
 though we did not deem it desirable to make a separate 
 report on that act, we deemed it proper to submit to your 
 Majesty, with our first report the evidence so collected. 
 
 Several years having elapsed since the passing of the 
 Master and Servant Act, we considered it our duty to 
 obtain all the information we could procure as to the 
 practical working of the act, and we took the necessary 
 steps at the outset of our inquiry to procure evidence on 
 this head. In the first place we caused application to be 
 made to the clerks of justices of the peace.of many of the 
 petty sessional divisions of Great Britain and Ireland, at 
 which, as we gathered from returns made to addresses of 
 the honourable the House of Commons in the years 1873 
 and 1874, convictions under the act had taken place, for 
 copies of the depositions in some of those cases, and we 
 were duly supplied Nvith them. 
 
 Considering that the discussion on the merits of the 
 IMaster and Servant Act had been mainly brought about 
 by the objections made against it by the representatives of 
 the working men, and their complaints as to its operation, 
 we deemed it highly desirable to have any facts brought 
 to our attention on which such objections and complaints 
 might be founded. We addressed ourselves to the secre¬ 
 tary of the London Trade Union Congress Parliamentary 
 Committee as representing the interests of the employed, 
 as also to certain associations of employers of labour, who 
 had volunteered to give evidence of the working of the 
 act, inviting them to furnish us with evidence in relation 
 to the act, and to any complaints they were prepared to 
 advance either to its principle or to its administration. 
 
 In reply to such application, very full information as 
 to the working of the act and as to the necessity for it 
 has been afforded to us by many of the employers to whom 
 we addressed ourselves; but we regret to say that, in con- 
 
REPORT OF ROYAL COMMISSION ON LABOUR LAWS. 51 
 
 sequence of the decided opposition to the inquiry made by 
 the representatives of the employed, with some few ex¬ 
 ceptions, we have been unable to obtain the same or similar 
 information from the employed or their representatives. 
 The secretary of the London Trades Union Congress 
 Parliamentary Committee, which represents a very great 
 number of the employed, in reply to the application 
 addressed to him requesting him either himself to give, or 
 to assist us to obtain, evidence of the working of the act, 
 declined to assist the commission in its labours in any 
 way, and only forwarded to us a copy of a resolution 
 passed by that committee to the same effect. We were, 
 however, in spite of this opposition, and chiefly through 
 the influence of one of ourselves, Mr. Macdonald, able to 
 induce two gentlemen, the one the secretary to a trades 
 council in London, the other to a similar body in Glasgow, 
 to appear and give evidence. 
 
 In addition to such evidence, we have examined some 
 gentlemen of great experience in the administration of the 
 laws in question, viz., two of the police magistrates of the 
 metropohs, and a gentleman who had been a police magis¬ 
 trate in the Staffordshire potteries and a stipendiary magis¬ 
 trate at Sheffield for some years ” (5). 
 
 The Commissioners having made a first report submit¬ 
 ting the evidence taken on the Master and Servant Act, 
 1867, made a second and final report in February, 1875, 
 submitting the conclusions at which they arrived on the 
 several subjects under their consideration, together with 
 the further evidence taken (c). 
 
 As to the Master and Servant .Act, 1867. 
 
 After stating the scope of the inquiry on this head, and 
 passing briefly in review the prior legislation on the rela- 
 
 (&) Second and Final Report of report. Where the report speaks of 
 the Royal Commission on Labour a “unanimous ’’ opinion, it refers to 
 Laws, 1875. all who signed it, and this solitary 
 
 (c) Mr. Macdonald, one of the exception must be made. 
 Commissioners, dissented from the 
 
 E 2 
 
52 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 tion of master and servant, leading up to the Master and 
 Servant Act of 1867, and the provisions of that act, the 
 report proceeded thus:— 
 
 From the evidence that has been given before us, it 
 appears that the complaints which are made to the act are 
 to those parts of it which are embodied in the 4th and 9th 
 sections, and the 14th section respectively. 
 
 The objections made against the 9th section are not so 
 much to the redress awarded to a party complaining of 
 breach of contract,—for it is not, and cannot be denied, 
 that the man who without just cause breaks a contract he 
 has entered into should make compensation to the opposite 
 party,—as to the power of the magistrate to impose a fine 
 under it, and to order imprisonment as a means of en¬ 
 forcing any order for the fulfilment of the contract, or for 
 the payment of money which he has directed to be paid. 
 
 With reference to the objection to the power to im¬ 
 prison, it was said that, as the relation of employer and 
 employed arises entirely out of contract, and as, in every 
 other case of contract, the party complaining of a breach 
 of it, and having damages awarded to him, and obtaining 
 judgment, can only obtain an order enabling him to take 
 the party liable to pay such damages in execution if the 
 latter has means to pay and will not, the same rule should 
 apply in the case of the workman failing to perform his 
 contract, and ordered to pay money in compensation ; and 
 that unless such a man had the means of payment no 
 imprisonment should follow. ‘ Why,’ it is asked, ^ if the 
 breach of any other contract, however flagrant, leads to no 
 imprisonment, should a breach of this particular contract 
 be attended Avith that consequence ?’ 
 
 It is, in the first place, to be observed that, as regards 
 orders for the fulfilment of the contract under the 9th 
 section, the basis of the argument fails. The mode in 
 which courts having jurisdiction to order specific per¬ 
 formance enforce their authority in case of disobedience is 
 by imprisonment. There is therefore nothing exceptional 
 
REPORT OF ROYAL COMMISSION ON LABOUR LAWS. 53 
 
 in the application of this remedy in case of disobedience 
 here. 
 
 As regards imprisonment in case of non-compliance 
 with orders for payment of money, it must be admitted 
 that the poAver to imprison is more or less anomalous. 
 
 The relation of master and servant in every form of it, 
 and not the less in that form which relates to employers 
 of labour and their artificers and Avorkmen, arises out of 
 contract. By the law of England a contract gives to the 
 party Avith whom it is made a right to have the contract 
 performed, and a breach of it by non-performance conse¬ 
 quently becomes a wrong. But breach of contract involves 
 no criminality. It is matter of ci\fil remedy only, either 
 by an action to recover damages, or by the order of a 
 court of competent jurisdiction for the specific performance 
 of the contract, where damages will not afibrd an adequate 
 remedy, and the contract is still capable of being fulfilled; 
 and in this respect there is no difference in principle 
 between the contract of hiring and service in general and 
 any other contract. Nevertheless, criminality has been 
 made by the statute law of England to attach to the non¬ 
 performance of the contract of serAuce in respect of hirings 
 of this particular class; and though by the Master and 
 Servant Act of 1867 the criminal character of the breach 
 of such a contract has, in cases falling under the 9th 
 section, been taken away, imprisonment still remains, 
 Avhile on the non-payment of damages for the breach of 
 any other contract it would not, in the absence of proof of 
 means of payment, be available. 
 
 It must be admitted that this distinction is to a certain 
 extent anomalous. If defensible it can only be so as an 
 exceptional case, on the ground of necessity. 
 
 That the breach of such a contract on the part of a 
 person in the employ of another may involve a serious, 
 and where it is accompanied by the concurrent action of 
 others a ruinous, loss to the employer, beyond the imme¬ 
 diate loss arising from the loss of profit on the Avork con- 
 
54 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 traded for, by exposing him to liability for the breach of 
 some contract into which he may have entered, while the 
 loss to the workman will be limited to a temporary loss of 
 employment, is obvious. It is equally so that the remedy 
 by an action for damages by the employer by reason of 
 any such loss, must be nugatory as against the workman, 
 who, in the great majority of instances, has no resources 
 beyond the wages he earns by his labour, nor has he pro¬ 
 perty by seizure of which the damages awarded could be 
 realized. 
 
 Under these circumstances it is obvious that an order 
 for the specific performance of the contract, without the 
 alternative of imprisonment on default of compliance would 
 be wholly ineffectual, and that to take away the power of 
 imprisonment on non-payment of compensation awarded 
 for breach of contract, would be to enable the workman to 
 break his contract with absolute impunity, while the means 
 possessed by the master would, as a rule, insure to the 
 workman, when the complaining party, the payment of 
 damages awarded to him. At the same time it is to be 
 observed that if this should not prove to be the case, the 
 master is equally liable to imprisonment. 
 
 Nor is it enough to say that, in the case of ordinary 
 contracts, if the party against whom damages are awarded 
 for breach of contract should prove to be without means 
 to satisfy the plaintiff, or should become insolvent and 
 unable to pay, the latter remains mthout redress. In 
 the great majority of cases, damages for which a verdict 
 has been given, are in fact recovered. The cases in 
 which the defendant proves unable to satisfy the judgment 
 form the exception. Here it is the other way. Being, 
 generally speaking, dependent on his labour alone, the 
 workman disposed to leave his contract unfulfilled, can 
 only be restrained from doing so by being made liable to 
 imjorisonment. 
 
 It was, no doubt, from such consideration that the 
 older statute law made the breach of such a contract by 
 
REPORT OF ROYAL COMMISSION ON LABOUR LAWS. 55 
 
 labourers, artificers, and others, employed in particular 
 trades, an offence. 
 
 We entirely concur in the view that the mere breach of 
 contract, such as is contemplated by the 9th section of the 
 act, should be divested of all character of criminality, and 
 we therefore recommend that the power of the magistrate 
 to impose a fine under that section, where compensation 
 cannot be assessed, should be taken away. If the com¬ 
 plaining party has sustained or will sustain loss, com¬ 
 pensation can be assessed; if he has not, he has no claim 
 to damages, and the infliction of the fine can only operate 
 by way of punishment, which pre-supposes a criminal 
 act, and not a claim of damages arising from breach of 
 contract. 
 
 Upon the same principle we are decidedly of opinion 
 that, imprisonment being here admissible as a civil remedy 
 only, a party ordered to be imprisoned should not be 
 committed to the House of Correction, where, of course, 
 the restraint is greater and the discipline far more strict, 
 but to the prison, or department of a prison, to which 
 persons imprisoned for debt are usually committed. But, 
 for the reasons we have already given, we cannot advise 
 that imprisonment in the last-mentioned form should be 
 done away with. It is a remedy for civil wrong long 
 known to the law, and though abolished practically as 
 between judgment creditor and debtor by recent legis¬ 
 lation, except under special circumstances, we think that, 
 inasmuch as its abolition, in the particular class of cases 
 we are dealing with, would afford impunity to men if 
 disposed to break their contracts without just cause, often 
 to the serious damage of their employers, it should in 
 cases falling within the 9th section of the act be retained. 
 
 In another respect, it appears to us that the 4th and 
 9th sections might be amended with advantage. They 
 are made to embrace cases of misusage, misdemeanor, 
 misconduct, illtreatment, or injury to person or property. 
 But whatever can properly be called misdemeanor belongs 
 
56 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 to the domain of the criminal law, and should be left to 
 the ordinary tribunals. In like manner the protection of 
 person or property may well be left to the ordinary law. 
 The jurisdiction here conferred should, in our opinion, be 
 limited to matters arising specifically out of the contract 
 entered into between the parties. 
 
 Greater difficulty arises with reference to the 14th 
 section, against which the opposition to the act on the 
 part of the working man is principally directed. 
 
 It is in the first place objected that, owing to the 
 vagueness of the term ^aggravated character,’as applicable 
 to the cases coming within the section, and to the total 
 absence of any indication of the sense in which it was 
 intended that those words should be understood, individual 
 magistrates, acting on their own view of what constitutes 
 aggravation, sometimes treat cases which ought to he 
 dealt with under the 9th section as coming under the 
 14th, holding circumstances to be of an aggravated 
 character which ought not to be so considered. 
 
 It appears that this complaint is not without foundation. 
 The evidence shows that many such cases have occurred. 
 IVe think it is to be regretted that the meaning of the 
 legislature was not more clearly expressed, and we 
 recommend that if this section of the act is to be retained, 
 the limits within which the law is to take effect shall be 
 more clearly defined, and the cases to which it is to be 
 applied more precisely specified and made known. 
 
 A more serious difficulty presents itself in the question 
 whether this section shall be retained or not, a question 
 well deserving of attentive consideration. 
 
 The objection made against the 9th section, that the 
 law is exceptional is here reproduced, and with additional 
 force. It is urged that even if the provisions of the 9th 
 section may be said to be in the nature of a civil remedy, 
 here the proceeding, not having for its object the fulfil¬ 
 ment of the contract, or compensation to the party 
 aggrieved by its non-fulfilment, but simply the punish- 
 
REPORT OF ROYAL COMMISSION ON LABOUR LAWS. 57 
 
 ment of the party for having broken his contract, is, more 
 especially as the imprisonment may be accompanied with 
 hard labour, unmistakably of a penal character, and is 
 therefore altogether exceptional, being at variance with 
 the general law, which, in other cases, leaves breach of 
 contract to be dealt with by the remedies which the civil 
 law affords, but does not make it an offence against the 
 criminal law. 
 
 The position thus taken that this legislation is excep¬ 
 tional, is undeniable. But the question remains whether 
 it is not justified and called for by the special cuxum- 
 stances^and the necessity of the case. 
 
 In considering this question, three things must be 
 assumed as essential to constitute the offence created by 
 such a law. First, that the party breaking his contract 
 does so wilfidly, not only without just cause, but also with¬ 
 out believing that he has just cause for so doing. 
 Secondly, that he does so with the knowledge that by 
 breaking his contract he will entail serious injury, loss, or 
 mischief on the other contracting party. And thirdly, 
 that he knows that he has no means of making compensa¬ 
 tion for the injury or loss so occasioned. The foliovdng 
 instances may be put:—1st. Where a man knows that 
 his employer has a heavy contract on hand which he is 
 bound under penalties or legal liabilities to complete, and 
 knows that his service is necessary to enable the employer 
 to fiilfil his engagement, his place not being capable of 
 being immediately filled. 2nd. Where a man quits his 
 service, knowing that serious injury to his employer’s 
 property wiU result firom his doing so; as, for instance, if 
 the manager of a smelting furnace were to quit his employ¬ 
 ment and cause the going out of the fires and cooling of 
 the metal. 3rd. Where the necessary effect of abandon¬ 
 ing the service is to expose the master’s property to serious 
 injury and loss. 4th. Where the purpose for which the 
 service is abandoned is that of unduly coercing the master 
 in the conduct of his business. On the part of the 
 
58 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 employer we might have a breach of contract in dismiss- 
 ing a workman aggravated by attempts to prevent him 
 from obtaining other employment. 
 
 In all these cases we have in the first place a wrongful 
 act, wilfully and deliberately committed by the party 
 breaking his contract. He is both legally and morally 
 in the wrong; for, independently of legal obligation, com¬ 
 mon honesty, as well as justice, require that engagements 
 once entered into, shall be honestly fulfilled. The mere 
 breach of such an obligation should not, indeed, suffice to 
 bring a person committing it within the reach of the 
 penal law. But when to an act, wrongful in itself, the fact 
 is added that serious injury and mischief are contemplated 
 by the wrong-doer as about to result from it, and are, in 
 fact, likely to result from it, it becomes a question whether 
 for the prevention of the serious mischief which such a 
 violation of contracts would be likely to occasion, a breach 
 of contract accompanied by such circumstances of aggra¬ 
 vation should not be brought within the scope of the penal 
 law. There might be less reason for making such a 
 breach of contract penal if pecuniary compensation com¬ 
 mensurate to the injury caused could be recovered. But 
 here, again, we must assume that in the vast majority of 
 instances pecuniary compensation is out of the question ; 
 and the object of the law must therefore be rather to deter 
 dishonest and unprincipled men from breaches of contract 
 for which they are unable to atone by making compen¬ 
 sation. 
 
 Nor is it sufficient to condemn a law to say it is excep¬ 
 tional. The exception may be founded on special and 
 exceptional circumstances which call for the application of 
 some special remedy. It is a mistake to suppose that this 
 is the only contract the breach of which is made penal by 
 the law. An instance, among others, and one immedi¬ 
 ately in point, is that of merchant seamen, who, having 
 signed articles, in other words, entered into a contract to 
 serve on board a particular ship, become amenable to the 
 
REPORT OF ROYAL COMMISSION ON LABOUR LAWS. 59 
 
 penal law as offenders if they neglect to join, or, having 
 joined, desert. They are liable to imprisonment, and 
 under given circumstances to hard labour. The law is 
 exceptional, but it is justified by the necessity of the case, 
 and the serious mischief and inconvenience which would 
 arise from such engagements being broken. 
 
 The real question is, whether the mischief to be pre¬ 
 vented, arising from breaches of contract under the aggra¬ 
 vated circumstances to which we have been referring, is so 
 serious that the remedy by civil process must be deemed 
 insufficient to deal with it, and the means of preventing it 
 should be sought in the application of the penal law. 
 
 As regards cases of misdemeanor and injury to person 
 or property, other than injury flowing simply from breach 
 of contract, we are clearly of opinion that these cases may 
 well be left to the ordinary law, especially as, in order to 
 bring them within the 14th section, it is required that 
 they should be of an aggi’avated character, and we there¬ 
 fore recommend that these cases, at all events, should be 
 excluded from the operation of the act. 
 
 With reference to other cases of aggravation such as 
 we have herein referred to, while we are sensible of the 
 serious character of such breaches of contract, and are 
 unanimous in thinking that these cases should be treated 
 with greater severity than simple breaches of contract un¬ 
 attended by circumstances of aggravation, and are all 
 agreed that if no sufficient means of preventing them can 
 be found except under the criminal law, the principle of 
 the enactment of the 14th section of the Master and Ser¬ 
 vant Act should be maintained, we are not agreed as to 
 the necessity of applying the criminal law to such cases. 
 Some of our number, feeling the force of the objection 
 founded on the anomalous character of the law by which 
 breach of contract is treated as a criminal offence, and 
 thinking that a sufficient remedy can be found for the 
 prevention of breach of contract, though of an aggravated 
 character, by civil proceeding, are of opinion that it would 
 
60 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 be better that it should be dealt with as falling within the 
 civil rather than the criminal law. To those members of 
 the commission it appears that it would be sufficient if 
 power were given to the justice, in aggravated cases such 
 as we have pointed out, to commit to prison for a longer 
 time, not exceeding six months, in the event of the com¬ 
 pensation he may award not being paid. Such imprison¬ 
 ment to be, as we have suggested in cases now falling 
 Avithin the 9th section, not in a penal but a civil prison, 
 and without hard labour. 
 
 The other members of the commission, impressed with 
 a sense of the serious mischief which may result from 
 such aggravated breaches of contract, are of opinion that 
 the law as it now exists under the 14th section, but subject 
 to the provision hereinafter proposed, of having such cases 
 tried by a jury at the option of the party accused, should 
 be maintained. Being nearly equally divided on this 
 point, Ave content ourselves with submitting both these 
 vieAvs for consideration, leaving it to the wisdom of the 
 legislature to decide between them.” 
 
 After stating that besides the objections raised to the 
 substantive enactments of the 4th, 9th, and 14th sections 
 of the act, complaints Avere made as to its administration, 
 and remarking that the act had been misconstrued and 
 misunderstood in many points (^/), the Beport proceeded :— 
 
 NotAvithstanding these complaints and difficulties we 
 think it is abundantly proved by the evidence that a speedy 
 remedy for breaches of contract, such as is provided by 
 the summary procedure of the act, is absolutely necessary. 
 It has been suggested that the jurisdiction over these cases 
 should be transferred from justices of the peace to the 
 county court {e ); but, considering the extent of the cir¬ 
 cuits allotted to the judges of these courts^—the only other 
 
 {d) See ante, p. 25. of the county courts in most places, 
 
 ((?) The suggestion was, a& far as and an increase in the number of 
 I am aware, only made, coupled with the judges, 
 the idea of a more frequent sitting 
 
REPORT OF ROYAL COMMISSION ON LABOUR LAWS. 61 
 
 tribunal suggested in substitution of the justices—and the 
 intervals at which their courts are held, we think the 
 transfer of jurisdiction to them would be highly inconve¬ 
 nient, and, except in places where there are stipendiary 
 magistrates, it would be impossible to find any other 
 tribunal before which these cases could be heard with 
 equal cheapness and despatch. 
 
 We certainly think that in places where there are 
 stipendiary magistrates, cases between master and servant 
 arising under this act, or any other which may be sub¬ 
 stituted for it, should be determined by such stipendiary 
 magistrates alone. Where there are no such magistrates, 
 we think the jurisdiction, so far, at all events as regards 
 cases arising under the 4th and 9th sections, should re¬ 
 main where it is. 
 
 A different consideration may arise with reference to 
 cases coming under the 14th section, if it should be deter¬ 
 mined to maintain that section. 
 
 As the bdl was originally introduced into the House 
 of Commons, it was proposed to leave the administration 
 of the criminal clause in the act to the quarter sessions in 
 England, Wales, or Ireland, and to justices of quarter ses¬ 
 sions in Scotland; and we are disposed to think that, 
 involving, as it practically does, an offence punishable 
 with three months’ imprisonment, possibly with hard 
 labour, it should be at the option of a party complained 
 against under this section of the act to claim to be tried by 
 a jury, in which case the jurisdiction of justices of the 
 peace in petty sessions should be confined to binding over 
 the defendant and remitting the case to the quarter ses¬ 
 sions. 
 
 We have only one or two further observations to offer 
 before concluding this part of our report. 
 
 During the course of our inquiry it was suggested 
 that all contracts for service of any sort should be in 
 writing, and that the act and the remedies provided by it 
 should only apply to written and not to parol contracts; 
 
62 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 but from the evidence it appeared clear that while by far 
 the greater number of the contracts that had been the 
 subject of proceedings under this act were parol contracts, 
 a dispute on either side as to what the effect of the con¬ 
 tract was scarcely ever arose. We think that the neces¬ 
 sity of having written contracts would occasion unnecessary 
 embarrassment and trouble in the dealings of employers 
 and men, and we are not prepared to recommend any 
 alteration in this respect.” 
 
 After a reference to the question of the power to recover 
 wages under the Act of 1867, the Commissioners said :— 
 
 Subject to the modifications Ave have suggested, and by 
 Avhich, if adopted, in all cases of simple breach of contract 
 betAveen employer and employed—leaving those of a more 
 dishonest and reprehensible character to be dealt with as 
 Parliament shall deem fit—the proceedings taken under 
 the act Avill be altogether divested of a penal character, 
 and assume that of a civil proceeding for specific perform¬ 
 ance or the recovery of damages, we beg to recommend that 
 the Master and Servant Act shall, subject to such amend¬ 
 ments, be continued, unless, indeed, it should be deemed 
 more advisable to substitute for it one framed in clearer 
 and more perspicuous language, Avhich, looking to the 
 confused language of the act and the difficulties which 
 have arisen in its administration, Ave venture decidedly to 
 recommend.” 
 
 Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1871. 
 
 Passing to this subject, and giAnng a summary of the 
 combination laws (/), and adverting to the opposite views 
 of employers and employed on the Act of 1871, as exhi¬ 
 bited in the eAudence given on the commission (^), the 
 report proceeded to deal A\dth the statute on its merits, and 
 to consider whether its repeal, or any modification of its 
 provisions, was desirable;— 
 
 (/) See ante, pp. 29—41. 
 
 (^) See ante, pp. 49—51. 
 
REPORT OF ROYAL COMMISSION ON LABOUR LAWS. 63 
 
 “ may begin by observing at the outset that it does 
 not appear to have occurred to any one to say that any of 
 the acts made penal by this statute should be permitted. 
 It seems impossible to deny that, while freedom should be 
 given to men willing to enter into such a confederacy as a 
 trade union, and to be bound by its rules, and to submit 
 their individual will and freedom of action to the direction 
 of the whole, the object of the law should be equally to 
 secure perfect freedom of action to those who do not think 
 proper to join such a confederacy, who choose to act for 
 themselves, and who are desirous of accepting employment 
 on other terms than those insisted on by the body. To 
 permit a body of men to interfere with individual freedom 
 in the matter of employment or labour by any of the 
 means specified in the act, would be to allow the freedom 
 which should be protected by law to be tyrannically and 
 unjustly violated. 
 
 Nor is the interference with individual rights by the 
 conduct thus made penal the only ground on which its 
 prevention is called for; public policy requires that in the 
 relation of capital and labour, as in every other depart¬ 
 ment of trade, free competition should be insured. The 
 demands of a body of men acting in combination may be 
 excessive. The remedy of the employer is to be found in 
 the possible willingness of others to accept employment on 
 more reasonable terms. 
 
 The true principles on which any legislation on this 
 important matter should be based are stated with so much 
 wisdom and justice in the report of the Commissioners of 
 1867, that, as it is now some years since that report was 
 given to the public, we are led to reproduce it. 
 
 ^ (60.) With regard to the general question of the right 
 of workmen to combine together for determining and sti¬ 
 pulating with their employer the terms on which only they 
 will consent to work for him, we think that, provided the 
 combination be perfectly voluntary, and that full liberty 
 be left to all other workmen to undertake the work which 
 
64 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 the parties combining have refused, and that no obstruction 
 be placed in the way of the employer resorting elsewhere 
 in search of a supply of labour, there is no ground of 
 justice or of policy for withholding such a right from the 
 workmen. It cannot be doubted that a demand, backed 
 by the resolution of a large body of workmen to decline 
 work if the demand be not acceded to, comes with more 
 force than that of an isolated workman; and we think that 
 the workmen may reasonably claim to be allowed any 
 advantage which they can derive from such concerted 
 action, in bargaining with their employer from time to 
 time as to the terms on which they will dispose of their 
 labour. 
 
 ^ (61.) In every bargain there is, more or less, a struggle 
 between the buyer and the seller, the seller desiring to get 
 as much as he can, and the buyer to pay as little as pos¬ 
 sible ; but, as between the employer and the workman, 
 there is in general this advantage on the side of the 
 employer, that he can more easily wait— i. e,, can hold out 
 longer than the workman. Moreover, the holding out 
 singly of any one workman out of a large number does 
 not much affect the employer: his works go on, though 
 perhaps not in complete efficiency, until a further supply 
 of labour is obtained; but the workman is generally in 
 such a position that he must staiwe unless he either accept 
 the terms offered, or is able speedily to find work else¬ 
 where. He in general cannot wait. It is to redress this 
 inequality that the power of combining is justified by the 
 promoters of trades unions. 
 
 ^ (62.) But upon the same principle, and for a precisely 
 similar reason, we think that whilst conceding to such 
 workmen as desire to exercise it an extended right to 
 combine against their employers, especial care should be 
 taken that an equal right be secured to those workmen 
 who desire to keep aloof from the combination, to dispose 
 of their labour with perfect freedom as they severally 
 think fit. The power of working, and consequently the 
 
REPORT OF ROYAL COMMISSION ON LABOUR LAWS. G5 
 
 value of a man’s labour, varies in different individuals 
 according to their strength, their skill, and their industry. 
 The workmen who think it for their advantage to com¬ 
 bine together in the disposal of their labour are no more 
 justified in constraining any other workman, who does not 
 desire such association, to combine with them—to bring 
 his labour into common stock, as it were, with theirs— 
 than an association of capitalists in constraining an indi¬ 
 vidual capitalist to bring his capital into common stock 
 with theirs ; and it is the more important that the law 
 should protect the non-unionist workman in his right 
 freely to dispose of his labour as he thinks fit, because, 
 standing alone, he is the less able to protect himself 
 ^(63.) AYe do not attach any weight to an argument 
 which is sometimes adduced in favour of the right of com¬ 
 bination—viz., that such a power is required for protecting 
 the workmen against the use by employers of dangerous 
 machinery, for resisting the truck system, and for pro¬ 
 tecting women and children. These, we think, are matters 
 to he regulated by law, so far as regulation is required ; 
 but it may well be argued that the practice of combination 
 amongst workmen may be useful for the purpose of aiding 
 the law in the repression of those practices; the existing 
 law, whether sufficient in itself or otherwise, having been 
 found in some cases difficult of enforcement. 
 
 ^(64.) All that, as it appears to us, the law has to do, 
 over and above any protection that may be required for 
 classes unable to protect themselves, such as women and 
 children, is to secure a fair field for the unrestricted 
 exercise of industrial enterprise. It should recognize the 
 right in the labourer to dispose of his labour, the capitalist 
 of his capital, and the employer of his productive powers, 
 in whatever manner each of them, acting either indi¬ 
 vidually or in association with others, may deem for his 
 own interest; and that without reference to the question 
 whether he is acting wisely for his own interest, or advan¬ 
 tageously to the public, or the contrary. The interest of 
 D. F 
 
66 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 the public will be best consulted by allowing each of these 
 parties to do what he thinks best for himself, without 
 further interference of the law than may be necessary to 
 protect the rights of others.’ 
 
 It cannot be denied that the violent and unjustifiable 
 means made penal by the act have frequently been resorted 
 to for the purpose of coercing both masters and individual 
 workmen. The outrages of Sheffield and Manchester are 
 still fresh in remembrance; and though the former went 
 far beyond what the present act was intended to prevent, 
 and came within the reach of the criminal law, certain 
 forms of molestation, such as ^ rattening,’ in other words 
 depriving a man of his tools, so as to take away from 
 him the power of working, were then, as is well known, 
 largely resorted to. Of ‘ picketing,’ another form of 
 molestation extensively used in times of strike, the Com¬ 
 missioners of 1867 give the following account:— 
 
 ‘ (68.) It has been shown in evidence that these rights 
 are most liable to be interfered with by what is commonly 
 known as the system of ^picketing.’ Picketing consists 
 in posting members of the union at all the approaches to 
 the works struck against, for the purpose of observing and 
 reporting the workmen going to or coming from the 
 works, and of using such influence as may be in their 
 power to prevent the workmen from accepting work 
 there. 
 
 ^ (69.) It is alleged that instructions are given to the 
 pickets to confine themselves to a mere representation of 
 the case of the union promoting the strike, and to use 
 argument and persuasion only, vdthout resorting to 
 violence, intimidation, or undue coercion. But although 
 such instructions may be given, it is hardly in human 
 nature that the pickets, who are interested parties and 
 who are suffering the privations incident to the strike, 
 should always keep within the fair limits of representation 
 and persuasion, when dealing with men whom they see 
 about to undertake the work which they have refused, and 
 
REPORT OF ROYAL COMMISSION ON LABOUR LAWS. 67 
 
 who may thus render the strike abortive. Accordingly, 
 experience shows, and the evidence before us leaves no 
 doubt on our minds, that during the existence of a strike, 
 workmen desirous to accept work are often subjected, 
 through the agency of the pickets, to molestation, intimi¬ 
 dation, and other modes of undue influence, and in effect 
 are prevented from obtaining employment. 
 
 ^ (70.) So far as relates to members of the union pro¬ 
 moting the strike, the pickets cannot be necessary if the 
 members are voluntarily concun’ing therein; so far as 
 relates to workmen who are not members of the union, 
 picketing implies in principle an interference with their 
 right to dispose of their labour as they think fit, and is, 
 therefore, without justification; and so far as relates to 
 the employer, it is a violation of his right of free resort to 
 the labour market for the supply of such labour as he 
 requires. 
 
 ^(71.) The abuses to which the system of picketing leads 
 were made evident in a remarkable manner in the case of 
 the London tailors’ strike in the spring of the year 1867, 
 when proceedings were instituted against some of the men 
 who had taken an active part as pickets, or in organizing 
 the system. The result of these proceedings was numerous 
 committals by the metropolitan police magistrates, and 
 finally the trial, on August 21, before Mr, Baron 
 Bramwell in the Central Criminal Court, of several of 
 the leaders of the operative tailors’ union, who were found 
 guilty of conspiracy. The fact is, that pickets, whilst 
 attempting to keep within the law as to outrage and 
 intimidation, as the representatives of the better con¬ 
 ducted imions state that the pickets are instructed to do, 
 may almost as efiectually work on the fears of the timid, 
 either directly or through the female members of their 
 families, and prevent them from exercising their freewill 
 in the disposal of their labour, as if they threatened 
 \dolence; and in this way the influence so exercised be¬ 
 comes a tyranny of the worst sort.’ 
 
68 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 Nor is it enough to say that the great majority of the 
 trade unions would not think of sanctioning any such pro¬ 
 ceedings. The law is not made to restrain those who do 
 right, but those who but for its restraint would be ready to 
 do wrong. Experience has made us familiar with the 
 instances in which, at the instigation or with the sanction 
 of trades unions, attempts have been made to coerce 
 masters, or other workmen, by the reprehensible means 
 against which the act is directed. At all times the 
 natural tendency of such combinations must be to seek to 
 extend their power by drawing all others belonging to the 
 same trade into their body. The greater their numbers, 
 the greater their wealth and power, the less will be the 
 ability of the employer to procure other workmen to resist 
 them. It is notorious that in some of the more powerful 
 unions the men refuse to work for masters who employ 
 men who do not belong to the union, thus coercing the 
 masters to employ only men belonging to the union, and 
 compelling all who belong to the trade to become members 
 of the union and submit to its dictation. This, though 
 obviously operating in restraint of the freedom of trade, 
 is no more than necessarily flows from the right, now fully 
 admitted, of every man to dispose of his labour as he thinks 
 proper, and to combine wdth others in order to obtain the 
 best terms he can. But beyond this, the power of inter¬ 
 fering with the perfect freedom of masters and other work¬ 
 men ought not to be suffered to go; especially in the 
 obnoxious forms of coercion against which the statute is 
 directed. The danger is that with the tendency before 
 referred to there must always be a desire to bring every 
 one belonging to the particular trade under the govern¬ 
 ment and control of the union, and though the better con¬ 
 ducted unions would deprecate recourse to lawless means 
 to effect that end, others may, nevertheless, especially in 
 time of strikes, prove to be less scrupulous. That in times 
 of strike, the forms of coercion against which the act is 
 directed—violence, injury to person or property, threats of 
 
REPORT OF ROYAL COMxMISSION ON LABOUR LAWS. 69 
 
 personal injurrattening, personal molestation, or as it is 
 termed ^ picketing,’—have been on past occasions largely 
 resorted to, is notorious. And though a better state of 
 feeling now exists, it cannot, we think, be doubted that, at 
 a time of excitement, when men’s passions are roused, 
 such things, unless repressed by the law, are not unlikely 
 to recur. Yet it is precisely at this time, when by com¬ 
 bined action the men are seeking to bring the employer to 
 their terms, that free competition in the labour market is 
 essential to determine which side is in the right and ought 
 to prevail. 
 
 That the conduct which is made penal by the act is an 
 outrage on the rights of others, and ought to be repressed 
 by law, does not seem to be seriously disputed; and the 
 objections take a different shape from that of denying 
 either the unlawful character of such acts, or claiming for 
 them immunity from punishment. The objections urged 
 appear to us, we must say, of a very shado^vy and unsu]> 
 stantial character. 
 
 The first is that the men feel aggrieved at the act 
 being specially directed against them. ‘ If,’ it is said, 
 
 ^ this is to be the law, let it be equally directed against 
 every form in which men may be coerced into doing that 
 which, if left to their own freewill, they would not do.’ 
 
 Though this objection may be said to be a matter of 
 sentiment rather than of appreciable grievance, we should 
 not be unwilling to give effect to the desire to have the 
 scope of the law made more general, if we could see any 
 other instances of coercion to which such a law would be 
 applicable. But no other instances of a tangible character 
 present themselves in which attempts are made by violence, 
 obstruction, or molestation, to prevent men from carrying 
 on their business or calling. Nowhere but in the labour 
 market is free competition sought to be prevented by un¬ 
 warrantable means. A remedial law, intended to suppress 
 a particular mischief, must direct the remedy to the 
 quarter from which the mischief proceeds. Its terms and 
 
70 
 
 THE T.ABOUR LAWS. 
 
 operation should be large enough to embrace the mischief 
 in every form and in every quarter in which it presents 
 itself. But it seems idle to say that where the mischief 
 arises among a particular class, it should not be repressed 
 by legislation, because the sensitiveness of that class may 
 feel hurt or offended at the law being apparently directed 
 against it. 
 
 Again, it is said that this legislation is special and 
 exceptional, being applicable to the case of employers and 
 employed alone. If this be true, the answer is that the 
 circumstances which have called the law into existence 
 are also special and exceptional. A new form of inter¬ 
 ference with personal freedom has arisen. The power 
 conceded by the law to large bodies of men to combine 
 for the protection of their interests has led to an abuse of 
 the power acquired by combination, by enabling them to 
 interfere with other men’s rights, and in a manner incon¬ 
 sistent with the public good. To meet this abuse, and 
 the mischief resulting from it, being a new form of private 
 wrong and of public evil, a law specially adapted to the 
 circumstances has been found necessary. If the law is 
 special so are the circumstances 'which have called for it. 
 It may be exceptional, but it is not on that account the 
 less necessary for the protection of private rights and of 
 the public interest. 
 
 Another point, of which much has been made, is one 
 Avhich has reference more immediately to the matter of 
 picketing. It is said that the act does not deal fairly as 
 between the masters and the men ; that the masters are 
 enabled by means of their so called ‘ black lists,’ trans¬ 
 mitted to one another, to exclude men who have given 
 them offence, and that the workmen by picketing are 
 only exercising a similar power. But we fail to see any 
 analogy between the two cases. The masters in sending 
 out their so called ‘ black lists,’ are using no means to 
 coerce those whom they address. They are doing no 
 more than the unionists do, and are entitled to do, when 
 
REPORT OF ROYAL COMMISSION ON LABOUR LAAVS. 7 1 
 
 they determine among themselves not to work for a par¬ 
 ticular master, or with particular men, and take the 
 necessary steps to inform other workmen of such their 
 determination. ^VTiat the act strikes at, Avhether in 
 masters or men, is violence, intimidation, personal moles¬ 
 tation. The interchange of black lists has nothing in 
 common with the use of obnoxious means of that 
 description. 
 
 Exception is next taken to the language of the act. It 
 is said that intimidation is not sufficiently defined. In 
 answer it is to be observed that the operation of the act 
 is expressly confined to cases where the party, if brouglit 
 before a justice of the peace, might be bound over to keep 
 the peace—an application of magisterial authority not 
 unfrequent—and of which it must be taken that a justice 
 of the peace at all acquainted with law, would well under¬ 
 stand the meaning, as applying to threats of personal 
 injury or violence. We have no reason to think there 
 has been any miscarriage of justice by reason of misappre¬ 
 hension as to the meaning of this part of the section. 
 
 It was alleged that the provision against picketing was 
 too general; that picketing might sometimes be perfectly 
 innocent, and on some occasions absolutely necessaiy for 
 the protection of the union. That, for instance, when the 
 union Avas on strike it would be necessary to keep watch 
 to see that men receiving pay from it, as being on strike, 
 did not take work, and thus defraud the body. But the 
 answer is obvious. Such a case ought certainly not to 
 be held to be within the act, which makes molestation 
 penal only when used for the purpose of coercion. 
 
 Again, it is alleged that too loose a construction has 
 been put on this part of the act, and that language 
 addressed to a man for the purpose of persuading him has 
 been held to be molestation with a view to coerce. 
 
 If, however, such a construction, which would un¬ 
 doubtedly be too large, should ha\^e been put on the act, 
 the fault is not in the statute, the language of which is 
 
72 
 
 THE LABOUR LAAVS. 
 
 sufficiently clear and precise. The fault has lain with 
 those who have administered it, and who, in some instances, 
 in their desire to give full effect to a salutary law, may 
 have been led to strain it too far. The law on this subject 
 was very clearly laid down by Mr. Justice Lush in the 
 case of the Queen against Shepherd and others, which 
 Avas tried at the Central Criminal Court, at the January 
 sessions, 1869 (A). In that case the defendants were 
 indicted for a conspiracy (founded on the act of 6 Geo. 4, 
 c. 129, s. 3) to force workmen to leave their employment, 
 the evidence being that the defendants merely waited 
 outside the place where the Avorkmen Avere employed, and 
 tried to induce them not to Avork there, their conduct 
 being peaceable, orderly, and cml. The learned judge, 
 in summing up the case to the jury, pointed out the 
 distinction between force put upon the Avill of another by 
 violence, intimidation, or molestation, and persuasion used 
 as a means of influencing the will, obserAung on. the 
 difference between the case then before him and one 
 which he had tried at Leeds, in Avhich the parties, 
 charged under a similar indictment, had abused their 
 fellow Avorkmen, shouted and hooted at them, and had 
 been otherwise violent in their conduct. Finally, he 
 directed the jury, if they should be of opinion that the 
 defendants had done no more than employ persuasion, to 
 acquit them, Avhich the jury accordingly did. BeheAung 
 this to be the true exposition of the law, Ave cannot doubt 
 that the ruling of the learned judge Avill be followed in 
 any similar case.” 
 
 After adverting to the exclusion, by the act, of magis¬ 
 trates connected with the particular trade, and that an 
 impression appeared, notAvithstanding, to prevail, that 
 especially in places AAdiere manufacturing business is carried 
 on, and such cases arise, the magistrates being taken from 
 the class to Avhich the masters belong, have a natural leaning 
 in their favour,”—the report concluded this branch of the 
 {h) Reported in Cox’s Criminal Law Cases, xi., p. 325. 
 
REPORT OF ROYAL COMMISSION ON LABOUR LAWS. 73 
 
 inquiry by saying, Here, again, we think it would be 
 an improvement if, as we have suggested in regard to 
 the 14th section of the Master and Servant Act, 1867, an 
 option were given to the party complained against, of 
 taking the case, if so advised, to the quarter sessions, and 
 having it there tried by a jury. With this exception we 
 see no reason for a repeal or alteration of the act in 
 question, which we believe to be usehil and necessary for 
 the purpose of securing the independence and rights of 
 those whom it is intended to protect.” 
 
 Law of Conspiracy. 
 
 On this subject, after stating the general application of 
 the law, and that the Commissioners were directed “to 
 consider whether it is desirable to limit or define the law 
 either generally or as affecting the relation of masters and 
 workmen,” they proceeded : 
 
 “ The scope and purpose of this commission being, as 
 we understand it, to inquire into the law affecting the 
 relation of master and servant, it appears to us that any 
 inquiry into the law of conspiracy can be necessary only 
 so far as that relation is affected by the law in question. 
 If it should appear desirable, as we recommend in a subse¬ 
 quent part of this report, to alter or modify that part of 
 the law of conspiracy which is now applicable to the case 
 of master and servant, we should think it preferable to 
 make such case an exception to the general law rather 
 than to disturb and unsettle the general law on account of 
 its bearing and operation on the class of cases with which 
 we have here to deal. 
 
 The primary question is, whether any change should be 
 made in the law as it affects the relation of master and 
 servant.” 
 
 After adverting to the objections made to the existing 
 law, and the misconceptions on the subject, and that the 
 law had, and, as it seemed to the Commissioners, wisely 
 and justly, established that a combination of persons to 
 
74 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 commit a wrongful act with a view to injure another, shall 
 be an offence, though the act, if done by one, would amount 
 to no more than a civil wrong (z), the report proceeded: 
 
 We see no reason to question the propriety of the 
 law as thus established, nor have we any reason to believe 
 that in its general application it operates otherwise than 
 beneficially. Whether there are cases in which, on a 
 correct view of the law, parties may be held liable on a 
 charge of conspiracy, where the end is not wrongful, or 
 the means to be used criminal, is a matter into which we 
 do not think it necessary to inquire, as, if such be the law, 
 which we greatly doubt, we are prepared, as we shall state 
 further on, to recommend that, as respects the contract of 
 hiring and service, and the relation of master and servant, 
 the law should be amended. 
 
 We have next to consider whether there is any ground 
 for saying that the application of the law of conspiracy to 
 any combination, having for its object to interfere wrong¬ 
 fully with rights acquired, or sought to be acquired under 
 a contract of hiring and service, is either unjust or inex¬ 
 pedient. 
 
 Bearing in mind that to bring a case within the law 
 of conspiracy there must be, as in all other offences, a 
 wrongful purpose, in violation of the rights of others, is 
 there anything peculiar in this particular class of cases 
 which should entitle it to exceptional favour? For it 
 must be remembered that the application of the law of 
 conspiracy to cases having reference to the relation of 
 master and servant is not exceptional, but results from the 
 general law ; and that those who ask for a modification of 
 the law do so, not because they object to it as applied to 
 tlie rest of the subjects of the realm, but in the special in¬ 
 terest of the unionist workman as likely to fall within it. 
 
 Let us consider what are the sort of cases in which a 
 combination to interfere wrongfully with rights relating to 
 hiring and service would fall under the head of conspiracy. 
 (i) See a?ite, p. 45. 
 
REPORT OF ROYAL COMMISSION ON LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 75 
 
 Suppose that workmen, in the service of a given em¬ 
 ployer, were, with the view of injuring a master who 
 had displeased them, to agree with one another, pending 
 the service, to quit their emplojunent in a body, thereby 
 rendering him unable to flilfil his engagemente. The end 
 would be wrongful, as would also be the means, as eacli 
 man would induce the other to break his contract, and 
 each so breaking it would be individually liable to an 
 action. Is there any reason why the law should be altered 
 to afford immunity to persons thus acting? Or let us 
 suppose that workmen should in like manner combine to 
 break their contracts by abruptly leaving their sendee, 
 with a view to any of the purposes which legislative expo¬ 
 sition has, in the Criminal Law Amendment Act, declared 
 to be wrongful, viz., in order to coerce a master to cany 
 on his business in a particular way, or to dismiss, or not to 
 dismiss, a particular workman, or, as the alternative, to 
 subject him to injury or inconvenience resulting from the 
 stoppage of his works, as was occasioned in the gas 
 stokers’ case. Or suppose that a trade union, or other 
 body of men, for any of the foregoing purposes should" 
 combine to induce the workmen of a particular master to 
 break their engagements and leave him; or by misrepre¬ 
 sentation, or any other wrongful means, to prevent work¬ 
 men not belonging to their own body from taking service 
 under him, so as to stop him from caiTying on his busi¬ 
 ness. Or suppose a similar confederacy entered into to 
 prevent by Avrongful means a workman from getting Avork, 
 and so ruining him. The question is, whether in cases in 
 which a combination is formed by wrongful action to 
 effect wrongful ends, a law applicable to the rest of the 
 community should be relaxed in favour of a class Avho, in 
 times of struggle betAveen employed and employers, Avill 
 be peculiarly exposed to the temptation to avail them¬ 
 selves of the formidable poAver which union and numbers 
 arm them with to interfere with the rights of others. 
 
 Nor must it be forgotten that this is a matter in 
 
76 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 whicli tlie public interest is deeply involved. The breach 
 of contract by the gas stokers threatened London with 
 darkness. The supply of water might in like manner be 
 stopped. And there are many other cases in which the 
 supply of things essential to the public well-being might 
 in a moment be cut off by an unlawful combination of the 
 workmen, or other servants of public companies or con¬ 
 tractors, to break their engagements. The railway traffic 
 on a great line might be suddenly stopped by the con¬ 
 certed action of the persons employed on it. 
 
 It may be said that men in the employ of persons con¬ 
 tracting Avith the public enter into no engagement with the 
 public, and are under no obligation towards it. This is 
 true, but the very serious consequences just referred to, as 
 possibly resulting from the combinations we have been 
 speaking of, appear to us to afford an additional reason for 
 not altering a law by which confederacies of this kind, 
 entered into for no legitimate purpose and fraught with 
 mischievous consequences, may be kept in check. 
 
 The great interest which the public has in the due per¬ 
 formance of contracts entered into for its accommodation 
 makes it not unreasonable that men who enter into the 
 service of those who contract with it, should be held 
 responsible criminally for combining to break contracts 
 where public mischief or inconvenience must result from 
 a concerted and abrupt breach of their engagements. 
 
 To the objection that, under an indictment for con¬ 
 spiracy, men may be more severely punished for the 
 offences punishable under the Criminal Law Amendment 
 Act, than if proceeded against under that act, the answer 
 we think is, that the same offences as are there made 
 subject to particular penalties when committed by in¬ 
 dividuals become far more serious when committed by 
 persons acting in combination, and therefore may properly 
 be visited with severer punishment. 
 
 There is a greater difficulty in dealing with the third 
 head of objection, namely, that by the application of the 
 
REPORT OF ROYAL COMMISSION ON LABOUR LAWS. 77 
 
 law of conspiracy men are made criminally liable for acts 
 which are no longer penal under, the statute law, and which 
 ought not to be penally prohibited at all. It is urged 
 that by the rulings of the judges in one or two cases 
 recently tried, the proviso in 1st section of the Criminal 
 Law Amendment Act has been so construed as to deprive 
 it of any practical value, and to leave men still liable 
 to be indicted by the application of the general law of 
 conspiracy for acts in respect of which the legislature, 
 it is said, meant to afford immunity from punishment. 
 
 As an instance of this, Mr. Baron Pollock, in a case of 
 conspiracy tried before him at the summer assizes at 
 Leeds in 1874, is reported to have directed the jury that 
 if several workmen combined not to work with a particular 
 person, and refused to work for an employer unless he 
 dismissed that workman, this would amount to a con¬ 
 spiracy at common law, a doctrine which would of course 
 equally apply to masters agreeing not to employ a 
 particular workman, unless he left a particular society or 
 union. We abstain from expressing any opinion as to 
 the correctness of the law as reported to have been thus 
 laid down ; we content ourselves with saying that, assum¬ 
 ing the law to be as thus stated, we are of opinion that 
 it requires amendment. Labour being free, we think 
 that men ought to be at perfect liberty, when not 
 under contract, to agree among themselves not to work 
 for a particular master, or with a particular workman who 
 may be obnoxious to them; and that masters should in 
 like manner be free to agree with one another, not to 
 employ particular men. There can be no possible doubt 
 of the right of each individual, not bound by contract, in 
 the exercise of his own free will, to refuse to employ 
 or to work for or with anyone to Avhom he objects. There 
 being nothing wrongful in such refusal, we fail to see how 
 the agreement of several to the same effect, unaccom¬ 
 panied by any other circumstances of coercion, can be 
 constituted a crime. 
 
78 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 We, are, therefore, of opinion that the immunity con¬ 
 tained in the proviso in the Criminal Law Amendment 
 Act^ in the sense in which it has been construed, is too 
 limited, and we also think it is expressed in too general 
 terms, and that a more definite enactment is required. 
 
 We therefore recommend that legislative provision 
 should be made to the effect that no person shall be liable 
 to be indicted for conspiracy, by reason only of the object 
 of the combination being to force or control the action or 
 Avill of any master or workman, in any matter relating to 
 the mode of carrying on his business or work, unless the 
 means of coercion to be resorted to shall be one of those 
 mentioned in the Criminal Law Amendment Act, or be 
 the wilfully breaking or procuring others to break any 
 contract of hiring and service, and unless the object of 
 such coercion shall be one of the purposes set forth in 
 that act. 
 
 Whilst proposing thus to limit the cases in which men 
 shall be liable to be indicted, on the ground that the object 
 is to interfere with the will of others in the conduct of 
 their business or work, we have thought it right to add 
 to the wrongful means set forth in the Criminal Law 
 Amendment Act, that of wilful breaches of contract. It 
 appears to us that when men combine to coerce by such 
 means they may properly be made subject to the law of 
 conspiracy, since both the end and the means are, in our 
 opinion, for the reasons given in a former part of our 
 report, wrongful. 
 
 It is right to point out that the enactment we propose 
 is not intended to give, and should be so framed as not to 
 afford, immunity to persons who may conspire to injure 
 another in cases where the means resorted to for the pur¬ 
 pose would constitute criminal conspiracy independently 
 of any intention to coerce;—for instance, if persons com¬ 
 bine to defame a man, or to induce him by false repre¬ 
 sentation to do an act to his prejudice, they would still be 
 liable to be indicted for conspiracy, although one of the 
 
REPORT OF ROYAL COMMISSION ON LABOUR LAWS. 79 
 
 objects might be to coerce; for apart from that object, the 
 means being criminal or wrongful, the offence, without it, 
 would be complete. 
 
 With this exception we are not prepared to recom¬ 
 mend any alteration in the law of conspiracy, either in 
 general or in its application to combinations coming within 
 the scope of the laws relating to labour. 
 
 The result, then, of the best consideration we have 
 been able to give to the matters submitted to us is as 
 follows:— 
 
 As regards the Master and Servant Act, we recom¬ 
 mend that in aU simple breaches of contract the summary 
 jurisdiction provided by the act should be divested of 
 everything of a penal character, and be entirely of a civil 
 nature. That the distinction between simple breach of 
 contract and breach accompanied by circumstances of 
 aggravation should be maintained, and that if the latter 
 shall remain subject to the same penalties as at present, 
 a party complained against should have the option of 
 taking the case to the quarter sessions to be tried by a 
 jury; and that if the latter shall be made the subject of 
 civil remedy only, the maximum of imprisonment shall 
 be increased to six months. 
 
 That as regards the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 
 the statute should remain unaltered, with the exception of 
 the same provision as we propose with reference to cases 
 arising under the 14th section of the Master and Servant 
 Act, of having the case tried by a jury at the option of 
 the party accused. 
 
 As regards the law of conspiracy, we recommend 
 that the alteration we have suggested should be made, but 
 we are not prepared to recommend any other alteration in 
 the law.” 
 
80 
 
 THE LABOUR LAAVS. 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 THE LEGISLATION OF 1875. 
 
 Within four months of the presentation of the Report 
 under the Royal Commission on Labour Laws, Mr. 
 Cross, the Secretary of State for the Home Department, 
 introduced into the House of Commons two bills, the 
 one an Employers and Workmen Bill,” and the other 
 a Conspiracy and Protection of Property Bill.” The 
 general tenor of the measures and the speech of the 
 minister who introduced them, led to their very favour¬ 
 able reception and consideration. Nevertheless the bills 
 underwent considerable discussion and alteration in their 
 different stages. They received the royal assent on 
 the 13th of August, and came into operation on the 
 1st September, 1875. 
 
 The government measures, while adopting to the full 
 extent the tenor of the report of the Royal Commis¬ 
 sioners, that in all simple breaches of contract the summary 
 jurisdiction in case of master and servant should be 
 divested of everything of a penal character, and be 
 entirely of a ciAul nature, went in some other respects 
 beyond the recommendations of the Commissioners. 
 
 Repealing the Act of 1867, as suggested in the report, 
 and many other provisions, the government recognized 
 the practical importance of placing all provisions relating 
 to the civil branch of the question in a separate act from 
 that containing provisions of a penal character. 
 
 Giving a general definition of workmen for all the 
 objects of legislation, so as to include all persons, other 
 than domestic or menial servants, engaged in manual 
 labour under an express or implied contract of service or 
 Avork, and treating the county courts as the primary proper 
 tribunal, but as inadequate, from the infi’equency of its 
 
THE LEGISLATION OF 1875. 
 
 81 
 
 sittings in many places, and its distance from the suitors, 
 the Employers and Workmen Bill gave a concurrent 
 civil jurisdiction, where the claim does not exceed ten 
 pounds, to courts of summary jurisdiction constituted of 
 police magistrates, or of two justices of the peace sitting 
 at a place appointed for holding petty sessions. The 
 hill was subsequently altered so as to take away the 
 jurisdiction of ordinary magistrates in petty sessions, where 
 police or stipendiary magistrates act, and also in the city 
 of London. 
 
 The common law jurisdiction and powers of the county 
 courts, and of these courts of summary jurisdiction, are 
 assimilated in relation to any dispute between an employer 
 and a workman arising out of or incidental to their relation 
 as such. The logical sequence of giving a civil jurisdic¬ 
 tion to courts of summary jurisdiction, by reason of the 
 inadequacy of the county courts to meet the public wants, 
 is that the mode of enforcing the orders of both courts 
 should be the same. Accordingly this has been effected. 
 As regards orders for payment of a sum as wages, damages, 
 or otherwise, they are enforceable as ordinary debts in the 
 county courts, that is to say, by distress and sale of goods, 
 or, under the Debtors Act, 1869, by committal to prison 
 for a term not exceeding six weeks, or until pa}Tnent of the 
 sum due, but only upon proof to the satisfaction of the court, 
 of the debtor having or having had the means to pay (a). 
 
 (a) See more fully post, Chap. 
 VIL With the views held and pub¬ 
 licly expressed by me, I of course 
 look with much satisfaction on the 
 Report of the Royal Commission, 
 and on the general features of the 
 government measure stated in the 
 text. The deviation from the Re¬ 
 port, adverted to in the text, is in 
 full accord with my own notion. 
 
 In stating my views to the Com¬ 
 missioners in 1874, in regard to 
 Lord Elcho’s Act, I said: “ I think 
 D. 
 
 any criminal part of the act, that is 
 to say, any provisions of a criminal 
 nature, should be embodied in a 
 separate act, and that, as far as 
 possible, it would be very desirable 
 that the enforcement of these con¬ 
 tracts for specific performance or 
 payment of damages should be in 
 a civil court. Unfortunately the 
 local courts, the county courts, do 
 not sit often enough, and a delay of 
 ten days is required, and it is neces¬ 
 sary that the process in these cases 
 G 
 
82 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 The Commissioners do not appear to have contemplated 
 this description of limitation, but to have proposed that 
 on failure to pay the amount of compensation, all the 
 provisions of the Summary Jurisdiction Acts applicable 
 to orders of magistrates for the payment of a sum of 
 money, should apply to the enforcement of orders of com¬ 
 pensation (Z>). 
 
 should be speedy : forty-eight hours 
 in a magistrate’s court is sufficient 
 
 .I take so strong a 
 
 view about the mere damages, that 
 I should say whatever the remedy 
 is in a civil court for the recovery 
 of damages for the breach of an or¬ 
 dinary contract, let the same apply 
 here.” (First Report of the Royal 
 Commission on Labour Laws—Mi¬ 
 nutes of Evidence.) And again,— 
 “ I should like to see the cases which 
 are not dealt with in a penal manner, 
 but by means of an order either to 
 pay money or to perform the con¬ 
 tract, completely separated from 
 cases of a penal and therefore of a 
 criminal kind, which have to be 
 dealt with by fine or direct impri¬ 
 sonment. It is very desirable to 
 separate the two questions by dif¬ 
 ferent acts of parliament. Of course, 
 an act providing for the penal cases 
 might embrace a great deal which 
 is now scattered through other acts 
 of parliament. Another matter, dis¬ 
 tinct from that, is that the present 
 act is extremely difficult to work in 
 consequence of its referring, in the 
 third section, to a number of acts 
 in the schedule, and stating that 
 cases within the meaning of those 
 enactments, and no others, shall be 
 within the act, instead of the act 
 itself defining with care, as I think 
 might be done without any very 
 great difficulty, the cases to which 
 
 it is to be applied. It is really ex¬ 
 tremely embarrassing to any magis¬ 
 trates, whether lawyers or ordinary 
 magistrates, to find out what cases 
 are or are not at present within the 
 purview of the act. You might 
 get rid of a great many provisions 
 which are obscure and really now 
 unnecessary, by merging them all 
 in one general act defining these 
 contracts.” (Second and Final Re¬ 
 port of the Royal Commission on 
 Labour Laws — Minutes of Evi¬ 
 dence.) The Commissioners, in 
 their Report, said, Mr. Davis 
 
 .recommended that 
 
 the act should be cut down to a 
 mere civil act, and the criminal pro¬ 
 visions of it embodied in a separate 
 act, and that all proceedings under 
 the act for enforcement of contracts 
 for specific performance or payment 
 of damages, should be, if possible, 
 in a civil court, but admitted that 
 as the county court did not sit 
 often enough, and cases in those 
 courts required ten days’ notice, 
 while forty-eight hours was suffi¬ 
 cient in a magistrate’s court, and 
 as the process was more costly in 
 the county court, the jurisdiction 
 in all places where there was not a 
 stipendiary must still remain with 
 the j ustices of the peace.” All these 
 points referred to were provided for 
 by the Bills of 1875. 
 
 (Z>) It would have involved a 
 
THE LEGISLATION OF 1875. 
 
 83 
 
 There is an omission of some importance in the new 
 act which it is difficult to account for. 
 
 The summary jurisdiction previous to Lord Elcho’s Act 
 recognized the great importance of permitting workmen 
 to sue agents, managers and foremen for wages. 
 
 The act 4 Geo. 4, c. 34, recited that masters, mis¬ 
 tresses, or employers reside at considerable distances from 
 the parishes or places where their business is carried on, 
 or are occasionally absent for long periods of time, either 
 beyond the seas, or at considerable distances from such 
 parishes or places, and during such residence or occasional 
 absences intrust their business to the management and 
 superintendence of stewards, agents, bailiffs, foremen, or 
 managers, whereby such servants, artificers, handicrafts¬ 
 men, miners, colliers, keelmen, pitmen, glassmen, potters, 
 labourers, or other persons and apprentices, are or may be 
 subjected to great difficulties and hardships, and put to 
 great expense in recovering their wages,” and provided 
 the obvious remedy, by making the agent, &c., responsible. 
 
 A corresponding provision was introduced into Lord 
 Elcho’s Act, by including the steward, agent, bailiff, fore¬ 
 man, manager or factor under the word employer. 
 
 Notwithstanding these patent facts, there is now no 
 provision of the kind, and it is clear that no such repre¬ 
 sentative of an absent employer can be proceeded against 
 under ordinary circumstances, for the general rule of law 
 must prevail, that known agents are not responsible for 
 the contracts entered into by them for their principals. 
 
 little more trouble, but would have 
 more completely separated the civil 
 from the criminal aspect of these 
 cases of employer and employed if 
 the procedure were independent of 
 Jervis’ Act relating to summary 
 convictions and orders. When the 
 working man finds the bine-coated 
 police constable visiting him at his 
 workshop, or home, to serve the 
 
 summons, he will think that Parlia¬ 
 ment has after all somewhat missed 
 its object to put him entirely on the 
 footing of an ordinary debtor. Jer¬ 
 vis’ Acts should be confined, as far 
 as possible in their non-criminal pro¬ 
 cess, to “State claims” (to borrow a 
 term from American jurists), such as 
 rates and taxes and public dues, and 
 sanitary and educational matters. 
 
 2 
 
84 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 However, the Lord Chancellor’s rules made under the act 
 will to some extent remedy the otherwise great defect, for 
 the rules allow of service at a defendant’s house, or place 
 of dwelling, or place of business (c). 
 
 The question of apprentices has been dealt with in the 
 new acts in a very satisfactory direction. The report 
 under the Royal Commission made no reference to the 
 subject, although contracts of apprenticeship were within 
 the Master and Servant Act, 1867, and although the 
 returns made from magistrates’ courts to the Commis¬ 
 sioners included cases of apprentices. 
 
 Imprisonment appears to have been applied to breaches 
 of contract by apprentices almost as frequently under the 
 Act of 1867 as previously, although it is difficult to under¬ 
 stand (apart from any misconstruction of the Act of 1867) 
 on what principle a naughty tiresome boy or lad, who 
 breaks an involuntary contract, should be dealt with more 
 stringently by an imprisonment than an adult mlfuUy 
 breaking his voluntary engagements. Probably those 
 who have made the distinction would desire to justify it 
 on the ground that discipline is involved in the one case 
 more than in the other; but, even in that view, imprison¬ 
 ment, as an instrument of discipline, seems opposed to the 
 modern, and so far successful, system of dealing with 
 juvenile offenders. 
 
 Be this as it may, it was urged before the Commis¬ 
 sioners, that power should be given to the court dealing 
 with apprentices, not only to require the attendance of 
 parents and guardians, but to exercise jurisdiction over 
 them by enforcing the performance of their contracts when 
 covenanting parties to the indentures {d). 
 
 (o) Sec the Rules {post). 
 
 {d) Being asked my opinion whe¬ 
 ther the relation between master and 
 apprentice and between master and 
 workman ought to he dealt with 
 under the same act, I said: “ Yes, I 
 think they ought; but I think the 
 
 third person in the contract of ap¬ 
 prenticeship ought to be brought 
 within it. That is generally the 
 father. The parent or next friend 
 who covenants for the services of 
 the apprentice ought to be within 
 it. I felt a great difficulty in deal- 
 
THE LEGISLATION OE 1875 . 
 
 85 
 
 The government adopted this view, and it was unani¬ 
 mously confirmed by the legislature. 
 
 A court of summary jurisdiction ” may not only 
 adjudicate on disputes between a master and an apprentice 
 and make an order directing the apprentice to perform his 
 duties under the apprenticeship, but if there is any person 
 liable, under the instrument of apprenticeship, for the 
 good conduct of the apprentice, he maybe summoned; and 
 the court may, in addition to or in substitution for an 
 
 ing with apprentices. 
 
 Owing to the goodness of trade at 
 Sheffield in 1872 and 1873, the cases 
 of the apprentices I am quite satis¬ 
 fied have been more numerous, and 
 for this reason: in regard to almost 
 all the apprentices in Sheffield, and 
 I believe elsewhere, the system is 
 very different from what it used to 
 be. Instead of a premium [by the 
 father], wages are paid [by the 
 master], but of a smaller amount 
 [than in the case of an adult], and 
 at the end of the first or second 
 year the apprentice could, if free, 
 earn higher wages if trade is brisk. 
 Very often a father has been really 
 the person who has seduced his son 
 from his employment, and put him 
 elsewhere, to get higher wages. 
 The boy is brought before me. I 
 have always insisted on the parent, 
 or the person who has been a party 
 to the indenture, being present in 
 court, and have adjourned the case 
 often for his presence, so as to hear 
 what he had to say; and I have 
 often had the case of a boy who has 
 been placed in a difficulty between 
 on the one hand obeying the parent 
 and on the other hand his master, 
 and I have endeavoured always in 
 those cases to try and make an ar¬ 
 rangement, in the absence of any 
 power to enforce it as against the 
 
 father, by explaining to the father 
 that he was liable to an action by 
 the master, and so on, and adjourn¬ 
 ing the case, and trying to get the 
 boy to find some third person as 
 surety for the performance of the 
 conti*act, and in that way effecting 
 an arrangement of some kind, so as 
 to enforce the contract, at the same 
 time without dealing harshly with 
 the boy.” (First Report of the 
 Royal Commission on Labour Laws 
 —Minutes of Evidence.) The evi¬ 
 dence of Mr. Henry Bleckley was 
 confirmatory of this view'. Speak¬ 
 ing, as a magistrate, of appren¬ 
 tices in the fustian cutting trade, 
 he said : “ They are generally 
 
 bound for short times, say for two 
 or three years, and in about six 
 months, when they have learnt the 
 trade, they could earn, of course 
 if they were free, twice as much as 
 they can during their apprentice¬ 
 ship ; and there are a very great 
 number of such persons brought up 
 in Warrington before the magis¬ 
 trates to enforce the contract of ap¬ 
 prenticeship. . . . Their parents 
 will often send them away to ano¬ 
 ther shop where instead of getting 
 is. or bs. they may get 65 . or Is. 
 a week. . . .We always ask 
 for the father or mother to be in 
 court.” {Id.) 
 
86 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 order against the apprentice, order that person to pay- 
 damages for any breach of the contract of apprenticeship, 
 or may take security, if he is willing to give it, for the 
 future performance of the contract by the apprentice. 
 
 On a question of considerable importance a difference 
 of opinion will no doubt exist as to the correctness of the 
 view taken by the legislature, namely, as to the propriety 
 of enforcing performance of uncompleted contracts for 
 personal service as distinguished from the payment of 
 damages for their breach. 
 
 The capability and propriety of thus enforcing contracts 
 of this description was suggested to Lord Elcho, and the 
 suggestion was laid by him before the committee of the 
 House of Commons in 1866, of which he was chairman, 
 and was adopted {e). The committee unanimously re¬ 
 solved, That the court shall have power, where such a 
 course is deemed advisable, to order the defendant to 
 fulfil contract, and also, if necessary, to compel him to 
 find security that he will do so ” (jf). 
 
 This recommendation was carried into effect by the 
 Act of 1867. An alternative mode given by that act of 
 dealing with complaints, was power to direct the fulfil¬ 
 ment of the contract of service, with a direction to the 
 party complained against to find forth-with good and 
 
 (e) The suggestion was made 
 under these circumstances: As sti¬ 
 pendiary magistrate at Stoke-upon- 
 Trent I had felt the want of some 
 power to order the performance of 
 contracts for the future, instead of 
 sending workmen to prison for past 
 breaches. In the absence of such a 
 pow’er I frequently, with beneficial 
 results, adjourned cases for a fort¬ 
 night or a month on the defendant 
 entering into a recognizance with a 
 surety for his appearance, with the 
 understanding that if he returned 
 to his work no further proceedings 
 
 would be taken. I thought a power 
 to attain this end directly, instead of 
 indirectly, would be of great advan¬ 
 tage to all parties. I availed myself 
 of an opportunity of mentioning my 
 views, and subsequently put them 
 into writing, as already stated (see 
 antfl, p. 16). 
 
 (/) See ante, p. 15. The com¬ 
 mittee comprised several lawyers of 
 distinction, including Sir Robert 
 Collier, the then Solicitor-General. 
 It also included a member of the 
 present cabinet. 
 
THE LEGISLATION OF 1875 . 
 
 87 
 
 sufficient security, by recognizance or bond, with or with¬ 
 out sureties, for such fulfilment {g). 
 
 How did this power work ? In many places it does 
 not appear to have been tested; not by reason of any dis¬ 
 taste for the principle involved, but from an inclination to 
 adhere to old paths—fine and imprisonment. In several 
 manufacturing centres, one of them Sheffield (probably 
 the most important of any district on any question 
 relating to employer and employed), the enforcement of 
 contracts under Lord Elcho’s Act was adopted almost 
 exclusively of any other remedy, and continued to be 
 applied down to the moment the new legislation took 
 effect, Avith the greatest advantage to employers, who do 
 not want damages but the work done {h ), and also with 
 general satisfaction to the employed, who, when held to 
 have been in the wrong (and in most cases feeling them¬ 
 selves to be in the wrong), prefer performance to a money 
 payment of fine or damages. 
 
 How did the Koyal Commission deal with the question ? 
 Attention was specially called to it, and to the effect of 
 Lord Elcho’s Act(^j; and so far from condemning the 
 principle, the conclusion arrived at by the Commissioners 
 
 {g') See ante, p. 19. 
 
 (//) See ante, p. 24, note (/). 
 
 (i) In giving my opinion on the 
 working of Lord Elcho’s Act, I said: 
 “ I mainly put in force the provision 
 of the act enabling the magistrates 
 to call upon the person summoned 
 to perform his contract; in fact a 
 rough specific performance of the 
 contract by means of the defendant 
 (generally of course the defendant 
 was the employed) undertaking by 
 recognizance to perform his contract, 
 with or without a surety. . . . 
 
 The man would perhaps say at the 
 moment, ‘Well, I cannot find a 
 surety, I am a stranger.’ Then I 
 have said, ‘ Will you undertake 
 
 yourself then to perform your con¬ 
 tract?’and, generally, I have said 
 to the employer, ‘This man is a 
 stranger, take his word, take his 
 own recognizance in hi. that he will 
 perform his contract; if he does 
 not do it, then he will be brought 
 up and sent to prison.’ .... 
 I have always found that the em¬ 
 ployers cared little about the money, 
 about getting actual ‘compensation,’ 
 and that they wanted labour. . . . 
 I find the power to call upon a man 
 to find a friend as surety an ad¬ 
 mirable power. It is always a good 
 test, and there is very little difficulty 
 about it: it is remarkable with 
 what facility men come forward to 
 
88 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 was that that act should be amended or another substituted, 
 and that the proceedings in all cases of simple breach of 
 contract between employer and employed should assume 
 that of a civil proceeding for specific performance 
 
 OR THE RECOVERY OF DAMAGES. 
 
 On the other hand, two objections were raised to an 
 order for performance; the one that it is impracticable, 
 and the other that it involves tlie power of imprisonment 
 to enforce it, and that, therefore, it has the aspect of a 
 criminal provision. 
 
 In support of the first objection, the practice of the 
 Court of Chancery was cited, which does not in general 
 decree specific performance of contracts for personal 
 services, on the grounds, either that the duties are of 
 too complicated and delicate a kind to be canned out 
 against the will, or because the recovery of damages by 
 action is a sufficient compensation for any breach. 
 
 The answer to these objections is, that an ordinary 
 breach of contract of labour consists either in an absence 
 from the place of work, or in simply not working up 
 materials within a reasonable time, and the style or 
 quality of work does not in fact form any part of the 
 complaint, and that no complicated or delicate questions 
 arise. JN’umerous illustrations of the kind of breaches 
 complained of in practice are disclosed in the evidence 
 given on the Labour Laws Commission. Cases of 
 wrongfully leaving the place of work are by far the most 
 numerous, and are continually referred to. 
 
 In all those cases, whether the absence is a deliberate 
 act or merely (as in the majority of cases actually occuring 
 in practice) giving way to temptation of drink or amuse- 
 
 answer for one another. I have carried out generally; but there have 
 had strangers come forward in the been sureties who have got them- 
 court and say, ‘ I will be bound for selves into scrapes.” (First Report 
 the man.’ I have thanked them and of the Royal Commission on Labour 
 said, ^ You are doing him and me Laws—Notes of Evidence.) 
 
 a favourand I think it is fairly 
 
THE LEGISLATION OF 1875 . 
 
 89 
 
 ment, to require performance is really nothing more than 
 to require attendance at the shop or other place of work. 
 
 A metropolitan police magistrate, speaking of breaches 
 of contract in the cabinet-making trade, said: They 
 nearly all arise in this way : the custom of the trade is 
 that a man takes out a job, as it is said, for instance a 
 sideboard, to make, and he is to have 5/., say, for making 
 it, and he begins by drawing IZ. or 30^., and then he goes 
 on and works away, and when he has nearly finished the 
 sideboard, he finds he has drawn all the money, but still 
 has some work to do on the sideboard ; then, naturally 
 enough, in a great many cases, if he is a man of not very 
 strong princqdes, he goes oflT and takes another job, 
 leaving the sideboard unfinished, having drawn all the 
 money. That is a very common class of cases applying 
 to all the trade ”(^)* 
 
 What difficidty in making an order to finish the job ? 
 The member(Z) of a well-known firm of locomotive en¬ 
 gineers described contracts for erecting the engines: “ We 
 let, for instance, in the case of a locomotive engine, the 
 work to be done by the piece ; every part almost is done 
 by the piece, and the putting together—what we call 
 erecting—is done by a number of men joining together to 
 take the work for 45Z. or 50Z. a-piece.” 
 
 In the case of a joint refusal or neglect, what diffi¬ 
 culty in ordering performance of such a contract ?( 7 ?z). 
 
 (k) First Report of the Royal 
 Commission on Labour Laws — 
 Minutes of Evidence (Mr. Hannay). 
 
 (Z) Mr. Robinson, a magistrate 
 for Staffordshire, president of the 
 National Federation of Associated 
 Employers of Labour, and a partner 
 in the firm of Sharp, Stewart & 
 Co., locomotive engineers, Man¬ 
 chester. 
 
 (m) In the face of such illustra- 
 tions,it excites a smile to find an argu¬ 
 ment used against enforcing labour 
 contracts, that it is impossible to 
 force an actor on the stage to apply, 
 
 against his will, his best powers to 
 play Richard the Third. (Sec the 
 debates in the House of Commons 
 on the Employers and Workmen 
 Rill, 1875.) That “You can take 
 a horse to water but cannot make 
 him drink,” is a favourite illus¬ 
 tration with objectors to orders for 
 specific performance of w’orkmen’s 
 contracts. The answer may be, 
 “ True, but you can take the horse 
 back to his work.” In the great 
 majority of these cases the object is 
 to get the workman from the drink¬ 
 ing place back to his place of work.^ 
 
90 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 As regards the power to recover damages by legal 
 proceedings, it is unnecessary to point out that the power 
 to obtain them is not equivalent to the actual performance 
 of any contract, and least of all in the case of a contract 
 of labour. To say to an employer, Do not ask for 
 performance, wait until the fidl damage is sustained, and 
 then proceed to recover the amount by law,” sounds like 
 a mockery. Apart from other objections, it often happens 
 that the damages actually incurred from the breach are 
 too remote in the eye of the law to allow of their being 
 claimed (7?). 
 
 The objection that imprisonment is a necessary accom¬ 
 paniment of the power to enforce performance of contracts, 
 and that, therefore, it has the aspect of a criminal measure, 
 is not well founded; for although it is obvious that an 
 order for the specific performance of the contract, without 
 the alternative of imprisonment on default of compliance, 
 would be wholly ineffectual ”(o), ‘^the mode in which 
 courts having jurisdiction to order specific performance, 
 enforce their authority in case of disobedience, is by im¬ 
 prisonment. There is, therefore, nothing exceptional in the 
 application of this remedy in case of disobedience here ”(p). 
 
 ( 7i) See 2 >ost^ Chapter VII. 
 
 {p) See the Second and Final 
 Report of the Royal Commission on 
 Labour Laws, ante^ p. 54. 
 
 (j!?) Ihid.^ ante^ p. 52. “ Sir M. 
 E. Smith .—You would retain the 
 power to imprison in the event of the 
 man not specifieally performing his 
 contract when ordered, but you would 
 prefer the ordinary civil remedy to 
 enforce the claim of compensation? 
 J. E. Davis. —Certainly. It would 
 he absolutely necessary to retain the 
 power of imprisonment to enforce 
 performance, but it would be simply 
 the power exercised at present by 
 the High Court of Chancery. In 
 Scotland, some fifty years ago, a 
 great question was raised as to 
 
 whether what is termed the process 
 of ‘ caution ’ could be legitimately 
 applied to the non-performance of a 
 contract for labour. The judges 
 were divided, but the majority held 
 that you could apply it to that sys¬ 
 tem—that is practically a specific 
 performance of acontract for labour. 
 The ordinary rule of equity in Eng¬ 
 land has been, that where damages 
 can be an equivalent, then you 
 have no right to ask for specific 
 performance; hut jurists rather 
 differ even upon that, as to whether 
 the rule is founded upon any true 
 principle.” {Id. Minutes of Evi¬ 
 dence.) Mr. Henry Crompton did 
 me the honour of saying, “ I hold 
 precisely the same opinion as was 
 
THE LEGISLATION OF 1875 . 
 
 91 
 
 A striking illustration of this occurs in the county- 
 courts. Under its equitable jurisdiction as hitherto 
 existing, imprisonment is expressly recognized to enforce 
 compliance -with orders of the court. 
 
 It is to be observed that, although security for perform¬ 
 ance, where performance was ordered, was required under 
 Lord Elcho’s Act, it is by no means an essential part of 
 the principle. Nevertheless a recognizance, especially 
 with a surety, tended materially to secure the performance 
 of the order, and at the same time obviated any direct 
 imprisonment, the order, if disobeyed^ being enforced in 
 the first instance by levying the amount. 
 
 The legislation of 1875 has halted between the conflict¬ 
 ing views above adverted to. While retaining a power 
 of ordering performance of a labour contract, the court 
 can only exercise the power with the consent of both 
 parties—the defendant as well as the complainant,—and 
 further it is essential that there should be one or more 
 sureties for the performance. The security or any sum 
 paid by a surety can be enforced as a debt, that is to say, 
 by a summons and an order, and then by execution 
 against the goods, or by^ a limited order of imprisonment 
 on proof of the means of payment, as in the case of 
 orders for damages {q). 
 
 How far, under these new conditions,—namely, the 
 assent of the defendant, his ability to find a surety, and 
 the limited power of enforcing the security,—orders for 
 performance will be found a mode of ensuring adherence 
 to labour contracts, must be left to future experience. It is 
 clear, however, that this scheme is not what the Commis- 
 
 given by Mr. Davis on the sub¬ 
 ject.” . . . “ Sir M. E. Smith. 
 —You would suggest, as I under¬ 
 stand you, that the power should 
 be simply to give damages or to 
 order specific performance ? Mr. 
 Crovipton .—Quite so.” (Second 
 
 and Final Report of the Commis¬ 
 sion—Minutes of Evidence). 
 
 {q) The bill as introduced by the 
 government provided for the en¬ 
 forcement of orders of performance 
 by imprisonment, and did not make 
 the finding a surety essential. 
 
92 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 sioners meant when they recommended proceedings for 
 specific performance and for recovery of damages as the 
 two alternative remedies in cases of simple breach of 
 contract (r). 
 
 Before leaving the consideration of the Employers and 
 Workmen Act, 1875, it should be noticed that one effect 
 of the new legislation is to make no distinction between 
 breaches of contract committed in the honest, although 
 mistaken, belief that there was just cause for so doing, and 
 breaches committed wilfully, not only without just cause, 
 but also without the belief that there was just cause; nor 
 even between cases of honest belief and cases of a wilful 
 and deliberate intention to do a wrong, unless combined 
 Avith the ingredients about to be noticed in the Conspiracy 
 and Protection of Property Act. 
 
 This change is remarkable. Previous to 1867 there 
 AA^as no summary jurisdiction by magistrates over hand Jide 
 disputes ( 5 ). The act of that year first gave that juris¬ 
 diction, but by its latitude enabled magistrates, if they 
 thought fit, to draw a wide distinction in dealing Avith 
 motives; noAv the distinction is altogether gone in cases 
 under the Employers and Workmen Act. 
 
 The poAver, of very great importance, giA^en by the act 
 to the Lord Chancellor to make rules for carrying into 
 effect the jurisdiction given to a court of summary juris¬ 
 diction, has been promptly exercised by the issue of Buies 
 and Forms apparently Avell adapted for their object, and 
 calculated to make the court essentially one of civil 
 procedure. 
 
 Passing from the civil jurisdiction given by the Em¬ 
 ployers and Workmen Act to the penal provisions of the 
 Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 1875, it Avill 
 
 (?•) It is only due to myself to say the power of the court as to per- 
 that when urging orders for per- formance being limited in the way 
 forrnance and compensation as ade- it has been by the legislature, 
 quate to meet cases of simple breach (5) See antCy p. 6. 
 of contract, I did not contemplate 
 
THE LEGISLATION OF 1875 . 
 
 93 
 
 be well to notice first that part of the act which is to be 
 regarded as a substitution for the 14th section of the Master 
 and Servant Act, 1867 {t). It has been already seen 
 that it was the too wide application and injudicious ex¬ 
 ercise of the power given by that section to magistrates 
 to impose direct imprisonment for any injury inflicted on 
 the person or property of the complainant of an aggravated 
 character, or for any misconduct, misdemeanor, or ill- 
 treatment of an aggravated character, that was the chief 
 cause of the dissatisfaction expressed by workmen for that 
 act (u). 
 
 The Royal Commissioners wer6 unanimous in recom¬ 
 mending that if the principle of the 14th section was to 
 be retained, the limits within which the law was to take 
 effect should be more clearly defined, and the cases to 
 which it was to be applied should be more precisely speci¬ 
 fied and made known (v ); and as regards cases of mis¬ 
 demeanor and injury to the person or property, other 
 than injury flowing simply from breach of contract,” they 
 were clearly of opinion that those cases might be left to 
 the ordinary law (x). 
 
 With reference to cases of aggravation, where the person 
 breaking his contract does so without believing that he 
 has just cause for so doing, with the knowledge that the 
 breach wiU entail serious injury, loss, or mischief on the 
 other contracting party (y), the Commissioners were 
 unanimous in thinking that those cases should be treated 
 with greater severity than simple breaches of contract 
 unattended by circumstances of aggravation; but they 
 were nearly equally divided on the point whether those 
 offences should be dealt with under the criminal law or 
 only by civil proceeding (z). 
 
 The legislature has dealt with this question by making it 
 
 ( t) See ante, p. 20. 
 (w) See ante, p. 25. 
 (y) See ante, p. 56. 
 (a?) See ante, p. 59. 
 
 (y) See the instances pnt by the 
 Commissioners in the Report, ante, 
 p. 57. 
 
 {z) See ante, p. 60. 
 
94 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 a criminal offence, punishable either by a pecuniary penalty 
 not exceeding twenty pounds, or by three months’ im¬ 
 prisonment, with or without hard labour, if any person 
 ‘^wilfully and maliciously breaks a contract of service or 
 of hiring, knowing, or having reasonable cause to believe, 
 that the probable consequences of his so doing, either 
 alone or in combination with others, will be to endanger 
 human life, or cause serious bodily injury, or to expose 
 valuable property, whether real or personal, to destruction 
 or serious injury ”(a). After considerable discussion in the 
 House of Commons, the same punishment is imposed on 
 a person wilfully and maliciously breaking a contract of 
 service with a municipal authority, or company, or con¬ 
 tractor, having the duty of supplying a place with gas or 
 water, knowing, or having reasonable cause to believe, 
 that the probable consequences will be to deprive the in¬ 
 habitants wholly or to a great extent of their supply of 
 gas or water.” 
 
 The precise effect of these provisions must to some 
 extent depend on the meaning of the word maliciously,” 
 applied to the breach of a contract (b). It seems clear 
 from the context and from an interpretation clause intro¬ 
 duced into the bill, that some force was intended to be 
 contained in ^^maliciously,” distinguished from wilfully.” 
 Lord Penzance thought the former word ought to be 
 struck out, but the government insisted on its retention. 
 Deferring a technical investigation of this point to a sub¬ 
 sequent chapter, it is noticed here as bearing on the inquiry 
 how far the legislature has carried out or departed from the 
 
 (a) It is to be observed that 
 neither this nor any other provision 
 of the Conspiracy and Protection of 
 Property Act, 1875, is confined to 
 “ workmen ” as defined by the Em¬ 
 ployers and Workmen Act, 1876. 
 
 (J) I am not aware of any other 
 instance in which the legislature or 
 the judges or expounders of the 
 
 common law speak of “ maliciously 
 bi'eaking a contract” I do not 
 remember when in pleaders’ cham¬ 
 bers seeing it introduced into a de¬ 
 claration or other pleading; but 
 there have been great changes in 
 ideas, and in words used to express 
 them, since those remote days. 
 
THE LEGISLATION OF 1875 . 
 
 95 
 
 report of the Commissioners. While it is evident that the 
 views of those Commissioners who thought all aggravated 
 cases might be treated as civil breaches have not been fol¬ 
 lowed, yet, on the other hand, if the common acceptation 
 of the word “ maliciously ” is to be applied, the legislature 
 has not carried out the opinion of the other Commissioners, 
 by including in the category of offences many (probably 
 the most numerous), where, without any malicious design, 
 the necessary effect of abandoning the service is to ex¬ 
 pose the master’s property to serious injury and loss”(c). 
 Neither is any provision made for the case put, where a 
 man knows that his employer has a heavy contract on 
 hand which he is bound under penalties or legal liabilities 
 to complete, and knows that his service is necessary to 
 enable the employer to fulfil his engagement, his place not 
 being capable of being immediately filled.” Even if done 
 maliciously,” the probable consequence of the wrongful 
 act is not to expose valuable property to destruction or 
 serious injury within the meaning of the new provision. 
 
 It follows that, as regards such instances, the unanimous 
 opinion of the Commissioners that these cases should be 
 treated with greater severity than simple breaches of con¬ 
 tract unattended by circumstances of aggravation, has 
 been either disregarded or intentionally over-ridden by 
 the legislature, which has at the same time purposely 
 withdrawn the protection arising from the power here¬ 
 tofore existing under Lord Elcho’s Act, of requiring 
 performance of the contract, and which the Commissioners 
 advised, as has been seen, should under any circumstances 
 be retained. 
 
 A desirable amendment of the law has been effected in 
 a matter not ^vithin the scope of the Labour Laws Com¬ 
 mission, by making the master of a servant or apprentice 
 legally liable to provide food, clothing, medical aid, or 
 lodging, and, on refusing or neglecting to provide either, 
 liable to fine or imprisonment if the health of the servant 
 (c) See ante, p. 57. 
 
96 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 or apprentice is, or is likely to be, seriously or permanently 
 injured—extensions, on the points indicated by italics, of a 
 previous provision (c?). 
 
 Leaving the penal provisions for breaches of contract, 
 and proceeding to the subject of the Criminal Law 
 Amendment Act of 1871, it is to be observed that the 
 new bill as first introduced by the government carried 
 out the precise recommendations of the Royal Commis¬ 
 sioners ; that is to say, it left the former act unrepealed 
 and unaltered, except in giving an option to the party 
 complained against of having the charge tried by a jury. 
 
 Eventually the government assented to the repeal of the 
 act and substituted another provision to meet intimidation 
 or annoyance by violence or otherwise. Getting rid of 
 the words '"molest” and "coerce,”—words, or the con¬ 
 struction given, or supposed to have been given, to them 
 ^7 and juries, apparently very distasteful to trade 
 
 unions by reason of their restraint,—it makes the doing 
 various specified acts, with a view to compel any other 
 person to abstain from doing or to do any act which such 
 other person has a legal right to do or abstain from doing, 
 punishable by a penalty not exceeding 20/., or by im¬ 
 prisonment not exceeding three months with or without 
 hard labour. 
 
 The objection made to the prohibition of "picketing” (^) 
 has been removed, or, at least, intended to be removed; for 
 although the offence is defined in the same terms as in the 
 Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1871, that is to say, as 
 watching or besetting the home or place where the person 
 sought to be compelled resides, or works, or carries on 
 business, or happens to be, or the approach to such house 
 or place, it is now provided that " attending at or near 
 the house or place where a person resides, or works, or 
 happens to be, or the approach to such house or place, in 
 order merely to obtain or communicate information, shall 
 not be deemed a watching or besetting.” 
 
 {d) Sce^osf, Chapter VIII. (<?) See ante^ p. 66. 
 
THE LEGISLATION OF 1875 . 
 
 97 
 
 Another modification of the Criminal Law Amendment 
 Act consists in giving the court of summary jurisdiction 
 power to impose a fine instead of imprisonment. But 
 probably the most important alteration of this branch of 
 the law consists in making it of general application. 
 
 Under the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1871, as 
 well put by Sir Montague Smith, a man need not have 
 been a servant to commit the offences comprised in it, but 
 the relation of master and servant must have existed be¬ 
 tween some people before the oflPence could happen (f). 
 The substituted provisions apply to every person who does 
 any of the specified acts with a view to compel any other 
 person to abstain from doing or to do any act which such 
 other person has a legal right to do or abstain from doing. 
 
 There can be no doubt that this application of the law 
 to all persons was adopted purposely. The question was 
 discussed before the Boyal Commission, exception being 
 taken by those representing the views of union workmen 
 to legislation of this kind being confined to trade dis¬ 
 putes {g). It was said that this legislation is special and 
 exceptional, being applicable to the case of employers and 
 
 (/) Second and Final Report of 
 the Royal Commission on Labour 
 Laws—Minutes of Evidence, p. 101. 
 See the provisions of the Criminal 
 Law Amendment Act, 1871, stated 
 ante, pp. 40, 41. 
 
 (^) Without adopting them my¬ 
 self, I may refer to the views ex¬ 
 pressed b}’- Mr. Crompton, which I 
 apprehend the legislature acted upon, 
 notwithstanding the report of the 
 Royal Commission. “ With respect 
 to the Criminal Law Amendment 
 Act, one objection which I under¬ 
 stand the workmen to take is that 
 the act, although general in form, is 
 practically limited to offences com¬ 
 mitted by the working classes in 
 the course of trade disputes, and 
 they think that any law dealing 
 D. 
 
 with violence should be general in 
 its application as well as in its form. 
 I may be wrong, but I do not know 
 myself any law dealing with vio¬ 
 lence that is special in its appli¬ 
 cation, and I think that the test of 
 whether a law is just or not is 
 whether the penalty falls impartially 
 on all persons * * * whether 
 
 they commit those crimes or not 
 habitually. * * * jf j could 
 
 see any real occasion for it, I do not 
 know that I should not admit an 
 exception to the principle; but I can 
 see no reason why any law should 
 not be framed generally which re¬ 
 lates to violence or to intimidation.” 
 (Second and Final Report of the 
 Royal Commission on Labour Laws 
 —Minutes of Evidence.) 
 
 H 
 
98 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 employed alone. The report of the Royal Commission 
 said, If this be true, the answer is that the circumstances 
 which have called the law into existence are also special 
 and exceptional” (h). 
 
 The legislature having so far adopted the objectors’ 
 view, as to make the provisions of general application, 
 it is the duty of courts of summary jurisdiction to give 
 effect to the clear intention of the legislature, by dealing 
 with cases of intimidation, or annoyance by violence or 
 otherwise, not merely in reference to trade disputes, but 
 also in matters arising independently of them (^). 
 
 Without attempting to anticipate the precise effect of 
 this extension of the law, it may be observed that ques¬ 
 tions arising under it may be complicated in consequence 
 of the absence of any clause excepting cases already 
 capable of being dealt with summarily under any other 
 provisions. 
 
 Under the new jurisdiction persons charged have the 
 right of trial by jury, a privilege which, of course, they 
 ought not to be deprived of in any case falling within the 
 terms of the new laAv. Confining the court of summary 
 jurisdiction, so far as parties are concerned, to appointed 
 petty sessions (^), power is given, in accordance with the 
 recommendation contained in the report under the Labour 
 
 (Ji) See the further observations 
 of the Commission, ante^ p. 70. 
 
 (i) Will three half-drunken men 
 accosting an acquaintance in a street 
 or road, and following him in a 
 disorderly manner, with a view to 
 compel him to go with them to a 
 public-house and drink, be within 
 the new law ? In former days 
 zealous, but indiscreet, partisans at 
 parliamentary elections might have 
 fallen under such a law, by not 
 drawing the line sufficiently clear 
 between persuasion and compulsion; 
 but in these days milder arts pre¬ 
 
 vail, or at least offences are not com¬ 
 mitted openly in streets or roads. It 
 may be that the new law is capable of 
 being occasionally applied to a cer¬ 
 tain class of attempted or intended 
 robberies from the person by threats, 
 not amounting to felonious assaults, 
 or to crimes otherwise punishable 
 directly. If so, will unionist work¬ 
 men be grateful for a concession to 
 their views, the result of which is to 
 place their occasional excesses on 
 the same footing ? 
 
 (/j*) See^(7.9f, p. 109. 
 
THE LEGISLATION OF 1875 . 
 
 99 
 
 Laws Commission (Z), to a person accused of any of the 
 offences above mentioned, in addition to a right of appeal 
 to quarter sessions, to object to the summary jurisdiction, 
 and in that event the case is to be dealt with in aU respects 
 as if the accused 'were charged with an indictable offence. 
 
 It is remarkable that no costs of prosecution are allowed 
 to prosecutors of indictments under these circumstances. 
 
 Making the fact of whether a particular offence is in¬ 
 dictable or not, depend on the will of the accused person, 
 is a novelty in our jurisprudence, and, to say the least, pro¬ 
 ductive of considerable practical inconvenience (m) ; and 
 both the novelty and inconvenience might have been easily 
 avoided, and, at the same time, the recommendation of 
 the Commissioners more effectually carried out. 
 
 The act introduces another novelty, worthy of notice, 
 not for the purpose of censure, but as denoting an innova¬ 
 tion in established rules as to the inadmissibility, as 
 witnesses, of persons accused of criminal offences. 
 Although the general law does not allow persons charged 
 in any criminal proceeding with any indictable offence, 
 or any offence punishable on summary conviction, to give 
 evidence for or against himself, or a husband or wife in 
 such cases to give evidence for or against each other, this 
 law was broken into by the Master and Servant Act, 
 1867, which rendered parties to the contract of service, 
 and their husbands and wives, competent witnesses for all 
 the purposes of that act; and subsequently by the Licens¬ 
 ing Act, 1872, in like manner, rendering licensed persons 
 and their wives competent witnesses in summary proceed¬ 
 ings (n). The legislation of 1875 has gone much further. 
 
 (Z) See ante, pp. 61, 73. 
 
 (m) See post, Chapter VIII. 
 
 (/i) As I am to some extent re¬ 
 sponsible for suggesting the past in¬ 
 novations, and therefore cognizant 
 of their origin, I may state how they 
 arose. Being impressed with the un¬ 
 
 equal effect of the law which drew 
 the distinction (and no doubt pro¬ 
 perly, in interpreting the statute 
 on which the question depended) 
 between orders and convictions by 
 magistrates, and seeing how very 
 hard it was in practice that only 
 
 H 2 
 
100 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 and extends tlie competency to parties to the contract of 
 service, and to their husbands and wives, on the trial of 
 indictments for any of the offences hitherto mentioned, 
 except those offences substituted for the provisions of the 
 Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1871 {o). 
 
 one side in master and servant cases 
 should be competent to give legal 
 evidence of the facts, I recom¬ 
 mended to Lord Elcho, in 1866, 
 that provision should be made to 
 this effect, and the recommendation 
 was placed before the Committee of 
 the House of Commons. A similar 
 suggestion was made by one of the 
 witnesses examined, hut the Com¬ 
 mittee were “not prepared them¬ 
 selves to recommend the adoption 
 of such a principle, involving as it 
 does departure from the law of evi¬ 
 dence in such cases, as npw settled.” 
 (See ante, p. 16). The legislature, 
 however, adopted the suggestion 
 to a greater extent than Avas first 
 proposed ; for the notion was to 
 carry it out by giving power to 
 the magistrate to make an order 
 to pay money, or to perform the 
 contract, and under the general 
 law defendants would be competent 
 Avitnesses. The legislature, how¬ 
 ever, went much further (see ante, 
 p. 21). Having observed the still 
 greater hardship attendant on the 
 exclusion of testimony in complaints 
 against innkeepers and beersellers, 
 Avhere the defendant’s wife aa'us the 
 j)rincipal or only person capable of 
 explaining, or justifying, or deny¬ 
 ing the acts alleged in support of 
 the charge, I availed myself in 
 1868 of the opportunity afforded by 
 a public occasion of calling the 
 attention of the licensed victuallers 
 to this, and as I thought, and still 
 
 think, another real grieA^ance, as dis¬ 
 tinguished from imaginary Avrongs. 
 A member of the then and present 
 government was present, and spoke 
 to me afterwards on the subject. In 
 1872, although the Licensing Bill 
 made no provision for admitting the 
 parties as witnesses in the cases re¬ 
 ferred to, and the government resisted 
 any change, a clause was moved, and, 
 on a division, carried against the go¬ 
 vernment. I have elsewhere said, 
 “I hope to see the day when de¬ 
 fendants in all cases of summary 
 convictions shall be competent, but 
 not compellable,Avitnesses.” (Second 
 and Final Report of the Royal 
 Commission on Labour Laws— 
 Minutes of Evidence.) The legis¬ 
 lation of 1875 has widened the 
 question. One thing seems to be 
 clear, that the present disjointed 
 condition of things, under which 
 neither the father nor mother of 
 a child is permitted to give evidence 
 in answer to a school board sum¬ 
 mons for a half-crown fine, for not 
 sending the child to school, can 
 long endure. The whole question 
 must be considered upon general 
 principles at no very distant day. 
 
 (o) The reason for the distinction, 
 which was evidently intentional, is 
 not very clear, for it is difficult to 
 say why a man, or his Avife, who 
 hides the tools of another, should not 
 be a competent witness, as fully as 
 a man or the wife of a man who 
 maliciously breaks a contract of 
 
THE LEGISLATION OF 1875 . 
 
 101 
 
 If a charge of any of these offences reaches the stage 
 of a trial, the appearance of the accused, or his wife, in 
 the witness box wdll be a fact of considerable interest in 
 legal history. It is even possible, although other con¬ 
 siderations wiU prevent the exjDeriment except under very 
 peculiar circumstances, that the accused may be put on 
 his oath, not only on his own behalf, but by the prosecutor, 
 and further, that the wife of the accused may be called as 
 a witness against him. 
 
 Proceeding to notice the mode in which the legislature 
 has dealt with the remaining subject of consideration by 
 the Poyal Commission,—^the law of conspiracy,—it will 
 be remembered that the Commissioners, while recommend¬ 
 ing a more definite enactment, extending the then exist¬ 
 ing immunity from the law of conspiracy, expressed an 
 opinion that a combination to interfere with the will of 
 others in the conduct of their business or work, by means 
 of wilfully breaking, or procuring others to break, any 
 contract of service, should be still subject to the law of 
 conspiracy (p). 
 
 The legislature has disregarded this recommendation by 
 enacting that an agreement or combination to do or pro¬ 
 cure to be done any act in contemplation or furtherance 
 of a trade dispute between employers and workmen, shall 
 not be indictable as a conspiracy if such act committed by 
 one person would not be punishable as a crime. 
 
 Coupled with the repeal of the Criminal Law Amend¬ 
 ment Act of 1871, it is not improbable that cases of total 
 irresponsibility to the criminal law may occur, not contem¬ 
 plated by the legislature, although foreshadowed by some 
 observations and illustrations given in the report of the 
 Royal Commission. For many reasons, however, it is un¬ 
 desirable to dwell on or to specify such contingencies. 
 
 Having now seen the general bearings and scope of the 
 Labour Laws of 1875, the subsequent chapters will be 
 
 service. It would be wrong, how- merely of privilege, 
 ever, to consider the question as one (y?) See ante, p. 78. 
 
102 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 devoted to the procedure of the courts under the new law, 
 treating the subject practically for the use of those partici¬ 
 pating in enforcing or administering the law, whether 
 judicially, ministerially, or in advocating the interests of 
 persons within the field of its operation. 
 
 The present chapter might have commented with greater 
 minuteness on the alterations effected during the progress 
 of the bills through the House of Commons, and on the 
 range of debate and discussion called forth, but such a 
 commentary would be a vain effort in regard to modifica¬ 
 tions made with a view not so much to attain a strictly 
 logical system of labour laws, but with the hope of satis¬ 
 fying a very large class of persons by a series of conces¬ 
 sions to their opinions (^). 
 
 If these concessions have the desired effect of securing 
 confidence in and adherence to the law, and in its adminis¬ 
 tration on most important subjects, the object attained will 
 be well purchased at a sacrifice of unity and consistency 
 of principle. 
 
 Whatever may be the direct advantages or disadvan¬ 
 tages of particular features of these acts, one general 
 indirect result may be anticipated although not contem¬ 
 plated. It is probable, for many reasons, that the courts 
 of summary jurisdiction wiU not be as readily resorted to 
 as heretofore (r). 
 
 This apparent indication of want of success may lead to 
 the best possible results,—greater mutual confidence and 
 
 (^) No stronger illustration of 
 this could be given than the absence 
 in the debate of any reference to the 
 truck laws. What a comment does 
 the restriction, under penal provi¬ 
 sions, put on labour contracts by the 
 Truck Act(l & 2 Will. 4, c. 37), 
 offer to the workman’s cry against 
 special legislation for labour con¬ 
 tracts I No one thinks at present of 
 repealing that special penal legisla¬ 
 tion. I again cite, without adopting. 
 
 Mr. Crompton’s words—“ The work¬ 
 ing classes are actually placed in a 
 better position than the rest of our 
 countrymen. Mr. Cross preferred 
 actual justice to a logical con¬ 
 sistency which caused injustice.” 
 (^Tlie Fortnightly Review, Sep¬ 
 tember, 1876.) 
 
 (r) The impossibility to obtain 
 an order for performance of con¬ 
 tract without the assent of the de¬ 
 fendant, and the necessity of a 
 
THE LEGISLATION OF 1875 . 
 
 103 
 
 regard, and reliance on personal character and good faith, 
 rather than on the invocation of the law for the perform¬ 
 ance of duties and obligations. 
 
 The chapter may fittingly conclude with the Prime 
 Minister’s observations on the Labour Laws of 1875. In 
 the aspirations contained in them all will concur. 
 
 In considering the greatest modern political question, 
 the condition of the people, we found that there was one 
 question we had to encounter, without a happy solution of 
 which all our efforts must in their effects be limited, 
 partial, and perhaps vain. I allude to those laws which 
 long existed, which statesmen have long considered with 
 a conviction, some of their inconvenience and danger, 
 some of their essentially baneful influence—those laws 
 which regulate the relations between the employers and 
 the employed. It had been said and considered that the 
 difficulties of dealing with this legislation were so great, 
 that any hope of success was impossible. I will not go 
 into these difficulties. I will only say—for I wish the 
 words I utter to be brief and condensed—her Majesty’s 
 government at least dared to meet those difficulties, and 
 conquered them. The legislation of labour, if I may so 
 call it, in this session of parliament, has terminated that 
 
 second distinct proceeding to enforce 
 payment of damages, and the then 
 great uncertainty of their ultimate 
 recovery, must inevitably have an 
 effect in deterring applications 
 to the court of summary civil 
 jurisdiction. The impediment to 
 a resort to criminal proceedings, 
 where an offence of that character 
 has been committed, is the pro¬ 
 spect that on any charge made 
 the defendant will elect to be tried 
 by indictment. The complainant 
 will not like the idea of a prose¬ 
 cution conducted entirely at his own 
 cost, and therefore Avill avoid that 
 probable contingency by not in¬ 
 
 curring the preliminary cost and 
 loss of time of an information and 
 summons. On the other hand, an 
 accused person will doubtless exer¬ 
 cise his privilege of objecting to the 
 justices’ jurisdiction, for one or 
 other of the following reasons : 
 (1) an honest desire to be tried by 
 a jury ; (2) the belief that the com¬ 
 plainant will, in consequence, decline 
 to prosecute ; (3) to avoid the com¬ 
 plainant’s costs in the court of sum¬ 
 mary jurisdiction and immediate fine 
 or imprisonment ; (4) to vex and 
 harass the complainant, towards 
 whom he has already done an inten¬ 
 tional wrong. 
 
104 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 distinction between classes which has been so long 
 deprecated, and which, if it exists, renders any union in 
 society scarcely possible. For the first time in the history 
 of this country the employers and the employed sit under 
 equal laws; no one can now be imprisoned for a breach of 
 contract, while adequate civil remedies have been furnished 
 for that concession. The law of conspiracy has been 
 dealt with in such a manner that no longer can it be said 
 that an aggregate body of men can be convicted of a 
 crime of which if one had been tried individually by law 
 it would be recognized that he was innocent. I am hope¬ 
 ful that these great results will be regarded as of the 
 present session of parliament” ( 5 ). 
 
 ( 5 ) Mr. Disraeli’s speech at the Mansion House, 4th August, 1875, as 
 reported in the “ Times.” 
 
( 105 ) 
 
 CHAPTER yiL 
 
 PROCEDURE UNDER THE EMPLOYERS AND WORKMEN 
 
 ACT, 1875. 
 
 § 1. The Tribunal for hearing and determining Disputes. 
 
 Before dealing witli the procedure under the Employers 
 and Workmen Act, 1875, it is desirable to say something 
 of the tribunal and its jurisdiction. 
 
 So far as relates to employers and workmen, there are 
 two tribunals referred to in the act for hearing and deter¬ 
 mining disputes” between them —The County Court, 
 and The Court of Summary Jurisdiction established 
 by the act (a). The county court jurisdiction is not 
 created by the act, but is the result of the jurisdiction 
 conferred on the county courts on their establishment (and 
 subsequently extended), in respect of claims to damages for 
 breaches of contract or other wrongs, including causes of 
 action arising out of the relation of employer and work¬ 
 men {h). 
 
 Recognizing the common law right of action, and the 
 right as already existing in the county courts of enforcing 
 that right, the Employers and AYorkmen Act, 1875, 
 simply enlarges the powers of the county courts in relation 
 to any dispute between an employer and a workman, and 
 
 («) As applied to Scotland, the 
 expression “ county court ” means 
 the ordinary sheriff court of the 
 county, and as applied to Ireland 
 means civil bill court. 
 
 (&) Although this county court 
 jurisdiction is in one sense only con¬ 
 current with the jurisdiction of the 
 
 higher courts of the country, yet for 
 practical purposes (applicable to all 
 but very exceptional cases), I treat 
 the county courts and the courts of 
 summary jurisdiction as exclusive 
 of any other tribunal for cases 
 arising under the Employers and 
 Workmen Act, 1875. 
 
106 
 
 THE LABOUR LAAVS. 
 
 creates anotlier limited concurrent jurisdiction as regards 
 such matters (c). 
 
 The new courts of summary jurisdiction cannot, how¬ 
 ever, exercise any jurisdiction where the amount claimed 
 exceeds 10/., nor can it make an order for payment ex¬ 
 ceeding that sum exclusive of the costs incurred in the 
 case, nor, under the power to be hereafter noticed (d), 
 require security to an amount exceeding 10/. from any 
 defendant or his surety (e). Further, it seems to be clear 
 that a court of summary jurisdiction can only hear and 
 determine cases between the immediate parties to the 
 contract, that is to say, the workman and the employer; 
 and that it cannot adjudicate on claims by or against the 
 personal representatives of either, or claims of third parties, 
 except to enforce undertakings for performance. So also 
 (although that must be immaterial in all but very ex¬ 
 ceptional cases) the complaint must be made within six 
 calendar months from the time when the matter of such 
 complaint arose (/). 
 
 The county court jurisdiction is not so limited, for its 
 ordinary jurisdiction up to 50/. applies of course to claims 
 for damages under the act. On the other hand, the juris¬ 
 diction given by the act in disputes between masters and 
 apprentices, hereinafter mentioned, is confined to the 
 courts of summary jurisdiction. 
 
 It is well to observe in this place that although the act 
 provides that proceedings for disputes within the scope of 
 the acts 77 ia?/ be heard in a court of summary jurisdiction, 
 
 I thus leaving any other court open, the repeal of the Act 
 ' of 1867, and of the previous provisions incorporated in it, 
 has the effect of making the new courts and the county 
 i courts the only available tribunals in the great majority 
 
 (c) The full title of the act well tion in respect of such disputes.” 
 marks the distinction, “An Act to (d) See p. 132. 
 enlarge the powers of county courts (<?) 38 & 39 Viet. c. 90, s. 4. 
 
 in respect of disputes between em- (/) See the Summary Jurisdic- 
 
 ploycrs and workmen, and to give tion Act, 11 & 12 Viet. c. 43, s. 11. 
 other courts a limited civil jurisdic- 
 
PFvOCEDURE—EMPLOYERS AND WORKMEN ACT. 107 
 
 of cases. Nevertheless, there are many provisions regu¬ 
 lating employer and employed in various trades and manu¬ 
 factures still unrepealed, which, although hitherto regarded 
 as having been merged in the general powers of the Act 
 of 1867 and prior acts, may, it is not improbable, be re¬ 
 vived, and these powers exercised for the determination of 
 cases under particular circumstances. For this and for 
 other reasons the still unrepealed legislation is included in 
 an Appendix of Labonr Laws ” to this volume. 
 
 With these observations, the remainder of this division 
 of the chapter is devoted to a statement of the constitution 
 of the new tribunal. 
 
 Courts of Summary Jurisdiction ?^—The Employers 
 and Workmen Act, 1875, enacts that ‘^a dispute between 
 an employer and workman may be heard and determined 
 ^ByTc^urt of summary jurisdiction, and such court for the 
 purposes of 'this act shall be deemed to be a court of civil 
 jurisdiction” 
 
 The court of summary jurisdiction is thus constituted : — 
 
 (1) As respects the city of London, the Lord Mayor 
 
 or any alderman sitting at the Mansion House 
 or Guildhall justice room. 
 
 (2) As respects any police court division in the metro¬ 
 
 politan police district, any metropolitan police 
 magistrate sMng at a police court for that 
 division (A). 
 
 (3) As respects any city, town, liberty, borough, place 
 
 or district for which a stipendiary magistrate is 
 for the time being acting, such stipendiary 
 magistrate sitting at a police court or other place 
 appointed in that behalf. 
 
 ig') 38 & 39 Viet. c. 90, s. 4. stipendiary magistrate in respect of 
 
 (A) This does not restrict the any act or jurisdiction which may 
 jurisdiction of the Lord Mayor or now be done or exercised by him 
 any alderman of the city of London, out of court (38 & 39 Viet. c. 90 
 or of any metropolitan police or s. 10^. 
 
108 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 (4) Elsewhere any justice or justices of the peace to 
 whom jurisdiction is given by the Summary 
 Jurisdiction Act ( 2 ). 
 
 Provided that as respects any case within the cognn 
 zance of such justice or justices as last aforesaid, a com¬ 
 plaint under this act shall be heard and determined, and 
 an order for imprisonment made by two or more justices 
 of the peace in petty sessions sitting at some place ap¬ 
 pointed for holding petty sessions” (A). 
 
 Very important distinctions exist between the constitu¬ 
 tion of the new courts and the former tribunals for deter¬ 
 mining cases between employers and workmen. Under 
 the Act of 1867 the jurisdiction of stipendiary magistrates 
 and of two ordinary justices of the peace was concurrent, 
 but now it is exclusive. In the large towns and populous 
 districts, where stipendiary magistrates are appointed, 
 whether under the Municipal Corporations Act or under 
 the Stipendiary Magistrates Act, or under special acts, 
 their jurisdiction is now exclusive (/). County or borough 
 justices have no jurisdiction in these cases in such places. 
 
 A still more important distinction, however, consists in 
 the courts where the county or borough justices have 
 
 (i) The Summary Jurisdiction 
 Act means 11 & 12 Viet. c. 43, 
 inclusive of any acts amending it; 
 in Scotland the 7 Will. 4 & 1 Viet, 
 c. 41, and any act amending it; in 
 Ireland, as regards the police dis¬ 
 trict of Dublin metropolis, the acts 
 regulating the powers and duties of 
 justices of the peace for such dis¬ 
 trict ; and elsewhere in Ireland the 
 Petty Sessions (Ireland) Act, 1861, 
 and any amending acts (38 & 39 
 Viet. c. 90, ss. 10, 14, 16). 
 
 (k) In Scotland ‘Uho court of 
 summary jurisdiction” means the 
 small debt court of the sheriff of 
 the county; in Ireland it means any 
 justice of the peace or other magis¬ 
 
 trate to whom jurisdiction is given by 
 the Summary Jurisdiction Act; and 
 (in Ireland) the court of summary 
 jurisdiction, where hearing and de¬ 
 termining complaints under the act, 
 in the police district of Dublin 
 metropolis, is required to be consti¬ 
 tuted of one or more of the divi¬ 
 sional justices of that district: and 
 elsewhere in Ireland of two or more 
 justices of the peace sitting at a 
 place appointed for holding petty 
 sessions (38 & 39 Viet. c. 90, ss. 14, 
 16). 
 
 (1) Their deputies, duly appointed 
 with the sanction of the Home Secre¬ 
 tary under 32 Sc 33 Viet. c. 34, can 
 exercise the powers in question. 
 
PROCEDURE—EMPLOYERS AND WORKMEN ACT. 109 
 
 jurisdiction. Previously, two justices sitting together 
 constituted the ordinary courts of summary jurisdiction in 
 master and servant cases; now, courts of summary juris¬ 
 diction to hear complaints under the new act, when heard 
 before justices of the peace, must be composed of two or 
 more justices in petty sessions, at some place appointed 
 for holding petty sessions. This seems to point to petty 
 sessions within petty sessional divisions constituted under 
 9 Geo. 4, c. 43, and subsequent acts, and the places ap¬ 
 pointed under 12 & 13 Viet. c. 18, or 31 Viet. c. 22 (m). 
 
 The forms accompanying the Lord Chancellor’s orders 
 under the act, confirm this view by using the words. 
 Petty Sessions District of, ^c. {n). 
 
 It must be borne in mind that these divisional comts of 
 petty sessions are not courts of record, and therefore the 
 new courts of summary jurisdiction in England are not, 
 like the county courts, courts of record, although the 
 clerk keeps a plaint book in his office. 
 
 Rules for carrying into effect the Jurisdiction given to 
 Courts of Summary Jurisdiction.^ —The act gives power 
 to the Lord Chancellor from time to time to make, and 
 when made to rescind, alter and add to, rules for carrying 
 into effect the jurisdiction given by the act to a court of 
 summary jurisdiction, and, in particular, for the purpose 
 of regulating the costs of any proceedings (o). 
 
 This power was at once exercised by the issue of rules, 
 dated 13th August, 1875. To these rules are appended a 
 schedule of forms and another of costs {p). The rules 
 
 (m) As to boroughs having a 
 separate commission of the peace, 
 see 12 & 13 Viet. c. 18, s. 1. See 
 the various provisions given in Oke’s 
 Magisterial Synopsis, Introduction. 
 V. The Constitution and Ma¬ 
 nagement OF Benches of Jus¬ 
 tices. 
 
 See the Rules and Forms, 
 
 {o) 38 & 39 Viet. c. 90, s. 9. In 
 Scotland “ the Court of Session, by 
 act of sederunt,” is substituted for 
 the Lord Chancellor; and in Ireland, 
 the Lord Chancellor of Ireland. As 
 to costs, see post. 
 
 {p) See the Rules and Forms, 
 post. 
 
110 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 and forms carry out tlie intention of the legislature to 
 make the courts of summary jurisdiction civil courts. 
 They assimilate the procedure and practice of the courts 
 as closely as possible to that of the county courts. 
 
 It is essential, however, to bear in mind, in dealing 
 with and applying the rules, that they cannot enlarge or 
 alter the jurisdiction of the courts of summary jurisdic¬ 
 tion. Any attempt so to affect the jurisdiction as pro¬ 
 vided by the act itself, would make the rules void, as ultra 
 vires. 
 
 It is scarcely necessary to observe that, with regard to 
 the county courts, judges of those courts, appointed by 
 the Lord Chancellor, have power, independently of the 
 new act, to make rules and orders ( 5 '), so that it was un¬ 
 necessary to make provision for them. No county court 
 rules have been issued having special reference to the 
 Employers and Workmen Act, 1875. The existing 
 county court rules are applicable for many purposes. Still 
 rules seem desirable as to a speedy hearing of cases, and 
 for some other purposes. 
 
 § 2 . The Jurisdiction as to Persons and Things, 
 
 It is desirable in the next place to see what persons 
 and what matters are subject to be dealt with under the 
 act. Postponing the consideration of the jurisdiction in 
 respect of apprentices, the present division of this chapter 
 is confined to employers and workmen. 
 
 Emplogers ,~\—The persons are ^^employers” and ^^work- 
 men.” The employers are those employers who have a 
 contract with a workman, and, therefore, the definition 
 of workman ” and of contract” govern employer.” 
 
 Workmen,'] —Workman” means any person who being 
 a labourer, servant in husbandry, journeyman, artificer, 
 
 {q) See the County Courts Act, 185G, s. 32. 
 
PROCEDURE—EMPLOYERS AND WORKMEN ACT. Ill 
 
 handicraftsman, miner, or otherwise engaged in manual 
 labour, whether under the age of twenty-one years or 
 above that age, has entered into or works under a 
 contract with an employer,” but does not include a 
 domestic or menial servant(r), nor does the act apply to 
 seamen ( 5 ). 
 
 It is the numerous class who serve by placing at the 
 service of their employers their labour, whether rude or 
 skilled, according to the branch of productive industry or 
 manufacture to which they belong, including labourers in 
 husbandry, miners, quarrjunen and the like, and to manu¬ 
 facturers, artificers, and others employed in the various 
 forms of creative industry that this legislation has been 
 directed (^). 
 
 Contract ']—The contract” entered into, or which is 
 worked under, with an employer, is within the meaning 
 of the act, whether the contract be made before or after 
 the passing of this act, be express or implied, oral or in 
 writing, and be a contract of service or a contract per¬ 
 sonally to execute'^y work or labour ”(m). 
 
 It seems, although not expressed with precision, that 
 the contract must be a contract of service or a contract 
 personally to execute some work or labour. There may 
 be contracts of service, although exceptional, not involving 
 the personal execution of any work or labour,” and there 
 may be contracts personally to execute work or labour not 
 amounting to a contract of service. It is not, however, 
 every contract of service, or every contract to personally 
 execute any work or labour, that is within the act; for 
 the contract must be by a workman with an employer, 
 
 (r) 38 & 39 Viet. c. 90, s. 10. service as arbitrator between em- 
 
 (s) Id. s. 13. ployer and employed, has used an 
 
 (i) See the Report of the Royal expression which, it appears to me. 
 
 Commission on Labour Laws, cited admirably concentrates and defines 
 ante, p. 3. Mr. Rupert Kettle, this class by two words, “Hand 
 judge of county courts, who, as is workers.’’ 
 well known, has done great public (w) 38 & 39 Viet. c. 90, s. 10. 
 
112 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 and the ^Svorkman” must be either a labourer, or a ser¬ 
 vant in husbandry, or a journeyman, or an artificer, or a 
 handicraftsman, or a miner, or a person* otherwise engaged 
 in manual labour; and this last apparently sweeping ex¬ 
 pression must be, to some extent, restrained by the pre¬ 
 vious definition of “workman” in accordance with well- 
 established principles of construction. It seems clear, 
 therefore, that neither domestic nor menial servants, nor 
 probably “seamen,” would be included in the word “work¬ 
 man,” even without their express exception. It is also 
 manifestly intended that the contract of service, or contract 
 personally to execute any work or labour, should have 
 relation to the workman’s ordinary or occasional vocation, 
 as defined; that is to say, that the contract should be in 
 that particular character. Thus, a person whose ordinary 
 avocation is that of “ handicraftsman ” or “ miner,” in the 
 summer time may be employed in harvesting, and thus, 
 for the time being, he w^ould, as “labourer” or “servant 
 in husbandry,” be ^within the act in respect of such occa¬ 
 sional service; but a “journeyman” in a trade, involving 
 manual labour, under an occasional contract, outside his 
 ordinary vocation, to serve, say, for example, as a copying 
 clerk, or in any other character of that description, would 
 not be within the act in respect of that occasional service; 
 for, although answering the description of, as ordinarily, a 
 “journeyman,” and entering into “ a contract of service,” 
 and, therefore, apparently falling within the required de¬ 
 finition, he would not, in respect of the supposed occasional 
 contract of service, be a workman within the act, for the 
 contract would not be in his ordinary character, nor would 
 he, although in one sense engaged in manual labour, be a 
 “ workman ” otherwise engaged in manual labour (jr). 
 
 {x) It is very difficult to define “ a the term “ hand worker ” generally 
 workman engaged in manual labour” follow (see ante^ P-111> iiote (t)). A 
 wffiere mind enters largely into com- journeyman compositor in a printing 
 bination with muscular activity. office may use more real “ mind” 
 As the one or the other dominates, in setting up his type than an 
 so must exclusion or inclusion in “ author ” or “ editor,” whose chief 
 
PROCEDURE—EMPLOYERS AND WORKMEN ACT. 113 
 
 On the other hand, it seems clear that the contract of 
 service or for personal execution of work need not be to 
 serve or work exclusively for one employer {y), 
 
 handmaids may be paste and scissors 
 and occasionally a pen. The case 
 put in the text does not, however, 
 depend on such distinctions, but on 
 the fact that the “ hand work ” in¬ 
 volved in copying writing does not 
 constitute a “ workman ” engaged 
 in manual labour within the special 
 meaning of the act. 
 
 (y) The following cases decided 
 under the now repealed act, 4 Geo. 4, 
 c. 34 (incorporated in the Act of 
 1867), appear to be applicable to the 
 Employer and Workmen Act, 1875. 
 It may be observed that the 4 Geo. 4, 
 c. 34, used (with others) all the 
 definitions as to employments men¬ 
 tioned in the 38 & 39 Viet. c. 90, 
 s. 10, except “journeyman,” but 
 was narrower than the last-men¬ 
 tioned act in making a contract of 
 sef'vice essential. 
 
 A designer, who contracts to 
 serve a calico printer for a specific 
 period, and whose duty it is to form 
 designs and draw patterns to be 
 afterwards engraved on copper rollers 
 to be used in calico printing, was 
 within the act 4 Geo. 4, c. 34, as 
 being either an “ artijicei' ” or 
 “ other person ” of that class. (Wil¬ 
 liams, J., Ex parte Ormerod, 13 
 L. J. Rep. (N. S.) M. C. 73; 1 
 Dowl. & L. 825.) 
 
 A journeyman tailor, working 
 with others engaged in the same 
 way for a master tailor on the pre¬ 
 mises of the latter, and doing such 
 work as he was set to do, being paid 
 wages at a certain price per gar¬ 
 ment, according to a list of prices 
 agreed upon between employer and 
 D. 
 
 men, the contract not extending 
 beyond the particular job the jour¬ 
 neyman was engaged upon at any 
 particular time, but during that job 
 working exclusively for his em¬ 
 ployer, was within the act. {Ex 
 parte Gordon^ 25 L. J. Rep. (N. S.) 
 M. C. 12.) 
 
 Evidence of a contract to serv'e as 
 a collier until a month’s notice on 
 either side, the price paid to be 
 l5. 10(^. per ton of coals cut, paid 
 monthly, but varying with the price 
 in the district, and the collier 
 agreeing not to work for any other 
 person during the service, nor until 
 the expiration of the month’s notice, 
 was held to justify the magistrates 
 in inferring a contract for personal 
 service, and consequently that it was 
 a case within the act. {Ex parte 
 Bailey and Ex parte Collier, 3 E. & 
 B.697; 23 L. J. (N. S.) M. C. 161.) 
 In that case Crompton, J., observed 
 that he should have entertained 
 some doubt if he had to decide the 
 fact of a requirement to serve per¬ 
 sonally. (See the cases of butty 
 colliers under the Truck Act, noticed 
 post, Appendix, p. 243.) 
 
 Where B., a potter, engaged W. 
 to work for him at specified work in 
 their manufactory for a year at 
 daily wages, and at the same time, 
 by a separate contract, B. engaged 
 R. to work for him by piece work 
 for the same period, and the work 
 which W. had to do was in fact 
 included in the piece work of R., 
 who paid W. his wages out of the 
 amount earned by R. for the piece 
 work, it was held that the contract 
 I 
 
114 
 
 THE LABOUH LAWS. 
 
 It seems, moreover, that the relationship of employer 
 and workman under the contract need not subsist at the 
 time of the proceeding taken under the act. If the law 
 Avere otherwise many claims by Avorkmen for wages under 
 
 of master and servant subsisted be¬ 
 tween B. & W., notwithstanding 
 the fact of the payment of W.’s 
 Avages by the hands of R., and that 
 consequently \Y. was liable under 
 the statute for neglecting his service 
 with B. (Willett v. Boote^ 30 
 L. J. Rep. (N. S.) M. C. 6; G II. 
 & N. 2G.) 
 
 Skilled persons were employed as 
 angle-iron smiths and platers by a 
 shipbuilder, who by a written con¬ 
 tract agreed to employ and they 
 exclusively to serve him to the best 
 of their ability, and subject to the 
 regulations of his yard, for the pur¬ 
 pose of executing the whole of the 
 skilled and unskilled labour requi¬ 
 site to complete the iron hull of a 
 vessel with the best workmanship, 
 and to the satisfaction of the ship¬ 
 builder ; the persons so employed 
 agreeing to employ and pay such 
 skilled and unskilled assistants as 
 the shipbuilder should deem requi¬ 
 site, and to be subject to the rules 
 of the yard and of the shipbuilder, 
 including liability to discharge by 
 him and as if each had entered his 
 service; to be paid weekly a fixed 
 sum per ton for the work executed 
 
 to the shipbuilder’s satisfaction, less 
 a per-centage to be retained until 
 the completion of the work as a 
 security for the work being duly 
 fulfilled ; the shipbuilder, in the 
 event of neglect or delay, or insuf¬ 
 ficiency of hands, to employ other 
 hands and charge any one of the 
 contracting parties with the extra 
 costs, but without prejudice to any 
 other redress arising out of the re¬ 
 lation of master and servant thereby 
 created. It was held that they were 
 servants liable to be proceeded 
 against under the 4 Geo. 4, c. 34, 
 for absenting themselves. {Lan:- 
 rence v. Toddy 14 C. B. Rep., N. S. 
 554; 32 L. J., M. C. 238.*) 
 
 The above cases, as already ob¬ 
 served, are still applicable; for being 
 within the 4 Geo. 4 they would, « 
 fortiori, be within the 38 & 39 Viet, 
 c. 90. 
 
 The act 4 Geo. 4 was held not to 
 apply to a contract to build a wall 
 for a certain price within a certain 
 time, for the relationship of master 
 and servant does not exist. {Lan¬ 
 caster V. Greaves, 9 B. & C. 628; 
 and see West v. Smallwood, 3 !M. 
 & W. 418.) So a contract “ to 
 
 • It may be suggested that the authority of this case has been shaken b}' decisions under 
 the Truck Act. Erie, J., in giving his judgment in Lawrence v. Todd, observed, that the 
 Truck Act (1 & 2 Will. 4, c. 37) was in pari materid with the statute 4 Geo. 4, c. 34, and 
 that he relied on the authority of Bowers v. Lovekin (1 E. & B. 584; 25 L. J., Q. B. 371). 
 pi that case Erie, J., had gone further than the rest of the court, and his opinion (so far as 
 it differed from the rest of the court) was disapproved bv the Exchequer Chamber in 
 Ingram v. Barnes (7 E. & B. 115, 132; 26 L. J. Rep. (N. S.) Q. B. 319); and in the subse¬ 
 quent case of Sleeman v. Barrett (2 11. & C. 934; 33 L. J. (N.S ) Ex. 153), on Lawrence 
 V. Todd being cited in argument as aihrming Bowers v. Lovekin, Martin, B., observed 
 that that was the opinion of Erie, J., who differed from the other judges in Ingram v. 
 Barnes. Bowers v. Lovekin is, however, apparently still law as having been a contract 
 tor personal services. Lawrence v. Todd may, however, be uplield without reference to 
 owr.s V. Lovekin, the contract showing that the parties expressly contemplated pet'sonal 
 services a> servants to the shipbuilders. Under any circumstances, it seems clear that the 
 rSVr V. Todd would bring the case within the existing act as a contract of ser- 
 
 hr m.iuual work, bee the Truck Act and cases upon it, post, Appe.ndix, pp, 233 -247. 
 
PKOCEDUKE—EMPLOYEES AND WORKMEN ACT. 115 
 
 past contracts, and many claims by employers for breaches 
 of contracts, where they have already elected to treat the 
 contract as terminated by the wrongful act, but think fit to 
 
 print certain pieces of woollen cotton 
 goods” was not within it. {Ex 
 parte Johnson, 7 Dowl. P. C. 702; 
 
 9 L. J. Rep. (N. S.) M. C. 27 ; 
 Johnson \. Reid, 6 M. & W. 124.) 
 
 But it is clear that these cases are 
 not to be relied on as applicable 
 to the 38 & 39 Viet., which only 
 requires a contract of service, or a 
 contract personally to execute any 
 work or labour. 
 
 But, on the other hand, the de¬ 
 cision that a person engaged to keep 
 the general accounts of a farm, to 
 weigh out food for cattle, to set the 
 men to work, to lend a hand to 
 anything if wanted, and in all things 
 to carry out the orders of his em¬ 
 ployer, was not within the 4 Geo. 4, 
 either as a “ servant in husbandry” 
 or “other person,” but was a stew¬ 
 ard or bailiff {Davies v, Berwich, 
 3 E. & E. 549; 30 L. J. Rep., M. C. 
 84) seems applicable to the new law; 
 for the words “ who being a labourer” 
 do not extend to every description of 
 labour, but to labourers “ engaged 
 in manual labour.” So, the decision 
 that a person whose name was added 
 to that of a regular officer in a 
 warrant under a fi. fa. by a plain¬ 
 tiff’s attorney, and who was em¬ 
 ployed to watch the goods after 
 they had been taken by the officer, 
 was not a labourer within another 
 prior and repealed act (20 Geo. 
 3, c. 19), is still applicable. 
 {Branrcell v. Pennech, 7 B. & C. 
 53G.) But another decision under 
 the same statute that a silk weaver 
 who works up at his own house 
 materials for a master manufacturer 
 was not within it {Hardy y. Ryle, 
 
 9 B. & C. 603) appears not to be 
 applicable to the altered law. 
 
 Although domestic servants, as 
 distinguished from servants in hus¬ 
 bandry, are not within the act 
 (and would not be, it seems, even 
 without the express exception, see 
 Kitehin v. Shaw, 6 A. & E. 729; 
 7 L. J. Rep., M. C. 14), a servant 
 may, under special circumstances, 
 serve intra moenia, and nevertheless 
 be regarded as a servant in hus¬ 
 bandry. 
 
 Where the duties of a female 
 servant were to attend at a farm 
 (where the master did not reside) 
 and perform the duties of a dairy¬ 
 maid, and to assist in harvest work, 
 and to cook and make beds for the 
 servant men and labourers, it was 
 held that there was evidence on 
 which the justices might adjudge 
 her to be a servant in husbandry, 
 making her main employment as 
 connected with husbandly, and the 
 domestic duties as merely ancillary. 
 {Ex parte Hughes, 23 L. J. (N, S.) 
 M. C. 138.) The decision of the Court 
 of Queen’s Bench in that case ap¬ 
 pears, however, to have been mis¬ 
 understood and consequently abused, 
 the decision merely amounting to 
 this, that there was some evidence 
 on which the justices might come to 
 the conclusion they did. It is clear 
 that if they had found the facts the 
 other way, that the w'oman was a 
 menial servant, the court would not 
 have interfered, but, on the con¬ 
 trary, have thought the conclusion 
 the sounder alternative. 
 
 A foreman is a servant as much 
 as the other servants whose work 
 
116 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 claim damages as well, would be defeated so far as relates 
 to the courts of summary jurisdiction (z), 
 
 Nor is it essential that the service under any contract of 
 service, or the work or labour under a contract personally 
 to execute any work or labour, should be entered upon. 
 If the contract has been entered into, although remaining 
 wholly unperformed, it is the subject of a proceeding under 
 the act («). 
 
 Validity of Contract ']—Although a contract, whether 
 express or implied, oral or in writing,” is within the act, 
 those words are only explanatory, and do not have the 
 effect of over-riding the general law. Contracts, therefore, 
 must be valid according to that law. Therefore a verbal 
 contract to serve for a year from a future day, the service 
 not being entered upon, cannot be enforced, not being in 
 writing as required by the fourth section of the Statute of 
 Frauds (Z»). So, again, any contract or stipulation in a 
 
 he superintends. (Willes, J., Gal- 
 lagliar v. Piper^ 16 C. B., N. S. 669; 
 cited with approval, WiUon\Merry, 
 Law Rep., 1 Sc. App. Cas. 326.) 
 
 (z) Mr. Hannay, the metropolitan 
 police magistrate, appears to have 
 thought that under the Act of 1867 
 the contract should be still subsist¬ 
 ing, i. e., at the time of the com¬ 
 plaint made. (See First Report of 
 the Royal Commission on Labour 
 Laws, Minutes of Evidence, p. 126, 
 Question 147.) The contrary has 
 been, however, expressly held with 
 regard to apprentices Queen 
 V. Proud, Law Rep., 1 C. C. R. 
 71; 36 L. J., M. C. 62, see 
 and there does not appear to be 
 any distinction in this respect be¬ 
 tween apprentices and workmen. 
 Any distinction between the lan¬ 
 guage of the Repealed Act of 1867 
 and of the Act of 1875 is in favour 
 of the view taken in the text. 
 
 («) This was so under the Act of 
 1867, but under that act, incorpo¬ 
 
 rating the previous legislation, a 
 contract not entered upon must 
 have been in writing and signed by 
 the contracting parties. (See Banhs 
 v. Crossland, 44 L. J., M. C. 8.) 
 This provision being repealed, parol 
 contracts can be enforced although 
 not performed in anyway ; subject, 
 of course, to the Statute of Frauds 
 (see the text, supra). 
 
 (J)) See Banks v. Ct'ossland, 44 
 L. J., M. C. 8. In that case the 
 contract of hiring by parol only at 
 Howden Statute Hirings, held on 
 11th Nov. 1873, was that the re¬ 
 spondent should serve the appellant 
 as a servant in husbandry for one 
 year, to commence at Martinmas 
 (23rd Nov.) 1873, at the wage of 
 13^. The appellant paid to the re¬ 
 spondent 35. for his “ fastening 
 money ” (which money was re¬ 
 turned on 30th Nov. 1873, by the 
 respondent to the appellant and re¬ 
 turned by him, an immaterial cir¬ 
 cumstance, hoAvever, as it seems). 
 
PROCEDUKE—EMPLOYERS AND WORKMEN ACT. 117 
 
 contract, rendered void bj reason of the Truck Act, cannot 
 be enforced (c). 
 
 It may be observed that agreements for the hire of any 
 labourer, artificer, manufacturer or menial servant are 
 exempted from stamp duty. 
 
 Mutuality of Contracts —Apart apparently from the 
 principle of law, that a consideration is essential to the 
 validity of a parol (verbal or written) contract, the courts 
 of law have not only declined to enforce unequal contracts 
 between masters and servants, but have held that they are 
 not binding upon the latter, and could not be enforced by 
 justices {di). Questions of the mutuality of contracts of 
 this description have consequently been raised from time 
 to time in the superior courts. 
 
 Contracts held to have sufficient Mutuality —An agree¬ 
 ment to serve for seven years as a crown glass maker, and 
 not to work for any other person during that term without 
 the leave of the employer, half wages to be paid during a 
 depression of trade, wages to cease during sickness, and 
 the employer to be at liberty to employ another person in 
 his stead, but certain wages to be paid as long as he con¬ 
 
 tinued to be employed as i 
 
 Blacltburn^ J., “ The Statute of 
 Frauds enacts, that do action shall 
 be brought to charge the defendant 
 upon any agreement that is not to 
 he performed within the space of 
 one year from the making thereof, 
 which must mean that the contract 
 is not generally to be enforceable 
 whether in an action or in a sum¬ 
 mary proceeding.” Although decided 
 under the Master and Servant Act, 
 1867, this case is clearly applicable 
 to the Act of 1875. 
 
 {c) See the Truck Act, 1 & 2 
 Will. 4, c. 37, and the cases under 
 it, postf Appendix. It is scarcely 
 necessary to observe that this act, 
 which extends to England and Scot¬ 
 land, applies as heretofore to claims 
 
 crown glass maker, and a 
 
 for wages. Artificers within the 
 meaning of that act, who have been 
 paid otherwise than in coin, may 
 therefore claim their wages under 
 the Act of 1875. 
 
 {d) An examination of the cases 
 shows that although the law does 
 not in general take cognizance of 
 the adequacy of a consideration, but 
 merely inquires if there is any con¬ 
 sideration at all, in cases of master 
 and servant a q^iid pro quo seems to 
 be considered as essential to bind 
 both parties. 
 
 This deviation, if it be a deviation 
 from the general rule as to “ consi¬ 
 deration,” will scarcely be extended 
 now that the matters are dealt with 
 simply as civil claims. 
 
118 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 certain yearly sum in lieu of house rent and firing, with 
 the option of dismissal at a month’s notice, was held 
 binding, as showing an undertaking to employ (e). 
 
 So an agreement to work solely for the employer for 
 a year and further until notice as a tin plate worker, the 
 employer agreeing to pay usual workman’s wages weekly 
 for piece work, contains by reasonable implication an obli¬ 
 gation on the part of the employer to find reasonable em¬ 
 ployment (/). So where a collier, in consideration of 
 wages to be paid to him fortnightly by a company, agreed 
 to serve the company exclusively as a collier until the 
 expiration of twenty-eight days’ notice, and the company, 
 in consideration of such faithful service, agreed that the 
 collier should not be discharged Avithout twenty-eight days’ 
 notice, it Avas held that there was an implied agreement 
 to find him AA^ork, and so the agreement was mutually 
 binding 
 
 Contracts to serve held void for ivant of Mutuality ^]— 
 An agreement in Avriting to AA^ork for J. S., and for no 
 other person, until the expiration of tAA^eh^e months, and 
 so on from twelve months to tAvelve months until he should 
 give tAA^elve months’ notice in Avriting, the master not exe¬ 
 cuting the agreement, Avas held to be A^oid (Ji), 
 
 Capacity to contract—Married Women.'\ —The parties 
 must be competent to contract. Therefore, where a 
 maiTicd AA^oman Avas employed as an artisan at weekly 
 Avages, and left her employment Avithout giving due 
 
 (<?) Pilkington v. Scott, 15 M. & 
 W.657; 15 L. J. Rep.(N. S.) Ex. 329. 
 
 (/) I'he Queen v. Welch, 2 E. & 
 B. 257; 22 L. J. (N. S.) Q. B. 145. 
 
 (y) Whittle V. Franidand, 2 Best 
 & S. 49; 31 L. J. Rep. (N. S.) 
 M. C. 81. Williamson v. Taylor, 5 
 Q. B. Rep. 176; 13 L. J., Q. B. 81; 
 and Aspdin v. Austin, 5 Q. B. Rep. 
 071; 13 L. J., Q. B. 155; where the 
 court held there was no implied 
 agreement to employ; cannot le re¬ 
 
 lied on as authorities. (See Emmens 
 V. Elderton, 4 H. L. Cas. 624; 13 
 C. B. Rep. 495.) 
 
 (Ji) Syhes v. Dixon, 9 A. & E. 
 693; 8 L. J. (N. S.) Q. B. 702. This 
 case, and also Lees v. Whitcomb, 5 
 Bing. 34; 3 C. & P. 219, are, it 
 seems, to be considered as authori¬ 
 ties on the ground that the contracts 
 were signed by one party only. (See 
 observation of Crompton, J., in 
 Whittle V. Franhland.') 
 
PROCEDURE—EMPLOYERS AND WORKMEN ACT. 119 
 
 notice, and, being summoned, the magistrates refused to 
 convict her on the ground that she as a married woman 
 was incapable of contracting, and that, consequently, 
 there was nothing to bind her as between her and her 
 employer, it was held by the Court of Queen’s Bench 
 that the magistrates were right {i ); and in a case occurring 
 soon afterwards, where the justices ordered a married 
 woman working as a weaver in a cotton cloth mill to pay 
 compensation, relying on the Married Women’s Property 
 Act, 1870 (33 & 34 Viet. c. 93) as giving her power to 
 contract, the same court, confirming their previous deci¬ 
 sion, held that the justices were wrong (h). 
 
 Contracts hij Infants .^—On grounds already stated in 
 a preceding paragraph, it seem.s clear that, although the 
 words whether under the age of twenty-one years or 
 above that age” are inserted in the definition of work¬ 
 man (/), a contract cannot be enforced against an infant, 
 unless binding on him independently of the act. 
 
 The general rule is well known that infants cannot 
 contract so as to bind themselves; but there is a wide 
 exception in regard to necessaries and contracts for their 
 personal services if beneficial to them. In the case, there¬ 
 fore, of a claim against an infant, the court must see that 
 on the whole he derives a benefit under the contract (m). 
 
 As the receipt of wages is a benefit, there can be no 
 doubt that, generally speaking, a contract by an infant to 
 
 (i) Tomldnsnn v. West, Q. B., 
 Easter Term, 1875. 
 
 (k) Hodklnson v. Green, Q. B., 
 sittings after Easter Term, 1875. 
 It is scarcely necessary to say that 
 these cases, although decided under 
 the repealed Master and Servant 
 Act, 1867, are still law. 
 
 (Z) 38 & 39 Viet. c. 90, s. 10. 
 The words referred to were not in 
 the bill as originally introduced. 
 There is reason for believing that 
 they were introduced to meet an 
 
 apparently popular impression that 
 a person “ under age ” is not 
 hound, under any circumstances, by 
 an agreement. The words may 
 have, however, a legal effect in 
 avoiding an objection that infants 
 can only sue in a civil court by a 
 “ next friend;” a difficulty that was 
 met in the case of county courts by 
 express legislation. (See 9 & 10 
 Viet. c. 95, s. 64.) 
 
 {m) Alder son, B., Wood v. Fen- 
 Tt'icli, 10 & W. 204. 
 
120 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 receive wages for liis labour is binding on bim, and, if 
 binding, be cannot put an end to it prematurely. That 
 would be a contradiction in terms; because to say that be 
 may contract, is to say tbat be may bind bimself by con¬ 
 tract ; bow, then, can it be determined at bis election tbe 
 next day ? (w). 
 
 Altbougb most contracts of service are on tbe above 
 grounds to be considered as beneficial and binding on a 
 workman under twenty-one, contracts are sometimes 
 entered into tbat are not binding, not being beneficial. 
 
 Thus, where a contract by an infant bound bim to 
 serve a certain number of hours in a week for a year, at 
 weekly wages, with a proviso that in case a steam engine 
 should be stopped from accident or any other cause tbe 
 master might retain the wages during the stoppage, it 
 was held tbat tbe master might stop tbe work whenever 
 be chose, and tbat therefore tbe contract was void as 
 against tbe infant, and tbat be could not be punished for 
 absenting himself from tbe service (o). 
 
 Lord Denman, in delivering tbe judgment of the court, 
 after taking time to consider (p), said: Among many 
 objections, one appears to us clearly fatal. He was an 
 infant at the time of entering into the agreement, which 
 authorizes the master to stop bis wages Avhen the steam 
 engine is stopped Avorking for any cause. An agreement 
 to serve for Avages may be for tbe infant’s benefit; but an 
 agreement AAdiicb compels bim to serA^e at all times during 
 the term, but leaves the master free to stop bis Avork and his 
 Avages Avhenever be chooses to do so, cannot be considered 
 as beneficial to tbe servant.” 
 
 On tbe other hand, it is to be observed tbat if an infant 
 elects to adopt a contract, altbougb not obliged to do so, 
 tbe other contracting party is bound, for as to bim tbe 
 rule is that be is bound though tbe infant is not ( 5 '). 
 
 (n) Lord Ahinger^ C. B., Wood {p') Lord Denman, C. J., Pat- 
 V. Fenwick, snpra. teson, Coleridge 2 ^ 6 . Wightman,^^. 
 
 {o') Beg. V. Loi'd, 12 Q. B. Rep. {q) SecBacon’sAbr. Infancy, 1.4. 
 
 757; 17 L. J. Rep. (N. S.) M. C. 181. 
 
PEOCEDURE—EMPLOYERS AND WORKMEN ACT. 121 
 
 The Subject-matter of Jurisdiction,^ — The subject- 
 matter of jurisdiction is any dispute between an em¬ 
 ployer and a workman arising out of or incidental to their 
 relation as such”(r). 
 
 The word ‘‘dispute” is not very happily chosen, if 
 intended to give an accurate notion of the pnncipal 
 grounds on which proceedings before magistrates have 
 been heretofore instituted. In the majority of cases, an 
 employer had complained of a workman for non-perfonn- 
 ance of his duty, the non-performance consisting of an 
 absenting without any colour of right or any deliberate 
 intention to violate the contract, express or implied; and 
 where not a word in the shape of “ dispute,” in the popular 
 sense of the word, has arisen. So wages not imfrequently 
 simply remain unpaid, from pecuniary embarrassments of 
 the employer. 
 
 So also, unless the act is to be to a great extent a dead 
 letter, “ dispute” must include a wilful act, unconnected 
 with any “ dispute” in the true sense of the word, not 
 amounting to criminal acts provided for by the Con¬ 
 spiracy and Protection of Property Act, 1875, or by any 
 other existing statute. 
 
 It must be observed, with reference to cases of a 
 criminal kind, that (unless amounting to a felony) they 
 may be the subject of proceedings as civil claims for 
 damages {s'). 
 
 With the wide range necessary to give the word “ dis¬ 
 pute,” it may in general be read as “ claim,” and the Lord 
 
 (r) 38 & 39 Viet. c. 90, ss. 3, 4. 
 
 («) Under the former law and 
 still applicable on general principles, 
 if the misconduct amounted to a 
 felony the justices had no jurisdic¬ 
 tion. {Coleridfje^ J., Ex parte 
 Jackliriy 13 L. J. Rep., M. C. 139; 
 2 Dowl. & L. 103.) In that case the 
 offence was wrongfully taking com 
 to give to the master’s horses; no 
 longer a felony but an offence 
 
 punishable summarily. (26 & 27 
 Viet. c. 103, seej9o«f, Appendix.) 
 
 In felonies, criminal proceed¬ 
 ings must precede the claim for 
 personal compensation. In misde¬ 
 meanors a complainant may, as a 
 general rule, in the absence of spe¬ 
 cial provision to the contrary, seek 
 his damages without regard to the 
 criminal offence. 
 
122 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 Cliaucellor’s orders take this view, for they altogether 
 ignore the word dispute” (t). 
 
 Still it is quite clear that the jurisdiction is only in 
 respect of a dispute,” whatever effect may be given to 
 that word. 
 
 § 3. Process of the Courts of Summary Jurisdiction 
 'preliminary to the Hearing, 
 
 The Employers and Workmen Act, 1875, enacts (m), 
 that any dispute or matter in respect of wdiich juris¬ 
 diction is given by the act to a court of summary 
 jurisdiction, shall be deemed to be a matter in which 
 that court has authonty by law to make an order on 
 complaint, in pursuance of the Summary Jurisdiction 
 Act (11 & 12 Viet. c. 43)(a:); and further, that all 
 powers conferred by the new act on a court of summary 
 jurisdiction shall be deemed to be in addition to and not 
 in derogation of any power conferred on it by the Sum¬ 
 mary Jurisdiction Act” (except warrants to apprehend 
 and the enforcement of orders for payment of money) (y). 
 
 Notwithstanding this application of Jervis’s Act, the 
 proceedings necessary to obtain a hearing and determina¬ 
 tion of a case by a court of summary jurisdiction are regu¬ 
 lated almost wdiolly by the Lord Chancellor’s rules, made 
 under the powers given by the act (<?). 
 
 Entry of the Plaint,']—A. person desirous to take pro¬ 
 ceedings under the Employers and Workmen Act, 1875, 
 must deliver particulars in writing of his cause of action 
 to the clerk of the court; that is to say, to the magis¬ 
 trates’ clerk of the petty sessional division or district “ in 
 wiiich the defendant or one of the defendants dw^elt or 
 carried on his business or w’as employed at the time the 
 
 {t) As to claims by workmen for (ff) Sect. 8 (^post^ p. 168). 
 
 damages by reason of defective (a*) See ante, p. 108, n. (i). 
 
 fencing to machinery, or for other (y) 38 & 39 Viet. c. 90, s. 9, post, 
 negligence, see the observations and p. 1G9. 
 cases cited, Appendix, p. 260. {z) Sec ante, p. 109. 
 
 (7 & 8 Viet. c. 15.) 
 
PROCEDURE—EMPLOYERS AND WORKMEN ACT. 123 
 
 cause of action arose” (a). Nevertheless the act, that is 
 to say, the breach of contract complained of, must have 
 been committed within the jurisdiction of the justices con¬ 
 stituting the court of summary jurisdiction. But for the 
 rules providing for a plaint book, as mentioned hereafter, 
 to be kept by the clerk of the court,” application might 
 have been made, it seems, to ani/ justice of the peace 
 anywhere, having jurisdiction in the county or division, for 
 a summons; leaving it to the properly constituted court 
 of summary jurisdiction” to hear and determine it(^). 
 
 No written complaint is required, and it is not neces¬ 
 sary (although in most cases desirable) that the plaintiff 
 should attend in person. The personal attendance of 
 some one cognizant of the essential facts will suffice (c). A 
 fee of one shilling is payable, where the claim does not 
 exceed one pound, and two shillings if above (d). The 
 plaintiff must also prepay, if required, the mileage (and 
 for affidavit and postage if any) for ser\dng the process. 
 
 Particulars of Cause of Action ^—Although in strict¬ 
 ness a plaintiff is bound to prepare his own particulars of 
 his cause of action, there is no doubt that he will be, and 
 ought to be, aided by the magistrates’ clerk, and that 
 forms will be provided. 
 
 It is very undesirable that unnecessary strictness or any 
 mere technicalities should be introduced into proceedings ; 
 still it appears desirable, for several reasons, that the 
 particulars should disclose on the face a dispute” within 
 the jurisdiction given by the act of parliament. 
 
 («) Rules under Employers and 
 Workmen Act, 1875, r. 1, 'post^ p. 
 175. As to the petty sessions, see 
 ante, p. 109. 
 
 (5) See the Summary Jurisdic¬ 
 tion Act, 11 & 12 Viet. c. 43, s. 29. 
 
 (c) Id. sects. 8, 10. The plaint- 
 book (see ^05#, p. 125) will in fact 
 constitute and be (on proof) a “ com¬ 
 plaint’’ to satisfy the requirements 
 of the Summary Jurisdiction Act. 
 
 Joint contractors should be before 
 the court, but if represented, some 
 variances are immaterial (see po&t, 
 p. 128),—such as the names of part- 
 ners instead of the name of an in¬ 
 corporated company, as complain¬ 
 ants. ( Whittle V. Franhland, 2 B. 
 & S. 76; 31 L. J., M. C. 81.) 
 
 {d) See Rule 19, jJost, p. 178; 
 and Schedule B , post, 191. 
 
124 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 The following forms may be useful, but they are merely 
 suggestive, and have no official authority. 
 
 Particulars of Cause of Action, 
 
 (1) By AN Employer against a Workman. 
 
 Employers and Workmen Act, 1875. 
 
 Between A. B... .. .. .. .. .. Plaintiff, 
 
 and 
 
 C. D. .. .. Defendant. 
 
 Particulars of the plaintiff’s cause of action. 
 
 The plaintiff claims £ damages for that the defendant, being 
 a workman, and having entered into a contract of service with the plaintiff 
 as his employer, determinable by \one montVs\ notice on either side, 
 wrongfully absented himself from his service on the day of , 
 187 , without having given or received such notice. 
 
 OVy 
 
 The plaintiff claims £ damages for that the defendant, being 
 a workman, and having entered into a contract personally to execute and 
 deliver certain work for the plaintiff, his employer, in a reasonable time, 
 wrongfully neglected to complete and deliver his work in a reasonable 
 time. 
 
 OVy 
 
 The plaintiff claims £ damages for that the defendant, being 
 a workman, and having entered into a contract personally to execute 
 certain work for the plaintiff, his employer, on the plaintiff’s materials 
 delivered to him, wrongfully and negligently lost the materials. 
 
 (2) By a Workman against an Employer. 
 
 Employers and Workmen Act, 1875. 
 
 Between A. B... .. .Plaintiff, 
 
 and 
 
 C. D... .. .. .. .. .. Defendant. 
 
 Particular of the plaintiff’s cause of action. 
 
 The plaintiff claims £ for [^07ie rveeh's'] wages, from the 
 
 day of to the day of , 187 , due to him as a workman 
 
 under a contract of serAuce entered into by him with the defendant, his 
 employer. 
 
 Or, 
 
 The plaintiff claims £ for work done between the day of 
 and the day of , under a contract personally to execute 
 
PROCEDURE —EMPLOYERS AND WORKMEN ACT. 125 
 
 work, entered into by the plaintiflP, a workman, with the defendant, his 
 employer. 
 
 Or, 
 
 The plaintiff claims £ damages, for that the plaintiff, a workman, 
 having entered into a contract of service with the defendant, his em¬ 
 ployer, for {one year], at the wages of £ , the defendant, on the 
 
 day of , wrongfully dismissed him before the expiration of 
 the term. 
 
 Plaint Book.^ —The clerk of the court is required to 
 “ enter in a book, to be kept for this purpose in his office, 
 a plaint in writing, stating the names and the last known 
 places of abode of the parties, and the substance of the 
 action intended to be brought (5). 
 
 It follows that the plaintiff must fimnish the clerk with 
 the names and last known places of abode of the parties, 
 as well as the particulars of the cause of action. The 
 substance of the action will be gathered from the par¬ 
 ticulars, and may be, it seems, very concise, as absenting 
 from the servicef ‘‘ wagesf neglecting to execute worlif 
 ‘‘ wrongful dismissalf and the like. 
 
 Summons. ~\—A summons is then prepared and issued 
 by the clerk in the form given in the schedule to the 
 rules(c). It is, of course, prepared in duplicate, as well 
 as the particulars of the cause of action which are annexed 
 to and deemed part of the summons (d). 
 
 A note at the foot of the form of summons says, This 
 and all other summonses issued under the Employers and 
 Workmen Act, 1875, may be signed by the clerk to the 
 justices, Avhen such justices shall, by a general direction, 
 authorize their clerks to sign them in lieu of one of them¬ 
 selves.” 
 
 Apart from the circumstance that this is not itself a 
 rule, but merely a note at the foot of a form, it is desirable 
 
 (&) Rule \, post. See Form of proceedings” are to be entered 
 “ Plaint and Minute Book,” Form See note {c), ante, p. 123. 
 
 No. 18, post, showing that the (^.) Jd, 
 
 “ order made ” and “ subsequent (<Z) Id. r. 3. 
 
12G 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 that the usual course should be adhered to of the justice 
 signing the summons(e). 
 
 Service of the Summons —The Summary Jurisdiction 
 Act directs that every summons shall be served by a 
 constable or other peace officer, or other person to whom 
 the same shall be delivered,” upon the person to whom it 
 is directed, by delivering it to the party personally, or 
 by leaving the same with some person for him at his last 
 or most usual place of abode”(/), and also requires the 
 summons to be served a reasonable time before the time 
 appointed for appearing (^^). The rules, however, direct 
 a somewhat different practice. The summons is to be 
 served on the defendant not less than one clear day 
 before the day on which the court shall be holden at which 
 the cause is to be tried”(A), and ^^the service of the 
 summons shall be either personal, or by delivering the 
 same to some person apparently sixteen years old, at the 
 house or place of dwelling, or place of business or of 
 employment of the defendant, or at the office of the 
 employer for the time being of the defendant ” (z). 
 Further, ‘^any summons which may be required to be 
 served out of the district of the court from which the 
 same shall have issued, may be served by an officer of any 
 other court of summary jurisdiction, which service shall 
 be proved by affidavit of the officer who served the 
 summons” (/t). 
 
 Attendance of WitnessesJ \—By the Summary Jurisdic¬ 
 tion Act if it is made to appear to any justice of the peace, 
 by the oath or affirmation of any credible person, that any 
 person within the jurisdiction of such justice is likely to 
 give material evidence in behalf of the complainant or 
 
 (<?) As to defects in a summons, time, see In re WilliamSy 21 L. J., 
 see 2 ?ost, p. 128. M. C. 4(1; 2 L. M. & P. 580. 
 
 (/) 11 & 12 Viet. c. 43, s. 1. (h) Rule 1. 
 
 (^) Id. s. 2. As to reasonable (i) Rule 5. 
 
 ik) Rule 4. 
 
PROCEDURE — EMPLOYERS AND WORK31EN ACT. 127 
 
 defendant, and will not voluntarily appear for the purpose 
 of being examined as a witness at the time and place 
 appointed for the hearing of the complaint, the justice is 
 required to issue a summons requiring him to appear, and 
 in default, on proof of service and of tender of a reasonable 
 sum for costs and expenses, empowering a warrant of 
 arrest (/). 
 
 The Lord Chancellor’s rules are silent on the subject of 
 witnesses on the original hearing, although the schedule 
 of forms contains a form of ‘^summons to witness”(wi), 
 and the schedule of costs to be paid by persons seeking 
 the assistance of the court has, For summons to wit¬ 
 ness. 
 
 Notice of set-off not required ,^—Xo notice is required 
 to be given by a defendant of any set-off or counter¬ 
 claim (o). 
 
 §4. Proceedings on the Hearing. 
 
 The court of summary jurisdiction being duly con¬ 
 stituted of two or more justices, as already mentioned, 
 as a court of civil proceeding (/?), proceeds, on the return 
 day of the summons, to hear and determine the dispute 
 hearing the parties and their wives and other witnesses, 
 so far as the parties desire to be themselves examined, or 
 have others as witnesses. 
 
 It is to be obseiwed that without any special provision, 
 the defendant, on a complaint on which an order can be 
 made under the Summary Jurisdiction Act, is a com¬ 
 petent witness ( 5 '). 
 
 All witnesses, including the parties, are examined on 
 oath or declaration (r). 
 
 {1) 11 & 12 Viet. c. 43, s. 7. (/?) See ante^ pp. 107, 108. 
 
 (w) See the Forni,^^?^^, p. 179. (^) Sec ante, p. 99, n, («). 
 
 («) See pout, p. 191. (r) 11 & 12 Viet. c. 43, s. 15; 32 
 
 {p) Rule 6. & 33 Viet. c. C8, s. 4. 
 
128 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 Attornies and Counsel?^ —By express provision of the 
 Summary Jurisdiction Act, the party against whom a 
 complaint is made is to be admitted to make his hill 
 answer and. defence, and to have the witnesses examined 
 and cross-examined by counsel or attorney on his behalf, 
 and every complainant is at liberty to conduct the com¬ 
 plaint, and to have witnesses examined, and cross-examined 
 by counsel or attorney on his behalf 
 
 Court O'Pen to the PuhlicJ] —The Summary Jurisdiction 
 Act enacts that the jJace in which the justices sit is 
 deemed an open and public court to which the public 
 generally may have access, so far as the same can con¬ 
 veniently contain them. 
 
 Adjournment?^ —The justices present constituting the 
 court may, before or during the hearing, in their discretion, 
 adjourn the hearing to some time appointed in the presence 
 and hearing of the party or parties or their respective 
 attornies or agents then present (5). 
 
 Defects in Substance or Form and Variances between 
 Summons and Evidence —The Summary Jurisdiction 
 Act provides that no objection shall be taken or allowed 
 to any summons for any alleged defect therein in substance 
 or in form, or for any variance between such summons 
 and the evidence adduced on the part of the complainant 
 at the hearing; but if any such variance shall appear to 
 the justices present and acting at such hearing to be such 
 that the party summoned and appearing has been thereby 
 deceived or misled, the justices may, upon such terms as 
 they think fit, adjourn the hearing of the case to some 
 future day(^). 
 
 (.s) Summaiy Jurisdiction Act, place of bearing. 
 
 11 & 12 Viet. c. 43, s. Ifi. The (0 11 & 12 Viet. c. 43, s. 1. 
 justices cannot, however, alter the ISee note (c), ante, p. 123. 
 
PROCEDURE—EMPLOYERS AND WORKMEN ACT. 129 
 
 Proceedings where both Parties appear .~\—The applica¬ 
 tion of the Summary Jurisdiction Act to these proceedings 
 may render the course to be adopted, where both parties 
 appear, somewhat different (in the absence of any rules) 
 from the practice on the trial of actions in the county 
 court. That act provides that where the defendant is 
 present at the hearing, the substance of the complaint 
 shall be stated to him, and he shall be asked if he have 
 any cause to show why an order should not be made 
 against him ; and if he thereupon admit the truth of the 
 complaint, and show no cause, or no sufficient cause, why 
 an order should not be made against him, the justices 
 may make an order against him accordingly ; but if he 
 do not admit the truth of the complaint, then the justices 
 shall proceed to hear the complainant and such witnesses 
 as he may examine, and such other evidence as he may 
 adduce in support of his complaint, and also to hear the 
 defendant and such witnesses as he may examine, and 
 such other evidence as he may adduce; and also to hear 
 such mtnesses as the complainant may examine in reply; 
 but the complainant shall not be entitled to make any 
 observations in reply upon the evidence given by the 
 defendant, nor shall the defendant be entitled to make 
 any observations in reply upon the evidence given by the 
 complainant in reply as aforesaid; and the justices having 
 heard what each party shall have to say as aforesaid, 
 and the witnesses and evidence so adduced, shall consider 
 the whole matter and determine the same, and shall make 
 an order upon the defendant, or dismiss the complaint, as 
 the case may be(M). 
 
 As, however, the Employers and Workmen Act, 1875, 
 expressly enacts that the court of summary jurisdiction 
 
 {%') 11 & 12 Viet. c. 43, s. 14, character. No such evidence is ad- 
 omitting so much of the section missible in the case of orders, and 
 cited as relates to convictions. For certainly not in the still more 
 instance, the section speaks of wit- strictly civil cases under considcra- 
 nesses as to the defendant’s general tion. 
 
 D. 
 
 K 
 
130 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 shall be deemed to be a court of civil jurisdiction, it follows 
 that in matters of practice, not affecting jiu’isdiction, 
 the practice of the county court ought to be followed 
 rather than the directions of the Summary Jurisdiction 
 Act; and it is apparent that the Lord Chancellor’s rules 
 have been framed on that view. 
 
 Proceedings loliere the Defendant does not appear ,']— 
 The Summary Jurisdiction Act gives an alternative in the 
 event of the non-appearance of a defendant to a complaint 
 — the issue of a warrant to apprehend him, or, upon proof 
 that the summons was duly served upon the defendant a 
 reasonable time before the time appointed for appearance, 
 the justices may proceed ex parte to the hearing of the 
 complaint, and to adjudicate thereon as fully and effectu¬ 
 ally, to all intents and purposes, as if such party had 
 personally appeared before them in obedience to the sum¬ 
 mons (x). The Employers and Workmen Act, 1^75, how¬ 
 ever, in confeiT’ing the powers of the Summary Jurisdiction 
 Act on courts of summary jurisdiction, excepts the power 
 to issue a warrant for apprehending any person (other than 
 an apprentice) for failing to appear in answer to any com¬ 
 plaint (y). 
 
 The rules somewhat impinge on the power given by 
 the Summary Jurisdiction Act (to proceed ex parte on 
 proof of service upon the defendant a reasonable time 
 before the day of hearing), by providing that if the 
 defendant shall not appear or sufficiently excuse his ab¬ 
 sence, or neglects to answer when called in court, the 
 court, on proof of service of the summons, may either 
 adjourn the case from time to time, or proceed to the hear¬ 
 ing on the part of the plaintiff only, and the judgment 
 thereupon shall be as valid as if both parties had attended; 
 provided that the court in any such case, at the same or 
 any subsequent court, may set aside any judgment so 
 given in the absence of the defendant, and the execution 
 
 (a?) 11 &, 12 Viet. c. 43, s. 2, see (y) 38 & 39 Viet. e. 90, s. 9. 
 also s. 13. 
 
PROCEDURE—EMPLOYERS AND WORKMEN ACT. 131 
 
 thereupon, and may grant a new trial upon such terms, if 
 any, as it may think fit” (z). 
 
 The court ought to be carefiil to avoid, as far as prac¬ 
 ticable, making any order in the absence of a reasonable 
 inference that the summons has reached the hands or come 
 to the knowledge of a defendant («). 
 
 Proceedings where the Plaintiff does not appear.^ The 
 Summary Jurisdiction Act provides, that if the complain¬ 
 ant do not appear by himself, his counsel or attorney, the 
 justices shall dismiss the complaint, unless for some reason 
 they think proper to adjourn the hearing to some other 
 day, upon such terms as they shall think fit (5). The 
 rules also provide, that if the plaintiff shall not appear on 
 the return day, or at any continuation or adjournment, the 
 cause shall be struck out, and the court may award costs 
 to the defendant (c). 
 
 § 5. Orders of the Court of Summary Jurisdiction, 
 
 General Powers of the Court in making an Order .']— 
 The Employers and Workmen Act, 1875, enacts, that in 
 a proceeding in relation to any dispute,” the court may 
 order payment of any sum which it may find to be due as 
 wages, or damages or otherwise, and may exercise all or 
 any of the powers conferred by the act on a county 
 court {d). The powers conferred on a county court by 
 the act in addition to its ordinary jurisdiction are the 
 following:—(1) The court may adjust and set off the 
 one against the other all such claims on the part either 
 of the employer or of the workman, arising out of or inci¬ 
 dental to the relation between them, as the court may find 
 to be subsisting, whether such claims are liquidated or 
 unhquidated, and are for wages, damages or otherwise 
 
 (z) Rule No. 8. (c) Kule 7. See Form of order 
 
 (a) See Ex parte Smith, Q. B., of Judgment for Defendant/’ and 
 Easter Term, 1875. for eosts, schedule to Rules, No. 4. 
 
 (&) 11 & 12 Viet. c. 43, s. 13. (d) 38 & 39 Viet. c. 90, s. 4. 
 
132 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 (2) "" If, having regard to all the circumstances of the 
 case, it thinks it just to do so, it may rescind any contract 
 between the employer and the workman, upon such terms 
 as to the apportionment of wages or other sums due there¬ 
 under, and as to the payment of wages or damages, or 
 other sums due thereunder, and as to the payment of 
 wages or damages, or other sums due, as it thinks just 
 
 (3) Power to accept security and order performance (e). 
 
 The court may direct the payment of any money to be 
 
 by instalments, and may rescind or vary such order (^). 
 
 Security for Performance ?^—In some cases the court 
 of summary jurisdiction will doubtless exercise the power 
 conferred on it of accepting security and ordering perform¬ 
 ance of the contract. Both plaintiff and defendant must 
 be consenting parties, and the security involves the defend¬ 
 ant finding a surety ( r/). AVith the power thus limited, 
 it will seldom admit of application to cases other than 
 those where the defendant admits either wholly or in part 
 that he has broken his contract, as alleged by the plaintiff. 
 From the nature of the cases, it can be very rarely applied 
 to complaints against employers: apart from other con¬ 
 siderations, a Avorkman prefers a money payment, while 
 an employer prefers performance (A)• 
 
 Performance, Avhen the defendant is willing to give secu¬ 
 rity, may be ordered in place either of the whole of the 
 damages Avhich Avould otherwise have been awarded, or 
 some part of such damage (z). 
 
 The statute evidently contemplates the hearing of the 
 case and arriving at a conclusion, not only as to a breach, 
 but also as to tlie amount of damages, before exercising 
 any discretion as to accepting security, and the form of 
 
 (c) See infra. ' and No. 4. 
 
 (/) 38 & 39 Viet. c. 90, s. 9. (</) 38 & 39 Viet. c. 90, s. 3. 
 
 The sehcdule to the Rules provides {li) See the general observations 
 
 a form of “judgment for plaintiff,” as to orders and seeurity for per- 
 and another of “judgment for de- formanee, ante., pp. 86—91. 
 lendant;” see Forms, iwst, No. 3 (t) 38 & 39 Viet. e. 90, s. 3. 
 
PROCEDURE—EMPLOYERS AND WORKMEN ACT. 133 
 
 undertaking given with the Chancellor’s orders, clearly 
 points to it (A). Unless, therefore, the defendant admits 
 the whole case of the complainant the case must be heard, 
 although, perhaps, if the language of the act had been 
 slightly different much time might have been saved. 
 
 Costs .']—The Summary Jurisdiction Act empowers 
 justices making orders, in their discretion, to award and 
 order in and by such order that the defendant shall pay to 
 the complainant such costs as to such justices shall seem 
 just and reasonable in that behalf; and, on the other 
 hand, where the justices dismiss the complaint, they may 
 by their order of dismissal award and order the com¬ 
 plainant to pay to the defendant such costs as to the 
 justices shall seem reasonable, and the sums so allowed 
 for costs shall in all cases be specified in such order or 
 order of dismissal; and the same shall be recoverable in 
 the same manner and under the same warrants as any 
 sum of money adjudged to be paid in and by such order is 
 recoverable; and in cases where there is no such sum to 
 be thereby recovered, then such costs shall be recoverable 
 by distress and sale of the goods and chattels of the party, 
 and in default of such distress by imprisonment, with or 
 without hard labour, for any time not exceeding one 
 calendar month, unless such costs shall be sooner paid (/). 
 
 This provision must be regarded as the foundation of 
 the power of the court of summary jurisdiction to give 
 costs in proceedings under the Employers and Workmen 
 Act, 1875. That act, however, affected the above power 
 by enacting that orders for the payment of money shall 
 not be enforced by imprisonment except under the 
 Debtors Act (//<), and by excepting some description of 
 goods and chattels from distress (w). 
 
 Further, the power of the Lord Chancellor to make 
 
 (A) See the Schedule of Fonns, (m) See 2 ^ost, p. 142. 
 
 No. 10. (n) Seejjost, p. 140. 
 
 (1) 11 & 12 Viet. c. 43, s. 18. 
 
134 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 rules for caiTying into effect the jurisdiction given to 
 courts of summary jurisdiction is stated to be “in par¬ 
 ticular for the purpose of regulating the costs of any 
 proceedings in a court of summary jurisdiction, with 
 power to provide that the same shall not exceed the costs 
 which would in a similar case be incurred in a county 
 
 court ” ( o), ^ 
 
 The rules accordingly provide a schedule of costs, “ to 
 he paid in the first instance by every person seeking the 
 assistance of the court” (p), and also provide that the 
 court may allow the costs of a solicitor, not exceeding ten 
 shillings in claims above forty shillings, and not exceeding 
 fifteen shillings where it exceeds five pounds ( 9 ). The 
 Forms and Orders also provide for the costs. The allow¬ 
 ance of costs to the defendant where the plaintiff does not 
 appear has been already noticed (»’). As to the enforce¬ 
 ment of costs, see § 7. Enforcement of Orders, post 
 
 § 6 . The Award of Damages. 
 
 Without attempting to enter upon the legal rights of 
 persons in the relation of employer and employed, a sub¬ 
 ject out of place in treating of procedure, a few words on 
 the question of damages to be awarded by the court of 
 summary jurisdiction will not be inappropriate. 
 
 The court is not at liberty to award damages at dis¬ 
 cretion, as they might impose a fine. The right to, and 
 the amount of, damages are governed by legal principles, 
 which the civil courts of summary jurisdiction must 
 strictly adhere to. 
 
 Damages for breach of contract must be the direct 
 consequence of the breach (.?). 
 
 ( 0 ) 38 & 39 Viet. c. 90, s. 9. («) MaHin, B,, Burton v. Pin- 
 
 (p) See Rule 19, post, p. 178, ierton, L. R., 2 Ex. 360; 36 L. J., 
 and Schedule B.,post, p. 191. Ex.l37. “According to the ordinary 
 
 (^) Rule 20. damage to be recoverable by a 
 
 (r) See ante, p. 131. plaintiff must inevitably flow from 
 
PROCEDURE—EMPLOYERS AND WORKMEN ACT. 135 
 
 Thus, taking as an illustration a case of breach of con¬ 
 tract hj the employed person in an action for the breach 
 of a contract for work and labour to be done upon a farm, 
 evidence of damage occurring to the plaintiff’s crops in 
 consequence of the defendant’s leaving his service is in¬ 
 admissible. The legal measure of damages in such cases 
 is the difference between the wages agreed to be paid to 
 the defendant and the price the plaintiff was obliged to 
 pay for labour to supply his place (t). 
 
 Most of the master and servant cases, however, in which 
 questions have arisen as to the legal amount of damages 
 recoverable, have been claims by the employed against the 
 employer. 
 
 In the case of agreements to work for a specified time for 
 a given sum, where the party employed quits his employ¬ 
 ment without the consent of the other, and before the period 
 fixed, the sound rule is that nothing can be recovered by 
 him (u); that is to say, for the current period of service, or, 
 in other words, the period subsequent to the last pay day, 
 whether the wages are payable weekly, quarterly, or yearly. 
 
 And this rule applies as well where the employer has 
 terminated the contract in consequence of the servant’s 
 default, as where the latter has voluntarily absented him- 
 
 the tortious act of the defendant. 
 It must be caused by him as the 
 causa causans.^' Bramrcell, B., 
 S. C. In that case a mariner under¬ 
 took to serve on board a vessel for 
 a given time and upon a particular 
 description of voyage, and was taken 
 another voyage, exposing him to 
 extraordinary and unforeseen dan¬ 
 gers, and he left the ship in a foreign 
 port, where he was imprisoned by 
 the authorities there; it was held, 
 that although he could recover 
 damages for his loss of wages and 
 something as general damages for 
 inconvenience and annoyance suf¬ 
 fered, he could not recover damages 
 
 for the imprisonment or for the loss 
 of his clothes left on board the ship, 
 which sailed away during his im¬ 
 prisonment. 
 
 (t) Sedgwick on Damages, p. 265 
 (w.), citing Peters v. Whitney, 23 
 Barb. (N. Y.) 24. If unable to fill the 
 place, and the workman knew that 
 result would follow from the breach, 
 the damages would be different. 
 
 (?/') See Sedgwick on Damages, 
 6th edit. pp. 254, 255, and the 
 elaborate examination of the Ame¬ 
 rican authorities as to the effect of 
 the partial benefit derived by the 
 employer from a partial perform¬ 
 ance. 
 
136 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 self. Thus, if a master dismisses a servant for refusing 
 to obey a lawful order (a:), or for any other misconduct, 
 no action can be maintained for the past service for the 
 current period, although hired for a given time(^), nor 
 even if the employer has recovered damages for the mis¬ 
 conduct for which the dismissal took place {z). 
 
 In such cases, however, the plaintiff had no right of 
 action, because the defendant had not really broken his 
 contract. The question under consideration, as to the 
 amount of damages legally recoverable, arises where there 
 has been a breach of contract. 
 
 Where the party employing another puts an end to the 
 contract without just cause, the party employed has a 
 right to exact the entire amount of his wages for the full 
 period. This, however, is subject to the right to recoup 
 what the plaintiff could reasonably have earned during 
 the time covered by the remainder of the contract («). 
 
 The true measure of damages is the loss sustained at 
 the time of dismissal. The servant, after dismissal, may, 
 and ought to, make the best of his time, and he may have 
 an opportunity of turning it to advantage” (^), and, there¬ 
 fore, the actual loss may be mucli less than the wages, 
 where another employment may be easily obtained (c). 
 
 (a?) Spain v. Amott^ 2 Stark. 
 256. That was the case of a yearly 
 farm servant who was ordered to go 
 a mile with the horses before dinner, 
 dinner being ready, and the servant 
 refused until he had had his dinner, 
 upon which the master told him to 
 go about his business, and the 
 plaintiff went. Lord Ellenhorovah 
 expressed his opinion that although 
 it might be hard upon the servant, 
 the action could not be maintained, 
 and a juror was withdrawn. 
 
 (y) Turner v. Robinson, 5 B. & 
 Ad. 789; Ridgway v. Hungcrford 
 Market Co., 3 A. & E. 171. 
 
 ( 2 ) Turner v. Robinson, supra. 
 
 {a) Sedg. 6th edit. p. 255, note *, 
 and pp. 416, 417. 
 
 (5) Erle,^., Goodmans. Pocock, 
 15 Q. B. Rep. 583, 584. 
 
 {c) Parke, B., delivering the judg- 
 mentof the Exchequer Chamber, A7- 
 derton v. Emmens, 6 C. B .Rep. 187. 
 
 “ In actions for wages brought 
 against the employer by the ser¬ 
 vant or employee discharged with¬ 
 out cause before the end of the 
 contract of service ‘ a compensation 
 is intended to be allowed,’ says Mr. 
 Justice Story, ‘which shall be a 
 complete indemnity to the illegal 
 discharge ; and this is ordinarily 
 measured by the loss of time and 
 
PROCEDURE—EMPLOYERS AND WORKMEN ACT. 137 
 
 The measure of damages for the breach of promise 
 now in question (that is to say, a contract for hiring and 
 service as a type founder for a definite time at weekly 
 wages, and a dismissal during the time) is obtained by con¬ 
 sidering what is the usual rate of wages for the employment 
 here contracted for, and what time would be lost before 
 
 the expenses incurred by the party.’ 
 The recovery should be for the 
 difference between the sum he should 
 have received under the contract 
 and that which he has or it is 
 shown might have received else¬ 
 where, the object being to compen¬ 
 sate him for his loss of wages as far 
 as it might not have been prevented 
 wholly or in part by his owm want 
 of due diligence. His readiness to 
 perform and prevention by his em¬ 
 ployer are not necessarily equiva¬ 
 lent, as regards the question of 
 damages, to actual performance. He 
 has no right to insist on employ¬ 
 ment in the same business at the 
 same price. If that business is not 
 to be had he is bound to engage in 
 another, and, if need be, at a less 
 price. The same rule of recovery 
 has been applied to the case of a 
 ship carpenter who had engaged for 
 the voyage, where the shipping 
 master failed to give him timely 
 notice of the departure of the ship, 
 which sailed without him. The 
 plaintiff may consider the contract 
 as rescinded, and recover on a 
 quantum meruit, what his services 
 were worth for the time he worked, 
 deducting what he had received. 
 There is some disparity in the de¬ 
 cisions in the case of ’the servant’s 
 failure to obtain employment, as to 
 whether the burden of proof lies on 
 him or the employer to explain it, 
 and in Mississippi it is held that the 
 servant, to recover for the time 
 
 during which he was out of employ¬ 
 ment, must show due diligence in 
 the endeavour to procure a situation. 
 But the general rule is the other 
 way. And in Minnesota, the su¬ 
 preme court of that state, w’hile 
 acquiescing in the doctrine that the 
 employee’s claim must be reduced 
 by the amount which it w'as proved 
 he had earned or might have earned 
 elsewhere, as too well settled to be 
 disturbed, remarked that it failed 
 ‘ to see on what sound principle a 
 man was to be punished in this 
 manner ’ for a failure in the per¬ 
 formance of the abstract duty not to 
 be idle, ‘ or why the employer should 
 be relieved from the consequences 
 of a wilful breach of contract be¬ 
 cause the employee has committed 
 a breach of a moral obligation.’ 
 And to entitle the defendant to re¬ 
 duce the recovery on the ground 
 that the plaintiff had earned money 
 in another employment, it must also 
 be shown that if he had not been 
 discharged, he could not have earned 
 it without violating his duty under 
 his contract. But, although, in 
 actions of this sort, the burden of 
 proof to show that plaintiff’s failure 
 to obtain employment is thrown on 
 the defendant, the plaintiff is held 
 to active diligence in procuring it, 
 and he cannot recover so far as his 
 loss might have been prevented by 
 such diligence.” (Sedgwick, Dam. 
 6th edit. p. 417 (w.) 2, omitting re¬ 
 ferences to American cases.) 
 
138 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 a similar employment could be obtained. The law con¬ 
 siders that employment, in any ordinary branch of industry, 
 can be obtained by a person competent for the place, and 
 that the usual rate of wages for such employment can be 
 proved, and that when a promise for continuing employ¬ 
 ment is broken by the master, it is the duty of the servant 
 to use diligence to find another employment (c?). Upon 
 these principles, in the present case, if the place of fore¬ 
 man in a type-foundry could not probably be again ob¬ 
 tained without delay, and if the wages in the contract 
 broken were higher than usual, the damages should be 
 such as to indemnify for the loss of wages during that 
 delay, and for the loss of the excess of the wages con¬ 
 tracted for above the usual rate; but no allowance would 
 be made in the nature of pretium affectionis, nor any re¬ 
 ference to any pain that might be felfc by the servant on 
 the ground that he was attached to the place. 
 
 If the breach of promise had arisen because the defend¬ 
 ants had retired from business, the action would have lain; 
 but if the defendants, in answer to the claim of damages, 
 had proved that another person carried on the same busi¬ 
 ness, and offered the plaintiff the same situation at the same 
 or higher wages, the claim for more than nominal damages 
 would, in my judgment, be at an end, and the plaintiff 
 would not be allowed to prove that the change of employer 
 was a source of regret personal to himself, and to obtain 
 compensation for such regret. 
 
 Indemnity for the loss of his bargain in respect of his 
 labour would be settled on the same principle as for the 
 loss of a bargain in respect of common merchandize. If 
 goods are not delivered or accepted according to contract, 
 time and trouble as well as expense may be required, either 
 in getting other similar goods or finding another purchaser; 
 and the damage ought to indemnify, both for such time, 
 trouble and expense, and for the difference between the 
 
 {d) Elderton v. Emmcns, 4 C. B. 498 (w.); 6 C. B. Rep. 160; 17 
 L. J., C. P. 307. 
 
PROCEDURE—EMPLOYERS AND WORKMEN ACT. 139 
 
 market price and the price contracted for. Loss of time and 
 trouble would be occasioned bj a breach of contract in re¬ 
 spect of employment, but they are such time and trouble as 
 have a known merchantable value, and the compensation 
 is measured wholly regardless of the considerations which 
 guide where bodily or mental pain is the direct object of 
 contemplation ” (e). 
 
 Liquidated Damages or Penalty —Where parties have 
 agreed for a stipulated sum, questions may arise whether 
 such sum is to be taken as agreed and liquidated damages, 
 or only as a penalty.” 
 
 In the former case the stipulated sum is recoverable, in 
 the latter the actual legal damage must be ascertained, 
 notwithstanding the apparent effect of the words {f). 
 
 Thus, where A. entered into an agreement with B. and 
 C. to serve them for seven years at fixed wages, at the rate 
 of three guineas weekly, the party making default to pay 
 to the other the sum of 500/. by way of or in nature of 
 specific damages,” it was observed that, since the cases of 
 Astley V. Weldon (2 B. & P. 346) and Kemble v. Farren 
 (6 Bing. 141), it can hardly in this case be contended that 
 the 500/. could be recovered as agreed and liquidated 
 damages, but that that sum is a penalty only ” ( g'). 
 
 (e) Erie, J., Beckham v. Brake 
 (H. L.), 2 H. L. Cas. 606—608. 
 “ After a wrongful dismissal the 
 servant or party employed may re¬ 
 cover such damages as a jury think 
 the loss of the situation has occa¬ 
 sioned. If he has obtained, or is 
 likely to obtain, another situation, 
 the damages ought to be less, or 
 nominal, according to the real loss, 
 and in such case the servant need 
 not remain idle, in readiness to give 
 services which cannot be wanted. 
 I quite agree with what was said by 
 my brother Erie in this house in the 
 case of Beckham v. Drake, 2 H. L. 
 606, that where a promise for con¬ 
 
 tinuing employment is broken by 
 the master, it is the duty of the ser¬ 
 vant to use diligence to find another 
 employment.” ( Cromiiton, J., Em- 
 mens v. Elderton (II. L.), 13 C. B. 
 508.) 
 
 (/) The cause of this distinction 
 
 involves a long story. As to the 
 general application of the rule, see 
 Kemble v. Farren, 6 Bing. 141; 
 Betts V. Burch, 4 H. & N. 506; 28 
 L. J., Ex. 267; see also 38 & 39 
 Viet. c. 90, s. \\, 2 )ost, p. 171. 
 
 (g) Wightman, J., Beckham v. 
 Brake, 2 H. L. Cas. 618. See also 
 judgment of Maule, J., S. C. 
 
140 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 § 7. The Enforcement of Orders, 
 
 Orders of a court of summary jurisdiction, under the 
 Employers and Workmen Act, 1875, are enforced by the 
 combined powers of that act and of the Summary Juris¬ 
 diction Act, applied for this purpose, and of the Lord 
 Chancellor’s rules under the first-mentioned act. 
 
 Orders for Payment of Money ^—Orders for the pay¬ 
 ment of money are enforceable by distress and sale of 
 goods, as ordered by the judgment; and also by an order 
 of commitment on a judgment summons under the Debtors 
 Act, 1869, either subsequent to an ineffectual execution 
 against goods, or without the intervention of a distress 
 warrant. 
 
 Execution against the Goods and Chattels ,— The 
 powers of the Summary Jurisdiction Act as to the issue 
 of warrants of distress are ajDplicable, except that the 
 wearing apparel and bedding of the debtor or his family, 
 and the tools and implements of his trade to the value 
 of five pounds, are excepted; and further, there is no 
 liability to imprisonment in default of distress under that 
 act, but only under the Debtors Act, 1869 (/i). 
 
 The Lord Chancellor’s rules provide forms of warrants 
 of distress for payment of money by a plaintiff and defend¬ 
 ant respectively, but the power to issue them rests on the 
 Summary Jurisdiction Act, as applied by the Employers 
 and Workmen Act, 1875. 
 
 The Summary Jurisdiction Act enacts, that where an 
 order requires the payment of a sum of money, and by 
 the statute authorizing such order such sum of money is to 
 be levied upon the goods and chattels of the defendant by 
 distress and sale thereof, and also in cases where by the 
 statute in that behalf no mode of raising or levying 
 such sum of money or of enforcing payment of the same 
 
 (70 See 38 & 39 Viet. c. 90, s. 9. 
 
PROCEDURE—EMPLOYERS AND WORKMEN ACT. 141 
 
 is stated or provided, it shall be lawful for the justices 
 making such order, or for any justice of the peace for the 
 same county, riding, division, liberty, city, borough or 
 place, to issue his warrant of distress (in a form provided) 
 for the purpose of levying the same, which said warrant 
 of distress shall be in muting under the hand and seal of 
 the justice making the same ; and if after delivery of such 
 warrant of distress to the constable or constables to whom 
 the same shall have been directed to be executed, suffi¬ 
 cient distress shall not be found within the limits of the 
 jurisdiction of the justice granting such warrant, then 
 upon proof alone being made on oath of the liandAvriting 
 of the justice granting such warrant before any justice of 
 any other county or place, such justice of such other 
 county or place shall thereupon make an indorsement in a 
 given form, signed with his hand, authorizing the execu¬ 
 tion of such 'warrant within the limits of his jurisdic¬ 
 tion, by virtue of which said warrant and indorsement 
 the sum aforesaid and costs, or so much thereof as may 
 not have been levied or paid, shall and may be levied by 
 the person bringing such warrant, or by the person or 
 persons to whom such warrant w^as originally directed, or 
 by any constable or other peace officer of such last-men¬ 
 tioned county or place, by distress and sale of the goods 
 and chattels of the defendant in such other county or 
 place (z). 
 
 Passing over the question whether, under a very strict 
 interpretation of the language of this section, an order 
 under the Employers and Workmen Act, 1875, falls 
 within it, and assuming that such an order is within it, it 
 may be observed that the court of summary jurisdiction, 
 for the purpose of issuing distress warrants, may be any 
 justice or justices of the peace to whom jurisdiction is 
 given by the Summary Jurisdiction Act” (A). 
 
 Warrants of distress may be signed by one justice, and 
 
 (i) 11 & 12 Viet. c. 43, s. 19. 
 
 (Jt) 38 & 39 Viet. e. 90, s. 10. 
 
142 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 tlie forms given by the Chancellor’s rules are accordingly 
 so framed. 
 
 Judgment Summons ,']—The Employers and Workmen 
 Act, 1875, enacts that ‘^any sum payable by any person 
 under the order of a court of summary jurisdiction, in 
 pursuance of this act, shall be deemed to be a debt due 
 from him in pursuance of a judgment of a competent 
 court within the meaning of the 5th section of the Debtors 
 Act, 1869, and may be enforced accordingly; and, as 
 regards only such debt, a court of summary jurisdiction 
 shall be deemed to be a court within the meaning of the 
 said section” (/). It also enacts that the rules made by 
 the Lord Chancellor {m), ‘‘so far as they relate to the 
 exercise of jurisdiction under the said 5th section of the 
 Debtors Act, 1869, shall be deemed to be prescribed 
 rules within the meaniug of the said section.” 
 
 To render this jDOwer clear, it is necessary to state that 
 the Debtors Act, 1869(72), s. 4, enacts that, with certain 
 exceptions, no person shall be arrested or imprisoned for 
 making default in payment of a sum of money. Among 
 the exceptions are “ default in payment of any sums re¬ 
 coverable summarily before a justice or justices of the 
 peace,” and “ default in payment of sums in respect of the 
 payment of which orders are in this act authorized to be 
 made.” Sect. 5 enacts that, “ subject to the provisions 
 hereinafter mentioned, and to the prescribed rules, any 
 court may commit to prison for a term not exceeding 
 six weeks, or until payment of the sum due, any person 
 wLo makes default in payment of any debt or instalment 
 of any debt due from him in pursuance of any order or 
 judgment of that or any other competent court; provided 
 (1) That the jurisdiction by this section given of com¬ 
 mitting a person to prison shall, in the case of any court 
 other than the superior courts of law and equity, be 
 
 (Z) 38 & soviet, c. 90, s. 9. (w) 32 & 33 Viet. c. 62. 
 
 (rii) See ante, p. 109. 
 
PROCEDURE—EMPLOYERS AND WORKMEN ACT. 143 
 
 exercised only subject to the following restrictions; that is 
 to say, («) be exercised only by a judge or his deputy, and 
 by an order made in open court, and showing on its face 
 the ground on which it is issued; (b) be exercised only as 
 respects a judgment of a superior court of law or equity, 
 where such judgment does not exceed fifty pounds, exclu¬ 
 sive of costs; (c) be exercised only as respects a judgment 
 of a county court by a county court judge or his deputy: 
 (2) That such jurisdiction shall only be exercised where 
 it is proved to the satisfaction of the court that the 
 person making default either has or has had, since the 
 date of the order or judgment, the means to pay the sum 
 in respect of which he has made default, and has refused 
 or neglected, or refuses or neglects, to pay the same. 
 Proof of the means of the person making default may be 
 given in such manner as the court thinks just; and for the 
 purposes of such proof the debtor, and any witnesses, may 
 be summoned and examined on oath, according to the 
 prescnbed rules. .... For the purposes of this section 
 any court may direct any debt due from any person, in 
 pursuance of any order or judgment of that or any other 
 competent court, to be paid by instalments, and may from 
 time to time rescind or vary such order.No im¬ 
 
 prisonment under this section shall operate as a satisfac¬ 
 tion or extinguishment of any debt, or demand, or cause 
 of action, or deprive any person of any right to take out 
 execution against the land, goods or chattels of the person 
 imprisoned, in the same manner as if such imprisonment 
 had not taken place. Any person imprisoned under this 
 section shall be discharged out of custody upon a certifi¬ 
 cate signed in the prescribed manner to the effect that he 
 has satisfied the debt or instalment of a debt in respect of 
 which he was imprisoned, together with the prescribed 
 costs (if any).” 
 
 Pules of the Lord Chancellor relating to a judgment 
 summons (which are deemed to be “ prescribed ” rules) 
 are comprised in the rules issued under the Employers 
 
144 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 and Workmen Act, 1875. It is sufficient to refer to 
 them without giving them here (c>). 
 
 It is to be remarked, that although a court of summary 
 jurisdiction is to be deemed a court within sect. 5 of the 
 Debtors Act, 1869, no express provision is made for the 
 exercise by the court of the power of a judge or his 
 deputy.” Neither is any provision made as to the prison 
 to which a debtor is to be committed. Under the Sum¬ 
 mary Jurisdiction Act, the imprisonment in default of 
 distress is to the house of correction, or if there be no 
 house of correction then to the common gaol(/?). 
 
 As to proof of “ the means to pay,” it may be stated that 
 the words point not merely to means ” as realized means 
 in the shape of money or other tangible assets, but also 
 to the ability to earn or acquire the means by the debtor’s 
 personal exertions {q). 
 
 Enforcement of Undertaking for Performance ^—An 
 undertaking by the defendant and his surety or sureties 
 for performance of a contract, is subject on non-perform¬ 
 ance, to the payment of a sum specified in the under¬ 
 taking (r), and the court in or under the direction of 
 which it is given may order payment of any sum which 
 may become due in pursuance of such security (s). 
 Further, any sum paid by a surety on behalf of a defendant 
 in respect of a security, together with all costs incurred by 
 such surety in respect of the security, is deemed to be a 
 
 (o) See post, pp. 177, 178. 
 
 (p) 11 & 12 Viet. c. 43. See 
 the Prisons Act, 28 & 29 Viet, 
 c. 12C. 
 
 (^) “ Means,” therefore, are not 
 confined to such “ means ” as Shy- 
 lock and Falstaff had in view when 
 the former said of Antonio: “His 
 means are in supposition,” and 
 when Falstaff to the Chief Justice’s 
 reproof, “ Your means are very 
 slender and your waste great,” re¬ 
 
 plied, “ I would it were otherwise; I 
 w^ould my means Avere greater, and 
 my waist slenderer.” The “ means ” 
 in the text embrace— 
 
 “ Both strength of limb and policy 
 of mind. 
 
 Ability in means and choice of 
 friends,” 
 
 spoken of by Leonato in “Much 
 Ado about Nothing.” 
 
 (r) 38 & 39 Viet. c. 90, s. 3. 
 
 (s) Id. s. 8. 
 
PROCEDURE—EMPLOYERS AND WORKMEN ACT. 145 
 
 debt due to him from the defendant; and Avhere such 
 security has been given in or under the direction of a 
 court of summary jurisdiction (as distinguished from a 
 county court), that court may order payment to the 
 surety of the sum which has so become due to him from 
 the defendant (t). 
 
 It follows, therefore, that a court of summary jurisdic¬ 
 tion acquires a distinct jurisdiction over thhd persons in 
 enforcing the security—not only against the principal (the 
 original defendant) and against the surety on behalf 
 of the original plaintiff, but also on behalf of the surety 
 against the principal. This junsdiction is to be exercised 
 by orders, in respect of which the court of summary 
 jurisdiction has the same power as in making an order; 
 and therefore it seems that the mode of enforcing payment 
 of the sum mentioned in the undertaking as a forfeiture to 
 the plaintiff, even as against the principal, is only by a 
 summons and an order, which is enforced by execution 
 against the goods or by a judgment summons as in other 
 cases (u). 
 
 § 8. Force and Effect of Orders, 
 
 It is desirable to say a few words as to the force and effect 
 of orders made by a court of summary jurisdiction. 
 
 (0 38 & 39 Viet. c. 90, s. 3. 
 
 {u) Although the Employers and 
 Workmen Act, 1875, gives the Lord 
 Chancellor (apart from the general 
 power to make rules for carrying 
 into effect the jurisdiction given by 
 the act) special power to make 
 rules with respect to giving security 
 under the act, no rule has been 
 issued directly affecting security. A 
 form of undertaking is, however, 
 given as already mentioned. 
 
 Still no rules could properly pro¬ 
 vide for the enforcement without 
 
 giving all parties entering into the 
 security an opportunity of being pre¬ 
 viously heard. In Crane v. Powell^ 
 38 L. J., M. C. 43, Willesy J. (as to 
 an order to return to work under 
 the Master and Servant Act, 1867, 
 which the defendant neglected to 
 obey), said:—“It will be for the 
 plaintiff to consider whether he can 
 enforce that part of the order with¬ 
 out bringing the appellant before 
 the justices again on a fresh sum¬ 
 mons after he has failed to return 
 to his work.” 
 
 D. 
 
 L 
 
146 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 In the first place it seems to be clear that an order once 
 complete is final, and cannot be varied or superseded, or 
 the case reheard bj the court of summary jurisdiction, 
 except in those cases expressly provided for by the Em¬ 
 ployers and Workmen Act, 1875, or by orders of the 
 Lord Chancellor made under it. The only power of this 
 kind mentioned in the act relates to orders for the pay¬ 
 ment of money by instalments. The court may direct 
 any sum of money, for the payment of which it makes an 
 order to be paid by instalments, and may from time to 
 time rescind or vary such order” (a:). The rules provide 
 that in the case of a judgment” (z. e., an order made), in 
 the absence of the defendant, the court in any such case, 
 at the same or any subsequent court, may set aside any 
 judgment so given in the absence of the defendant, and 
 the execution thereupon, and may grant a new trial upon 
 such terms, if any, as it may think fit ” (?/). 
 
 In any other case an order of a court of summary 
 jurisdiction must be treated as conclusive as an order of 
 justices under the Summary Jurisdiction Act and only 
 capable of being reviewed or set aside (unless on a case 
 stated as mentioned below), by a superior court (exercising 
 as a divisional court under the Judicature Act, the powers 
 of the Court of Queen’s Bench) where any excess of juris¬ 
 diction or fatal irregularity has occm-red. 
 
 Case for Opinion of Superior CourtJ ]—As the court 
 of summary jurisdiction is constituted of justices of the 
 peace, and the dispute or matter is deemed to be a matter 
 on which the court has authority to make an order on 
 complaint” in pursuance of the Summary Jurisdiction 
 Act (11 & 12 Viet. c. 43), it seems that the court may 
 state a case for the opinion of a superior court under the 
 Act 20 & 21 Viet. c. 43 (r), which enacts (sect. 2), that 
 
 after the hearing and determination by a justice or jus- 
 
 (x) 38 & 39 Viet. c. 90, s. 9. («) This act extends to Ireland, 
 
 (y) Rule 8. hut not to Scotland. 
 
PROCEDURE—EMPLOYERS AND WORKMEN ACT. 147 
 
 tices of the peace of any information or complaint which 
 he or they have power to determine in a summary way, 
 by any law now in force or hereafter to be made, either 
 party to the proceeding before the said justice or justices 
 may, if dissatisfied with the said determination as being 
 erroneous in point of law, apply in writing within three 
 days after the same to the said justice or justices to state 
 and sign a case setting forth the facts and the grounds of 
 such determination for the opinion thereon of one of the 
 superior courts of law to be named by the party applying,” 
 and makes provision for the granting and hearing of such 
 case (a). 
 
 Effect of Order on a subsisting Contract ^—Another 
 and more difficult question will probably be raised from 
 time to time, and one which courts of summary jurisdic¬ 
 tion will be called upon to determine in the first instance; 
 namely, the effect of orders on particular contracts. 
 
 Where a contract is rescinded by the court, under the 
 power conferred on it, of course there is an end of the 
 whole matter as regards claims by employer and employed 
 under it; so also no difficulty arises where the contract has 
 expired; but the question referred to apphes to cases 
 where, under a subsisting contract, a dispute” has arisen, 
 and the court has awarded damages for a breach. Where 
 the breach complained of is the common case of a wrongful 
 absenting from the service, an employer has in general 
 a right either to treat the contract as at an end, or he may 
 treat it as subsisting. It is a matter in his election. In 
 either case he can summon the workman for the breach, 
 and the amount of damages must in strictness be the same 
 in either case; for it is the loss sustained or accruing 
 from the past breach that the court has to ascertain and 
 estimate. It has no right to suppose, where the plaintiff 
 
 {a) See the statute with the de- tion of Jervis’s Acts. See also the 
 cisions carefully and clearly stated last edition of Oke’s Magisterial 
 in Mr. Cunningham Glen’s last edi- Synopsis. 
 
 L 2 
 
148 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 desires to enforce the subsequent performance, that the 
 defendant, after the decision and award of damages for the 
 past, will not perform his part of the contract in future. 
 It follows that a subsequent breach by reason of a con¬ 
 tinued absence can be the subject of another claim, to 
 which the first order is no bar. This has been expressly 
 so decided in reference to the Master and Servant Act, 
 1867, by the Court of Queen’s Bench, in the case of 
 Cutler V. Hague {h). 
 
 In that case a workman had agreed to serve his employer 
 in Sheffield for five years at piece work, at the usual prices 
 allowed by those in the same trade for similar work. At 
 the end of two years he gave notice, in concert with his 
 trade union, that the prices of work would, from a certain 
 day, be increased twenty per cent., the same as given in 
 Birmingham, and in case of non-compliance he should 
 suspend himself from service. He accordingly ceased to 
 work, and absented himself. He was summoned, and the 
 police magistrate assessed the damages sustained between 
 the absenting and the issuing of the summons at 11/. 8^., 
 and ordered the workman to pay that sum and costs. The 
 amount was paid after an order for imprisonment had 
 been drawn up; but the workman did not return to his 
 work, and he was again summoned, when the magistrates 
 ordered him to fulfil the contract, and to enter into his 
 own recognizance and to find two sureties for its fulfilment, 
 and in default of finding security, to be committed to 
 prison for three months, or until he found security. This 
 order was not complied with, and the defendant went to 
 prison. On his liberation he continued to absent himself. 
 The Court of Queen’s Bench held, affirming the opinion 
 of the police magistrate, that neither of the above orders 
 was a bar to a third order for damages for a subsequent 
 breach, by reason of the continued absence (c). 
 
 (h) 43 L. J., M. C. 124. that the law proved too strong for 
 
 (c) Cutler V. Hague was a case the workman, was the cause of 
 taken up by the union, and the fact great dissatisfaction and strong ex- 
 
PROCEDURE—EMPLOYERS AND WORKMEN ACT. 149 
 
 Although that case was decided under the former and 
 now repealed statute, it appears to be applicable to the 
 Employers and Workmen Act, 1875, subject to this ob¬ 
 servation, that now there" can be no imprisonment for 
 neglecting to obey an order for performance, as an 
 undertaking to perform must be the voluntary act of the 
 defendant. 
 
 Effect of Order on Proceedings in other Courts ."]—On 
 general principles it is clear that when proceedings are 
 instituted under this act, and a decision arrived at, those 
 proceedings will be a bar to any action or suit whether in 
 the superior courts or in the county courts. 
 
 So, also, if any disputes have been referred under the 
 
 pressions on the part of officers of 
 the union previous to the decision of 
 the Court of Queen’s Bench up¬ 
 holding the view I had taken. The 
 facts, as fairly admitted by the 
 secretary of the union in giving 
 evidence before the Royal Commis¬ 
 sion on Labour Laws, were, that the 
 man was a clever workman, and his 
 employers were very anxious to 
 secure his services for a length of 
 time; that prices in the trade were 
 not raised at Sheffield, and that no 
 evidence was given before the magis¬ 
 trate of a rise elsewhere, and that the 
 loss to the employers was undoubt¬ 
 edly a serious one, and that several 
 other persons would be kept out of 
 work if the defendant’s work were 
 not done, and that the magistrate 
 fully investigated the question of 
 actual damage. The secretary stated 
 that the workman was a man of “ a 
 very dogged determination,” and 
 impressed with the conviction that 
 he was right and the magistrate 
 wrong. (First Report of the Royal 
 Commission on Labour Laws— 
 
 Minutes of Evidence.) I was not 
 aware at the time I gave evidence 
 before the Commission of the way 
 in which the decision of myself and 
 other magistrates (for I did not deal 
 with the case on the intermediate 
 hearing) had been spoken of, or I 
 should have entered fully into the 
 matter. The facts above admitted 
 show, I apprehend, that when the 
 secretary of the “Parliamentary 
 Committee of the Trades Union 
 Congress” cited this case of Cutler 
 V. HaguCy as an illustration “ of the 
 injustice and excessive cruelty ” of 
 the law, and as “ where not only 
 had the man to suffer imprisonment 
 for three months for a morally 
 justifiable act, but he has also had 
 to suffer two subsequent prosecu¬ 
 tions for the same offence, to the 
 eternal disgrace of English law ” 
 (see Appendix, Part IV., to Second 
 Report of the Labour Law Com¬ 
 mission), he wrote (although I fully 
 believe in perfect sincerity) in en¬ 
 tire misconception of law and fact. 
 
150 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 5 Geo. 4y c. 96, or under any act extending or amending 
 the same,” that reference will be a bar to proceedings 
 under The Employers and Workmen Act, 1875.” It 
 has been expressly held that if a servant has already taken 
 proceedings in the county court for recovery of his wages, 
 or for damages by reason of his discharge, and a judgment 
 has been given against him, he cannot go before the 
 magistrates (d). 
 
 § 9. Aji-prentices. 
 
 The procedure with regard to apprentices and their 
 masters remains for a concise notice. 
 
 The jimisdiction given by the Employers and Work¬ 
 men Act in disputes between an apprentice and his 
 master is confined to an apprentice to the business of a 
 'workman, as defined by this act (e), upon whose binding 
 either no premium is paid, or the premium (if any) paid 
 does not exceed twenty-five pounds, and to an apprentice 
 
 {S) Hoxitledge v. Hislop, 29 L. 
 J. Rep. (N. S.) M. C. 90. In that 
 case a female servant in husbandry, 
 hired for a quarter of a year for 5?., 
 on being discharged before the end 
 of the quarter, immediately sued 
 her master in the county court for 
 6Z. 65. Qd. damages for discharging 
 her before the determination of the 
 contract. A verdict was given for 
 the defendant, and the servant, after 
 the expiration of the quarter, sum¬ 
 moned the master before the magis¬ 
 trates for the full wages, alleging in 
 the summons that she had been dis¬ 
 charged without just cause and that 
 she was always ready to complete 
 the service, and that the defendant 
 refused to pay her the wages justly 
 due for the time she was hired, 
 amounting to the sum of 5Z. The 
 magistrates decided in favour of the 
 
 complainant; but, upon a case stated, 
 the Court of Queen’s Bench held the 
 judgment in the county court to be 
 a bar to the proceedings before the 
 magistrates, on the ground that the 
 matter for the consideration of the 
 justices was, in truth, the same 
 identical matter which had been 
 decided by the judge of the county 
 court, namely, whether the dis¬ 
 charge was wrongful and without 
 cause. 
 
 {e) What is the meaning of the 
 business of a workman as defined 
 by this act?” See the definition, 
 ante^ pp. 110, 111 Probably what 
 is meant is the business of an em¬ 
 ployer of a workman within the 
 meaning of the act, and if this effect 
 is given to the words, some com¬ 
 plicated questions may be avoided. 
 
PROCEDURE—EMPLOYERS AND WORKMEN ACT. 151 
 
 bound under the provisions of the acts relating to the 
 relief of the poor” (/). 
 
 Disputes between such an apprentice and his master, 
 ansing out of or incidental to their relation as such, may 
 be heard and determined by a court of summary jurisdic¬ 
 tion {g), the court having the same powers as if the dis¬ 
 pute were between an employer and a workman; and also 
 the powers to make an order directing the apprentice to 
 perform his duties, and also power when it rescinds the 
 indentures to order the whole or part of the premium to 
 be repaid (/i). 
 
 It seems to be clear, notwithstanding the same powers 
 
 (/) 38 & 39 Viet. c. 90, s. 12. 
 The act does not extend to appren¬ 
 tices to the sea service, nor does it 
 take away or abridge any local or 
 special jurisdiction touching ap¬ 
 prentices, Id. s. 13. It would be 
 out of character with a concise 
 sketch of the procedure of the courts 
 of summary jurisdiction to attempt 
 to present a view of the rights of 
 parties under deeds of apprentice¬ 
 ship. The repeal of nearly all the 
 statute law relating to ordinary 
 apprentices (see pp. 200—205), 
 
 coupled with the new jurisdiction, 
 will probably give rise to several 
 questions. The only statutes appa¬ 
 rently now in force specially relating 
 to other than parish apprentices are 
 54 Geo. 3, c. 96, and 5 & 6 Viet. c. 7. 
 The only part of the former act of pre¬ 
 sent moment is sect. 3, which enacts 
 that ‘‘any justice or justices of the 
 peace may hear and determine any 
 complaints that may arise respect¬ 
 ing any apprenticeships in like 
 manner as if they had been made 
 under the act hereby in part re¬ 
 pealed” (viz. 5 Eliz. c. 4, now 
 wholly repealed). The 5 & 6 Viet, 
 c. 7 (included in the schedule to 
 the Master and Servant Act, 1867 
 
 but expressly preserved, see post^ 
 
 р. 203), merely recites 20 Geo. 2, 
 
 с. 19; 33 Geo. 3, c. 65; 4 Geo. 4, c. 
 29 (all repealed); and 32 Geo. 3, 
 c. 57, relating to parish apprentices, 
 and that doubts had been enter¬ 
 tained whether those acts applied 
 where no money was paid on the 
 binding of the apprentice, and 
 enacts that those recited acts shall 
 so apply. As to apprentices to bank¬ 
 rupts, see 32 & 33 Viet. c. 'll,post^ 
 Appendix, The effect at common 
 law of instruments of apprentice¬ 
 ship cannot be discussed here. As 
 to the jurisdiction over parish ap¬ 
 prentices, some work on the poor 
 laws, where the numerous statutes 
 and cases are collected, must be 
 consulted. 
 
 For a general view, historical and 
 legal, of apprenticeships and local 
 privileges, see an excellent and 
 interesting article in the “ Penny 
 Cyclopaedia.” 
 
 {g') Id. 8. 5. 
 
 (Ji) Id. s. 6. See, in the Chancel¬ 
 lor’s rules, forms of order on appren¬ 
 tice to perform duties, and of order 
 rescinding contract of apprentice¬ 
 ship, p. 187. 
 
152 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 are given as in the case of a workman^ that an apprentice’s 
 consent to an order for performance and security is not to 
 be asked for or accepted, an order directing performance 
 of duties being with propriety substituted. 
 
 It may be also confidently stated in conformity with the 
 effect of previous provisions giving summary jurisdiction 
 in the case of apprentices, that orders for wages or damages 
 may be made after the termination of the apprenticeship in 
 respect of breaches committed during the term (/). 
 
 Enforcement of Order for Performance of Duties ,^— 
 Where an order is made directing an apprentice to per¬ 
 form his duties under the apprenticeship the court may, 
 from time to time, if satisfied after the expiration of not 
 less than one month from the date of the order that the 
 apprentice has failed to comply therewith, order him to be 
 imprisoned for a period not exceeding fourteen days” (k). 
 The words ^^ftom time to time” indicate a power to 
 make an unlimited number of orders of imprisonment after 
 one order for performance. Although the Act and Kules 
 and Forms are silent on the subject, it seems on general 
 principles that the apprentice should be summoned and 
 heard upon any application for an order of imprison¬ 
 ment (Z). 
 
 (i) See The Queen v. Proud, Law 
 Rep., 1 C. C. R. 71; 36 L. J., M. C. 
 62. In that case perj ury was alleged 
 to have been committed on the hear¬ 
 ing of a claim made for wages on an 
 apprenticeship indenture after the 
 termination of the apprenticeship. 
 
 An objection was taken that 
 magistrates’ jurisdiction under 4 
 Geo. 4, c. 34, s. 2, applied to the 
 Act of 1867, with respect to differ¬ 
 ences and complaints between mas¬ 
 ters and apprentices, was gone when 
 that relation ceased to exist, and 
 that, therefore, he had no jurisdic¬ 
 tion to hear and adjudicate upon 
 this complaint. The objection was 
 
 overruled. Martin, B., observed 
 to counsel during the argument: 
 “Supposing the sum of 5s. to be 
 due for wages for the last week 
 of the service, according to your 
 contention the apprentice cannot 
 go to the justice, but must sue in 
 the county court. The act could 
 not have intended that.” 
 
 (;5;) 38 & 39 Viet. c. 90, s. 6. 
 See the Lord Chancellor’s rules, for 
 form of order of committal of ap¬ 
 prentice, Form No. 13. 
 
 (Z) See ante, p. 145, note (?/), 
 and the next page, as to procedure 
 against a person covenanting in 
 the indenture. 
 
PROCEDURE—EMPLOYERS AND WORKMEN ACT. 153 
 
 Procedure against Parent or other Person 'party to the 
 Indenture ,^—The court of summary jurisdiction may 
 direct ^^any person liable under the instrument of ap¬ 
 prenticeship for the good conduct of the apprentice” 
 (meaning, it is to be presumed, a person covenanting to 
 that effect with the master) to be summoned, in like 
 manner as if he were the defendant, to attend the hearing 
 of any proceeding in relation to a dispute between a master 
 and an apprentice. And the court, in addition to or in 
 substitution for any order which the court is authorized to 
 make against the apprentice, may order the person so 
 summoned to pay damages for any breach of the contract 
 of apprenticeship. 
 
 The court may accept the secimty of the person sum¬ 
 moned, or any other person, for the performance by the 
 apprentice of his contract of apprenticeship,” instead of 
 or in mitigation of any punishment which it is authorized 
 to inflict upon the apprentice {m). 
 
 See forms of application for and summons of bonds¬ 
 man ” for an apprentice, and also of order on him to pay 
 damages, in the Chancellor’s orders. 
 
 The words ^‘instead of or in mitigation of any punish¬ 
 ment” indicate the power to summon the third party on 
 an application for an order of imprisonment of the appren¬ 
 tice, for on the original hearing of a dispute the court has 
 no power to inflict any punishment (w); and the form of 
 acceptance, given by the orders, confirms this view. 
 
 (wi) 38 & 39 Viet. c. 90, s. 7. of an order against an apprentice 
 
 {n) See the preceding observa- for the performance of his duties, 
 tions in the text on the enforcement 
 
154 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 CHAPTEE VIIL 
 
 PROCEDURE UNDER THE CONSPIRACY AND PROTECTION 
 OF PROPERTY ACT, 1875. 
 
 § 1. Offences under the Act, 
 
 The offences defined and punishable by the Conspiracy 
 and Protection of Property Act, 1875, may be thus shortly 
 stated in the order they occur in the act: 
 
 (1.) Wilfully and maliciously breaking a contract of 
 service with a mimicipal authority or company or con¬ 
 tractor having the duty of supplying any city, borough, 
 town or place, or any part thereof, with gas or water, 
 knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that the 
 probable consequences of so doing, either alone or in com¬ 
 bination with others, wiU be to deprive the inhabitants of 
 that city, borough, town, place or part, wholly or to a 
 great extent, of their supply of gas or water («). 
 
 (2.) Wilfully and maliciously breaking a contract of 
 service or of hiring, knowing or having reasonable cause 
 to believe that the probable consequences of so doing, 
 either alone or in combination with others, will be to 
 endanger human life, or cause serious bodily injury, or to 
 expose valuable property, whether real or personal, to 
 destruction or serious injury (b). 
 
 (3.) A master, who being legally liable to provide for 
 his servant or apprentice necessary food, clothing, medical 
 aid or lodging, wilfully and without lawful excuse refuses 
 or neglects to provide the same, whereby the health of the 
 
 {a) 38 & 39 Viet. c. 86. As to thority in Scotland, sect. 18; and 
 the definition of “ municipal autho- Ireland, sect. 21. 
 rity,” “company” and “contractor,” (h) AZ. s. 5. 
 
 see sect. 14; and of municipal au- 
 
PROCEDURE —CONSPIRACY AND PROTECTION, &C. ACT. 155 
 
 servant or apprentice is or is likely to be seriously or 
 permanently injured (c). 
 
 (4.) Every person who, with a view to compel any other 
 person to abstain from doing or to do any act which such 
 other person has a legal right to do or abstain from doing, 
 wrongfully and without legal authority, 
 
 1 . Uses violence to or intimidates such other person 
 
 or his wife or children, or injures his property; 
 or 
 
 2 . Persistently follows such other person about from 
 
 place to place; or 
 
 3 . Hides any tools, clothes or other property o^vned 
 
 or used by such other person, or deprives him of 
 or hinders him in the use thereof; or 
 
 4 . Watches or besets the house or other place where 
 
 such other person resides, or works, or carries on 
 business, or happens to be, or the approach to 
 such house or place (c?); or 
 
 5 . Follows such other person with two or more other 
 
 persons in a disorderly manner, in or through 
 any street or road (e). 
 
 Of the above four principal classes of offences, the first 
 and second classes may be regarded as in substitution of 
 the fourteenth section of the Master and Servant Act, 
 1867 (/). 
 
 The word “maliciously,” used in reference to these 
 offences, is to be construed in the same manner as is 
 required by sect. 58 of the Malicious Injuries to Property 
 Act, 24 & 25 Viet. c. 97, in reference to offences under 
 that act, that is to say, the punishment and forfeiture 
 equally apply “whether the offence shall be committed 
 
 (c) 38 & 39 Viet. c. 86, s. 6. order merely to obtain or communi- 
 
 (d) Attending at or near the cate information, is not a watching 
 house or place where a person re- or besetting within the meaning of 
 sides, or works, or carries on busi- this section. 
 
 ness, or happens to be, or the ap- (e) Id. s. 6. 
 
 proach to such house or place, in (/ ) See ante^ pp. 20, 93. 
 
156 
 
 THE LABOUR LAAVS. 
 
 from malice conceived against the owner of the property 
 in respect of which it shall be committed or otherwise”(y). 
 
 {g) Notwithstanding this inter¬ 
 pretation it is probable that ques¬ 
 tions will be raised as to the precise 
 effect of the word “ maliciously ” in 
 the Conspiracy and Protection of 
 Property Act, 1875. “Malice, in 
 common acceptation, means ill-will 
 against a person; but, in its legal 
 sense, it means a wrongful act done 
 intentionally without just cause or 
 excuse.” {Bayley, J., Bromage v. 
 Prosser, 4 B. & C. 255.) If “ ma¬ 
 liciously ” in the statute is to be 
 read in the “ common acceptation ” 
 of the word, the interpretation will 
 merely make it immaterial whether 
 the malice was conceived against the 
 owner or against some third person. 
 If it is to be read in the strict legal 
 sense, then the interpretation clause 
 appears to be inoperative or un¬ 
 necessary. The words “ either alone 
 or in combinatiofi with others,” 
 seem to point to malice in the 
 “ common acceptation ” of the word. 
 On the other hand, the words 
 “ knowing or having reasonable 
 cause to believe that the probable 
 consequences” will be to produce 
 the mischief of the description men¬ 
 tioned, indicates that it is unneces¬ 
 sary that the probable result should 
 be really present to the mind of the 
 person wilfully breaking his con¬ 
 tract. If a strictly legal sense, and 
 not the popular sense, is to be given 
 to the words “wilfully and mali¬ 
 ciously,” a larger class of cases will 
 be included Avithin the penal provi¬ 
 sion. In the former event two 
 workmen drinking by common con¬ 
 sent at a public-house during work¬ 
 ing hours, and having reasonable 
 cause to believe that their absence 
 
 will expose valuable property to 
 serious inj ury, but not contemplating 
 the result or giving it a thought, 
 would be amenable to the law as 
 being guilty of “ a wrongful act, 
 done intentionally, without just 
 cause or excuse.” Certainly if human 
 life or limb or valuable property be 
 jeopardized, there seems no moral 
 wrong done in making such reckless 
 conduct punishable as a crime; but 
 can such a case constitute a wilful 
 and malicious breach of contract? 
 Without speculating further on the 
 question, a case recently decided 
 under the 24 & 25 Viet. c. 97, s. 51, 
 may be cited as bearing somewhat 
 upon it. That section makes it a 
 misdemeanor “unlawfully and ma¬ 
 liciously ” to commit any damage, 
 injury or spoil to any property to 
 an amount exceeding bl., for which 
 no other punishment is provided. 
 
 On an indictment under that sec¬ 
 tion for unlawfully and maliciously 
 committing damage to a window, it 
 appeared that the defendant and 
 others, having been turned out of a 
 public-house for disorderly conduct, 
 fought in the street, and the de¬ 
 fendant picked up a large stone and 
 threw it at the persons he had been 
 fighting with, and the stone passing 
 over their heads broke a plate-glass 
 window, and doing damage to an 
 amount exceeding bl. On a finding 
 of the jury that he intended to 
 strike the persons, but not intending 
 to break the window, it was held 
 that the defendant could not be 
 convicted. Blaclihurn, J., said, 
 “ when a person wilfully does an act 
 to the injury of another without any 
 lawful cause, the act is malicious. 
 
PROCEDURE—CONSPIRACY AND PROTECTION, &C. ACT. 157 
 
 The third offence (by a master of a servant or appren¬ 
 tice) is an extension of sect. 26 of the Offences against 
 the Person Consolidation Act, 24 & 25 Viet. c. 100. The 
 chief extension consists in the introduction of seriously 
 injured,” and thus constituting it an offence if healtli is 
 or is likely to be seriously injured, instead of confining it 
 to an actual or probable permanent injury. The neglect 
 of medical aid is also introduced, in addition to necessary 
 food, clothing or lodging. 
 
 The fourth class comprises the offences substituted for 
 the repealed Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1871 (A). 
 
 In addition to the above offences there is another, 
 wholly the creation of the Act of 1875, but connected 
 with offence No. 1. The act requiries every municipal 
 authority, company or contractor, upon whom is imposed, 
 by act of parliament, the duty, or who has assumed the 
 duty, of supplying a place with gas or water, to cause to 
 be posted up at the gas or waterworks a printed copy 
 of section 4 of the act in some conspicuous place where it 
 may be conveniently read by the persons employed; and 
 as often as such copy becomes defaced, obhterated or 
 destroyed, to cause it to be renewed with all reasonable 
 despatch. A municipal authority, or company, or con¬ 
 tractor making default in relation to such notice, incurs a 
 liability on summary conviction to a penalty not exceeding 
 five pounds for every day during which such default con¬ 
 tinues ; and every person who unlawfully injures, defaces 
 
 Here the act was without lawful 
 excuse; but was it wilful? Upon 
 the facts there was evidence upon 
 which the jury might have found if 
 they had been so directed that the 
 act was malicious. If they had 
 found that the prisoner was aware 
 that the window was where it was, 
 and that he was likely to break it, 
 and was reckless whether he did so 
 or not, the case might have been 
 different, hut they were not so 
 
 directed, and have not so found. 
 They have found that he did not 
 intend to break the window. There¬ 
 fore I think this conviction must be 
 quashed.” The Queen v. Pem- 
 Miton, Law Rep. 2 C. C. R. 119; 
 43 L. J., M. C. 91. See further. 
 The Queen v. Ward^ Law Rep. 1 
 C. C. R. 356; 41 L. J., M. C. 69; 
 and ijost, p. 274. 
 
 (Ji) See ante^ p. 40, and p. 96. 
 
158 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 or covers up any notice so posted up is liable to a penalty 
 of forty sbillings (z). 
 
 It does not appear, however, that the posting up the 
 notice and its preservation are conditions precedent to 
 the facts necessary to create the offence No. 1, nor that 
 any defaults or omissions in these respects operate as an 
 exoneration of that offence. 
 
 Besides the offences thus enumerated, and wholly 
 pimishable under the act, the law has been altered by 
 making it no longer an offence to conspire to do or procure 
 to be done any act in contemplation or furtherance of a 
 trade dispute between employers and workmen, if such 
 act committed by one person would not be punishable as a 
 crime (A), and further restrains the sentence of punish¬ 
 ment of a person convicted of a conspiracy to do or procure 
 to be done an act punishable only on summary conviction 
 by imprisonment (Z). 
 
 But the alteration of the law in reference to conspiracy 
 does not concern the subject of this chapter (namely, the 
 procedure for offences under the act), and therefore will 
 not be firrther noticed here {m). The same observation 
 applies to a power given by the act to reduce penalties to 
 one fourth in respect of any offence under any act 
 relating to employers or workmen where no such power of 
 reduction is given {n). 
 
 Attention has been already called to the fact that the 
 four classes of offences are not confined to any particular 
 class of workmen {o). There is no restriction to work¬ 
 men of the classes specified in the Employers and Work¬ 
 men Act, 1875. Nothing in the act now under con¬ 
 sideration applies, however, to seamen or to appi'entices to 
 the sea service (/>). 
 
 {%) 38 & 39 Viet. c. 86, s. 4. 79, and Chapter VI. p. 101, where 
 
 (Ji) See sect. 3 for certain ex- the scope of the alteration is dis- 
 ceptions, and for the definition of cussed. See also post^ p. 282. 
 
 “ crime.” ('0 
 
 (Z) See sect. 3. (^) See ante, pp. 97, 98. 
 
 (?;i) See ante, Chapter V. pp. 73, 38 & 39 Viet. c. 86, s. 16. 
 
PROCEDURE—CONSPIRACY AND PROTECTION, &C. ACT. 159 
 
 § 2. The Tribunal and Mode of deciding Cases, 
 
 All the offences mentioned in the act may be dealt 
 with on summary conviction, subject to the right of 
 defendants as hereafter mentioned in all the four classes of 
 cases already enumerated to be tried by a jury. 
 
 The offences of the first, second and fourth classes are 
 punishable by fine not exceeding 20/., or by imprisonment 
 not exceeding three months, with or without hard labour. 
 In the thh’d class, the master is liable to the same penalty, 
 or to imprisonment not exceeding six months, Avith or 
 without hard labour. 
 
 Court of Summary Jurisdiction .^—The tribunal for 
 summary adjudication in the first, second and fourth 
 classes is a court of summary jurisdiction, constituted 
 precisely as the court of summary jurisdiction under the 
 Employers and Workmen Act, 1875, that is to say: — 
 (1) In the city of London the lord mayor or any 
 alderman sitting at the Mansion House or Guildhall 
 justice room; (2) In any police court division in the 
 metropolitan police district, any metropolitan police 
 magistrate sitting at the police court for the division; 
 (3) In anyplace or district for which a stipendiary magis¬ 
 trate is for the time being acting, such stipendiary magis¬ 
 trate sitting at a police court or other place appointed in 
 that behalf; (4) Elsewhere any justice or justices of the 
 peace, to whom jurisdiction is given by the Summary 
 Jurisdiction Act: provided that, as respects any case 
 within the cognizance of such justices, an information 
 under the act must be heard and determined by two or 
 more justices sitting at some place appointed for holding 
 petty sessions {q), 
 
 {q) 38 & 39 Viet. c. 86, s, 13. tutes {Id. s. 18), and in Ireland any 
 In Scotland “court of summary justice of the peace or other magis- 
 jurisdiction ” means the sheriff of trate to whom jurisdiction is given 
 the county or any one of his substi- by the Summary Jurisdiction Act 
 
160 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 As to the meaning of a place appointed for holding 
 petty sessions/’ the observations made on the same words 
 in the Employers and Workmen Act, 1875, will apply 
 here (r). 
 
 Legal Proceedings^^ —It is expressly provided that every 
 offence made punishable by a court of summary jurisdic¬ 
 tion or on summary conviction, and every penalty under 
 the act recoverable on summary conviction, may be pro¬ 
 secuted and recovered in manner provided by the Sum¬ 
 mary Jurisdiction Act (11 & 12 Yict. c. 43), inclusive of 
 any acts amending that act (5). Without this express 
 provision it is clear that Jervis’s Acts would apply. 
 
 Offences, therefore, will be dealt with upon information 
 laid before a magistrate, and a summons or warrant 
 issued thereon. Although the act does not require the 
 information to be in writing, it is desirable that it should 
 be reduced to Avriting. In most cases a summons Avill be 
 issued, and in default of appearance then a Avarrant to 
 apprehend. In some exceptional cases, however, it may 
 be prudent to issue a Avarrant in the first instance on a 
 sworn information. 
 
 The forms of summons and conviction given by the 
 Summary Jurisdiction Act Avill require to be someAvhat 
 varied to meet the description of the court of summary 
 jurisdiction in those cases that require to be so dealt with. 
 
 Competency of Witnesses ^]—Upon the hearing of any 
 case under sects. 4, 5, and 6 of the act, comprising the 
 
 as applied to Ireland {Id. s. 21), 
 and constituted as mentioned in that 
 section. In Scotland every offence 
 under the act is to be prosecuted, 
 every penalty recovered, and every 
 order made at the instance of the 
 Lord Advocate, or of the procurator 
 fiscal of the sheriff court. The 
 proceedings may be on indictment 
 
 in the Court of Justiciary in Edin¬ 
 burgh, or on circuit, or in a sheriff 
 court, or may be taken summarily 
 in the sheriff court under the pro¬ 
 visions of the Summary Procedure 
 Act, 1864. 
 
 (r) See antCy p. 109. 
 
 (s) 38 & 39 Viet. c. 86, s. 10. 
 
PROCEDURE—CONSPIRACY AND PROTECTION, &C. ACT. 161 
 
 first, second and third of the four classes already mentioned, 
 the parties to the contract of service, and their husbands 
 and wives, are competent witnesses, whether upon summary 
 conviction or indictment as hereinafter mentioned (t). 
 
 Objection by Defendant to the Court of Summary Juris¬ 
 diction .']—Where any person is accused before a court of 
 summary jurisdiction of any offence made punishable by the 
 act, and for which a penalty amounting to 20/. or imprison¬ 
 ment is imposed {u), he may, on appearing before the court, 
 declare that he objects to being tried for such offence by a 
 court of summary jurisdiction, ^^and thereupon the court of 
 summary jurisdiction may deal with the case in all respects 
 as if the accused were charged with an indictable offence 
 punishable on summary conviction, and the offence may 
 be prosecuted on indictment accordingly” (u). 
 
 This provision, making an offence indictable only at 
 the election of the accused, has been already commented 
 upon {x). It must suffice here to state, that although in 
 strictness the objection by the defendant ought to be made 
 immediately on his appearing before the court, yet latitude 
 ought to be given to him to object subsequently, where 
 on his first appearing he had not had any one to advise 
 him, or he was otherwise ignorant of his position. On the 
 other hand, the objection ought to be made before the 
 court (having heard the facts) has expressed an opinion on 
 the merits of the case. 
 
 Further, although the objection is to proceed from the 
 
 though the court may happen to be 
 constituted as a court of summary 
 jurisdiction is required to be on the 
 hearing and determination of other 
 cases, it would be an anomaly 
 that the right could he exercised 
 under those circumstances and not 
 when the justices are sitting in 
 ordinary petty sessions. 
 
 (v) 38 & 39 Viet. c. 86, s. 9. 
 
 (.r) See ante, p. 99. 
 
 M 
 
 {€) 38 & 39 Viet. c. 86, s. 11. 
 See the observations, ante, pp. 99— 
 101 . 
 
 (u) As the offences under sect. 6 
 of the act by a master of a servant 
 or apprentice (constituting class (3) 
 as specified in the text), may be 
 dealt with by justices not sitting in 
 divisional petty sessions, it is doubt¬ 
 ful whether the right to trial by a 
 jury extends to such cases, for al- 
 D. 
 
162 
 
 THE LABOUR LAAVS. 
 
 defendant, it will be a proper course for tbe court to inform 
 him of the option the law has given him. 
 
 If he exercises the option, the complainant should in 
 ordinary cases be asked whether he wishes to prosecute, 
 for as the legislature has not thought fit to allow the costs 
 of the prosecution, it must be taken to be on the notion 
 that these cases are not of sufficient public concern to 
 allow of the costs being properly borne by the public; 
 and therefore the complainant should not be compelled to 
 prosecute against his will, unless in very exceptional cases. 
 
 If he elects to prosecute, it is the duty of the court to 
 proceed to hear it as in indictable cases, ordering the 
 accused to be discharged if the court think the evidence 
 is not sufficient to put the accused on his trial; or, on the 
 other hand, committing him for trial if the evidence given 
 raises a strong or probable presumption of guilt; the court 
 applying, of course, all the provisions of Jervis’ Act, 
 11 & 12 Viet. c. 42 (examining the defendant’s witnesses 
 under 30 & 31 Viet. c. 53), to the case as are applicable(y). 
 
 The warrant of commitment must be carefully framed, 
 so as to show the jurisdiction of the court to commit for 
 trial by reason of the defendant’s objection to the summary 
 disposal of the case. 
 
 The committal will be in general for trial at the quarter 
 sessions. 
 
 In addition to the witnesses examined before the court, 
 and bound over to attend the trial, evidence will be required 
 on the trial, and strictly speaking even before the grand 
 
 (y) The act provides that upon 
 the hearing and determining of 
 any indictment or information 
 under sects. 4, 6 and 6 of the act 
 (forming the first three classes of 
 the division mentioned in the text), 
 the parties to the contract of service, 
 their husbands or wives, shall be 
 deemed and considered as compe¬ 
 tent witnesses. It may be doubted 
 
 whether this extends to what is com¬ 
 monly termed “the examination” 
 of the accused person before the 
 justices for the indictable offence. 
 At all events it is clear it does not 
 supersede the duty of the court to 
 take the statement of the accused 
 in the ordinary way according to 
 Jervis’ Act, 11 & 12 Viet. c. 42. 
 
PROCEDURE—CONSPIRACY AND PROTECTION, &C. ACT. 163 
 
 jury, of tlie proceedings before the court of summary juris¬ 
 diction (and it may be of its due constitution), and of the 
 objection made by the defendant. Unless the indictment is 
 prepared by the prosecutor’s counsel, copies of the infor¬ 
 mation, summons or warrant of apprehension, and of the 
 warrant of commitment, should accompany the depositions, 
 to enable the officer of the court to prepare the indictment. 
 
 For reasons given elsewhere, it is probable that these 
 prosecutions will be of rare occurrence ( 2 :). 
 
 AppealJ ]—An appeal to the quarter sessions is given 
 (in England or Ireland) (a) by a court of summary juris¬ 
 diction against any conviction on any information under 
 the act in the mode specified by the act, with power to 
 the court of appeal not only to confirm, reverse or modify 
 the decision of the court of summary jurisdiction, but to 
 remit the matter to that court with the opinion of the 
 court of appeal thereon, or make such other order as that 
 court thinks just. If the matter be remitted, the court of 
 summary jurisdiction is to rehear and decide the informa¬ 
 tion in accordance with the opinion of the court of appeal. 
 The court of appeal may make such order as to costs to 
 be paid by either party as it thinks just {b). 
 
 Case for Opinion of a Superior Court ^—A case may 
 be applied for and stated on any point of law arising on 
 any information under the act, pursuant to the statute 
 20 & 21 Viet. c. 43. 
 
 (z) See ante, p. 102, note {v), 
 
 {a) In Scotland the appeal is to 
 the next circuit Court of Justiciary, 
 or where there are no circuit courts 
 to the High Court of Justiciary at 
 Edinburgh, as under 20 Geo. 2, 
 c. 43, as amended by act of parlia¬ 
 ment (38 & 39 Viet. c. 86, s. 20). 
 
 (5) 38 & 39 Viet. c. 86, s. 12. 
 
 The Court of Quarter Sessions has 
 no power to order the justices form¬ 
 ing the court of summary jurisdic¬ 
 tion (who although made respond¬ 
 ents as nominal parties, take no 
 part in the appeal) to pay the costs. 
 The Queen v. Goodall, 43 L. J., 
 M. C. 119. 
 
 M 2 
 
164 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS, 
 
 I 
 
 i 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 Short title. 
 
 Commence¬ 
 ment of act. 
 
 I’ower of 
 county court as 
 to ordering of 
 payment of 
 money, set-off, 
 and rescission 
 of contract and 
 taking secu¬ 
 rity. 
 
 38 & 39 ViCT. c. 90. 
 
 A?! Act to enlarge the powers of County Courts in 
 respect of disputes between Emplpy£x^^jmd.Jd^£^^ 
 and to jyive other Courts a limited cwif jurisdiction 
 irTrespect of such disputes, [ISth August, 18757] 
 
 Be it enacted by tbe Queen’s most excellent Majesty, 
 by and with the advice and consent of the Lords 
 Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present 
 Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, 
 as follows: 
 
 Preliminary, 
 
 1 . This act may be cited as the Employers and 
 Workmen Act, 1875. 
 
 2. This act, except so far as it authorizes any rules 
 to be made or other thing to be done at any time after 
 the passing of this act, shall come into operation on the 
 first day of September, one thousand eight hundred and 
 seventy-five. 
 
 Part I. 
 
 Jurisdiction — Jurisdiction of County Court, 
 
 3. In any proceeding before a county court («) in 
 relation to any dispute between an employer and a 
 workman arising out of or incidental to their relation 
 as such (which dispute is hereinafter referred to as a 
 dispute under this act) the court may, in addition to 
 any jurisdiction it might have exercised if this act had 
 
 (<z) In Scotland, the ordinary Sheriff Court of the county j in Ire¬ 
 land, Civil Bill Court. 
 
EMPLOYERS AND WORKMEN ACT, 1875 . 
 
 165 
 
 not passed, exercise all or any of the following powers; 
 that is to say, 
 
 (1.) It may adjust and set off the one against the 
 other all such claims on the part either of the 
 employer or of the workman, arising out of or 
 incidental to the relation between them, as the 
 court may find to be subsisting, whether such 
 claims are liquidated or unliquidated, and are 
 for wages, damages, or otherwise (5); and, 
 
 (2.) If, having regard to all the circumstances of the 
 case, it thinks it just to do so, it may rescind 
 any contract between the employer and the 
 workman upon such terms as to the apportion¬ 
 ment of wages or other sums due thereunder, 
 and as to the payment of wages or damages, 
 or other sums due, as it thinks just; and, 
 
 (3.) Where the court might otherwise award damages 
 for any breach of contract it may, if the defen¬ 
 dant be Avilling to give security to the satisfac¬ 
 tion of the court for the performance by him 
 of so much of his contract as remains unper¬ 
 formed, with the consent of the plaintiff, accept 
 such security, and order performance of the 
 contract accordingly, in place either of the 
 whole of the damages which would otherwise 
 have been awarded, or some part of such 
 damages. 
 
 The security shall be an undertaking by the defen¬ 
 dant and one or more surety or sureties that 
 the defendant will perform his contract, subject 
 on non-performance to the payment of a sum 
 to be specified in the undertaking (c). 
 
 Any sum paid by a surety on behalf of a defendant 
 in respect of a security under this act, together 
 
 (&) Seej! 70 s#, sect. 11, and 1 & c. 48, post, Appendix, and the 
 2 W. 4, c. 37, and 37 & 38 Viet, observations on those acts. 
 
 (c) Seej?ost, sect. 8. 
 
166 
 
 THE LAROUR LAWS. 
 
 Jurisdiction of 
 justices in dis¬ 
 putes between 
 employers and 
 workmen. 
 
 Jurisdiction of 
 justices in dis¬ 
 putes between 
 
 with all costs incurred by such surety in 
 respect of such security, shall be deemed to 
 be a debt due to him from the defendant; and 
 where such security has been given in or under 
 the direction of a court of summary jurisdic¬ 
 tion, that court may order payment to the 
 surety of the sum which has so become due to 
 him from the defendant {d). 
 
 Court of Summary Jurisdiction, 
 
 4 . A dispute under thi s act between an employer 
 and a workman may be heard and determined by a 
 court of summary jurisdiction (e), and such court, for 
 the purposes of this act, shall beTfeemed to be a court 
 of civ il jurisdiction, and in a proceeding in relation to 
 any such dispute the court may order payment of any 
 sum which it may find to be due as wages, or damages, 
 or otherwise, and may exermsFall or any of the powers 
 by this act conferred on a county court: provided that 
 in any proceeding in relation to any such dispute the 
 court of summary jurisdiction— 
 
 (1.) Shall not exercise any jurisdiction where the_ 
 amou nt claimed exceeds ten pounds; and 
 (2.) Shall not make an order for the payment of any 
 sum exceeding ten pounds, exclusive of the 
 costs incurred in the case^ and 
 (3.) Shall not require security to an amount exceed¬ 
 ing ten pounds from any defendant or his 
 surety or sureties. 
 
 5 . Any dispute between an apprentice to whom this 
 act applies (y') and his master, arising out of or in- 
 
 {d') As to the procedure relat¬ 
 ing to orders of performance and 
 security, see ante^ pp. 132, 144; 
 and as to the changes effected by 
 the act on such orders, see antCy 
 pp. 8G—92. 
 
 (d?) For the constitution of 
 courts of summary jurisdiction, 
 see sect. 10; in Scotland, sect. 14; 
 and in Ireland, sect. 15. 
 
 (/) See posty sect. 12. 
 
EMPLOYERS AND WORKMEN ACT, 1875 . 
 
 167 
 
 cidental to their relation as such, (which dispute is masters and 
 hereinafter referred to as a dispute under this act,) may —- 
 
 be heard and determined by a court of summary juris¬ 
 diction. 
 
 6. In a proceeding before a court of summary juris- Powers of 
 diction in relation to a dispute under this act between respecToT 
 a master and an apprentice, the court shall have the app^ Uces. 
 same powers as if the dispute were between an employer 
 
 and a workman, and the master were the employer and 
 the apprentice the workman, and the instrument of 
 apprenticeship a contract between an employer and a 
 workman, and shall also have the following powers: 
 
 (1.) It may make an order directing the apprentice 
 to perform his duties under the apprenticeship; 
 and, 
 
 (2.) If it rescinds the instrument of apprenticeship 
 it may, if it thinks it just so to do, order the 
 whole or any part of the premium paid on 
 the binding of the apprentice to be repaid. 
 
 Where an order is made directing an apprentice to 
 perform his duties under the apprenticeship, the court 
 may, from time to time, if satisfied after the expiration 
 of not less than one month from the date of the order 
 that the apprentice has failed to comply therewith, order 
 him to be imprisoned for a period not exceeding fourteen 
 days. 
 
 7 . In a proceeding before a court of summary juris- Order against 
 
 diction in relation to a dispute under this act between of^j> 
 
 . . p , . prentice, and 
 
 a master and an apprentice, if there is any person liable, power to friend 
 under the instrument of apprenticeship, for the good 
 conduct of the apprentice, that person may, if the court 
 so direct, be summoned in like manner as if he were 
 the defendant in such proceeding to attend on the 
 hearing of the proceeding, and the court may, in addi¬ 
 tion to or in substitution for any order which the court 
 
168 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 is authorized to make against the apprentice, order the 
 person so summoned to pay damages for any breach ot 
 the contract of apprenticeship to an amount not ex¬ 
 ceeding the limit (if any) to which he is liable under 
 the instrument of apprenticeship. 
 
 The court may, if the person so summoned, or any 
 other person, is willing to give security to the satisfaction 
 of the court for the performance by the apprentice ot 
 his contract of apprenticeship, accept such security 
 instead of or in mitigation of any punishment which it 
 is authorized to inflict upon the apprentice {g). 
 
 Mode of 
 giving secu¬ 
 rity. ' 
 
 Part II. 
 
 Procedure. 
 
 8. A person may give security under this act in a 
 county court or court of summary jurisdiction by an 
 oral or written acknowledgment in or under the direc¬ 
 tion of the court of the undertaking or condition by 
 which and the sum for which he is bound, in such 
 manner and form as may be prescribed by any rule for 
 the time being in force, and in any case where security 
 is so given, the court in or under the direction of which 
 it is given may order payment of any sum which may 
 become due in pursuance of such security. 
 
 The Lord Chancellor may at any time after the 
 passing of this act, and from time to time make, and 
 when made, rescind, alter, and add to, rules with respect 
 to giving security under this act. 
 
 Summary 
 proceedings. 
 
 9 . Any dispute or matter in respect of which juris¬ 
 diction is given by this act to a court of summary 
 jurisdiction shall be deemed to be a matter on which 
 that court has authority by law to make an order on 
 
 (^) As to the procedure relat- as to the origin of this new provi- 
 ing to apprentices, see ante^ sion for summoning third persons 
 p. 150, and see ante, pp. 84, 85, parties to the indenture. 
 
EMPLOYERS AND WORKMEN ACT, 1875 . 
 
 169 
 
 complaint in pursuance of the Summary Jurisdiction^ 
 Act (h), but shall not be deemed to be a criminal pro- \ 
 ceeding; and all powers by this act conferred on a court \ 
 of summary jurisdiction shall be deemed to be in ad di- \ 
 tion to and^not in derogation of any powers conferre^_ 
 ^n it by the -Summary Jurisdictipn Act, except that a ' 
 warrant shall not be issued under that act for appre¬ 
 hending any person other than an apprentice for failing 
 to appear to answer a complaint in any proceeding 
 under this act, and that an order made by a court of 
 summary jurisdiction under this act for the payment 
 of any money shall not be enforced by imprisonment 
 except in the manner and under the conditions by this 
 act provided; and no goods or chattels shall be ^aken 
 under a distress ordered by a court of summary juris¬ 
 diction which might not be taken under an execution 
 issued by a coimty court ( 2 ). 
 
 A court of summary jurisdiction may direct any sum 
 of money, for the payment of which it makes an order 
 under this act, to be paid by instalments, and may from 
 time to time rescind or vary such order. 
 
 ^ Any sum payable by any person under the order of a 
 court of summary jurisdiction in pursuance of this act, 
 shall be deemed to be a debt due from him in pursuance 
 of a judgment of a competent court within the meaning 
 of the fifth section of the Debtors Act, 1869(A), and 
 may be enforced accordingly; and as regards any such 
 debt a court of summary jurisdiction shall be deemed 
 to be a court within the meaning of the said section. 
 
 The Lord Chancellor may at any time after the 
 passing of this act, and from time to time make, and 
 when made, rescind, alter, and add to, rules for carrying 
 into efiect the jurisdiction by this act given to a court 
 of summary jurisdiction, and in particular for the pur¬ 
 pose of regulating the costs of any proceedings in a 
 
 (A) See sect. 10, infra. p. 140. 
 
 (i) See the distinction, antCy {U) See ante, p. 142. 
 
170 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 court of summary jurisdiction, witli power to provide 
 that the same shall not exceed the costs which would in 
 a similar case he incurred in a county court (Z), and 
 any rules so made in so far as they relate to the exercise 
 of jurisdiction under the said fifth section of the Debtors 
 Act, 1869, shall be deemed to be prescribed rules 
 within the meaning of the said section (m). 
 
 Part III. 
 
 Definitions and Miscellaneous, 
 
 Definitions, 
 
 Definitions I 10 . In this act— 
 
 “ Workman:” 
 
 ! 
 
 I 
 
 ! 
 
 *‘The Sum¬ 
 mary Jurisdic¬ 
 tion Act.” 
 
 The expression workman ” does not include a 
 domestic or menial servant, but save as aforesaid, means 
 any person who, being a labourer, servant in husbandry, 
 journeyman, artificer, handicraftsman, miner, or other¬ 
 wise engaged in manual labour, whether under the age 
 of twenty-one years or above that age, has entered into 
 or works under a contract with an employer, whether 
 the contract be made before or after the passing of this 
 act, be express or implied, oral or in vTiting, and be a 
 contract of service or a contract personally to execute 
 any work or labour {n). 
 
 The expression ‘Hhe Summary Jimsdiction Act” 
 means the act of the session of the eleventh and 
 twelfth years of the reign of her present Majesty, 
 chapter forty-three, intituled An Act to facilitate the 
 performance of the duties of Justices of the Peace out 
 of sessions within England and Wales with respect to 
 summary convictions and orders,” inclusive of any acts 
 amending the same. 
 
 (1) See the Lord Chancellor’s ante^ p. 143. 
 
 Rules, ^05^, p. 176. (;i) See this definition exa- 
 
 {m) As to prescribed rules, see mined, antCy pp. 110—116. 
 
171 
 
 EMPLOYERS AND WORKMEN ACT, 1875 . 
 
 The expression court of summary jurisdiction 
 means— 
 
 (1.) As respects the city of London, the lord mayor 
 or any alderman of the said city sitting at the 
 Mansion House or Guildhall justice room; and 
 
 (2.) As re^ects_any police __coj^ division in the ^ 
 ^[T^tropolitan'poTice district,^ipiy-nietropjDlit^^^ 
 police ma^’rate sitting at the police co urt for, 
 that dmsTon ; and 
 
 (3.) As'^spects any city, town, liberty, borough, 
 place, or district for which a stipendiary 
 magistrate is for the time being acting, such 
 stipendiary magistrate sitting at a police court 
 or other place appointed in that behalf; and 
 
 (4.) Elsewhere any justice or justices of the peace to 
 whom jurisdiction is given by the Summary 
 Jurisdiction Act: pro^dded that, as respects 
 any case within the cognizance of such justice 
 or justices as last aforesaid, a complaint under 
 this act shall be heard and determined and 
 an order for imprisonment made by two or 
 more justices of the peace in petty sessions 
 sitting at some place appointed for holding 
 petty sessions (o). 
 
 Nothing in this section contained shall restrict the 
 jurisdiction of the lord mayor or any alderman of the 
 city of London, or of any metropolitan police or sti¬ 
 pendiary magistrate in respect of any act or jurisdiction 
 which may now be done or exercised by him out of 
 court. 
 
 11. In the case of a child, young person, or woman 
 subject to the provisions of the Factory Acts, 1833 to 
 1874, any forfeiture on the ground of absence or 
 leaving work shall not be deducted from or set off 
 against a claim for wages or other sum due for work 
 done before such absence or leaving work, except to the 
 
 (o) See ante, pp. 108, 109. 
 
 Set off in case 
 of factory 
 workers. * 
 
172 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 Application 
 
 apprentices. 
 
 Saving of 
 special juris¬ 
 diction, and 
 seamen. 
 
 Application 
 
 Scotland. 
 
 Definitions. 
 
 amount of the damage (if any) which the employer may 
 have sustained by reason of such absence or leaving 
 work (/>). 
 
 Application, 
 
 12. This act in so far as it relates to apprentices 
 shall apply only to an apprentice to the business of a 
 workman as defined by this act (# 7 ) upon whose binding 
 either no premium is paid, or the premium (if any) 
 paid does not exceed twenty-five pounds, and to an 
 apprentice bound under the provisions of the acts 
 relating to the relief of the poor. 
 
 Saving Clause. 
 
 13. I*7othing in this act shall take away or abridge 
 any local or special jurisdiction touching apprentices. 
 
 This act shall not apply to seamen or to apprentices 
 to the sea service. 
 
 Part IV. 
 
 Application of Act to Scotland, 
 
 14 . This act shall extend to Scotland, with the 
 modifications following; that is to say. 
 
 In this act with respect to Scotland— 
 
 The expression county court ” means the ordi¬ 
 nary sheriff court of the county: 
 
 The expression the court of summary jurisdic¬ 
 tion ” means the small debt court of the sheriff 
 of the county: 
 
 The expression sheriff’^ includes sheriff substi¬ 
 tute : 
 
 The expression instrument of apprenticeship ” 
 means indenture: 
 
 The expression plaintiff” or complainant ” 
 means pursuer or complainer: 
 
 ( p) See on this subject 37 & 38 Wallis v. Thorpe 44 L. J., Q. B. 
 
 Viet. c. 48 >^ 7 (> 5 ^, Appendix; and 137, there noticed. 
 
 {q) See ante, p, 150 (<?}. 
 
EMPLOYEES AND WORKMEN ACT, 1875. 
 
 The expression defendant ” includes defender or 
 respondent: 
 
 The expression ^^the Summary Jurisdiction Act” 
 means the act of the seventh year of the reign 
 of his Majesty King William the Fourth and 
 the first year of the reign of her present 
 Majesty, chapter forty-one, intituled An Act 
 for the more effectual recovery of small debts in 
 the Sheriff Courts, and for regulating tlie esta¬ 
 blishment of circuit courts for the trial of small 
 debt causes by the sheriffs in Scotland,” and 
 the acts amending the same. 
 
 The expression ‘‘ surety ” means cautioner. 
 
 This act shall be read and construed, as if for the 
 expression the Lord Chancellor,” wherever it occurs 
 therein, the expression the Court of Session by act 
 of sederunt ” were substituted. 
 
 All jurisdictions, powers and authorities necessary 
 for the purposes of this act are hereby conferred on 
 sheriffs in their ordinary or small debt courts, as the 
 case may be, who shall have full power to make any 
 order on any summons, petition, complaint or other 
 proceeding under this act, that any county court or 
 court of summary jurisdiction is empowered to make 
 on any complaint or other proceeding under this act. 
 
 Any decree or order pronounced or made by a sheriff 
 under this act shall be enforced in the same manner 
 and under the same conditions in and under Avhich a 
 decree or order pronounced or made by him in his 
 ordinary or small debt court, as the case may be, is 
 enforced. 
 
 Part Y. 
 
 Application of Act to Ireland, 
 
 15. This act shall extend to Ireland, with the modi- Api^iication 
 fications following ; that is to say, Ireland. 
 
 The expression county court ” shall be construed 
 to mean civil bill court; 
 
174 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 The expression Lord Chancellor ” shall be con¬ 
 strued to mean the Lord Chancellor of Ireland: 
 
 The expression ^^the Summary Jurisdiction Act” 
 shall be construed to mean, as regards the police 
 district of Dublin metropolis, the acts regulating 
 the powers and duties of justices of the peace 
 for such district, and elsewhere in Ireland, the 
 Petty Sessions (Ireland) Act, 1851, and any 
 acts amending the same: 
 
 The expression court of summary jurisdiction ” 
 shall be construed to mean any justice or justices 
 of the peace or other magistrate to whom juris¬ 
 diction is given by the Summary Jurisdiction 
 Act: 
 
 The court of summary jurisdiction, when hearing 
 and determining complaints under this act, shall 
 in the police district of Dublin metropolis be 
 constituted of one or more of the divisional 
 justices of the said district, and elsewhere in 
 Ireland of two or more justices of the peace in 
 petty sessions sitting at a place appointed for 
 holding petty sessions: 
 
 The expression fifth section of the Debtors Act, 
 1869,” shall be construed to mean sixth section 
 of Debtors Act (Ireland), 1872.” 
 
EMPLOYERS AND WORKMEN ACT, 1875 . 
 
 175 
 
 RULES 
 
 For carrying into effect the jurisdiction given to Court 
 of Summary Jurisdiction in England by the Em¬ 
 ployers and Workmen Act, 1875, 38 ^ 39 Viet, 
 c. 90 (a). 
 
 A desirous to enter action under the 
 
 Employers and Workmen Act, 1875, shall ddiv^r to 
 the clerk of the court particulars in writing of his cause 
 of action, and the clerk of the court shall enter in a 
 ^^k to be kept for this purpose in his oflSce a plaint in 
 writing, stating the names and the last known places of 
 abode of the parties, and the substance of the action 
 intended to be brought; and thereupon '^a summons 
 shall be issued according to the form in the schedule, 
 and be served on the defendant, not less than one clear 
 day befwe the day on which the court shall be holden 
 at which the cause is to be tried; and no misnomer or 
 inaccurate description of any person or place in any 
 such plaint or summons shall vitiate the same, so that 
 the person or place be therein described so as to be 
 commonly known. 
 
 2 . The particulars shall be annexed to and be deemed 
 part of the summons. 
 
 3. Such summons may issue in any district in which 
 the defendant or one of the defendants dwelt or carried 
 on his business or was employed at the time the cause 
 of action arose (^). 
 
 4. Any summons which may be required to be serv^ed 
 out of the district of the court from which the same 
 
 («) See the authority for (J) See observations, ante, pp. 
 making these rules in sects. 8 and 122, 123. 
 
 9 and ante, pp. 109, 110. 
 
176 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 shall have issued, may be served by an officer of any 
 other court of summary jm’isdiction, which service shall 
 be proved by affidavit of the officer who served the 
 summons. 
 
 5 . The service of the summons shall be either per¬ 
 sonal, or by delivering the same to some person ap¬ 
 parently sixteen years old, at the house or place of 
 dwelling or place of business or of employment of the 
 defendant, or at the office of the employer for the time 
 being of the defendant. 
 
 Hearing, 
 
 6 . No notice shall be required to be given by a 
 defendant of any set-off or coimter claim that he may 
 wish to advance at the hearing against the claim of the 
 plaintiff. 
 
 7. If upon the day of the return of any summons, or 
 at any continuation or adjournment of the said court, 
 the plaintiff shall not appear, the cause shall be struck 
 out, and the court may award to the defendant, by way 
 of costs and satisfaction for his attendance, such sum as 
 it in its discretion shall think fit. 
 
 8 . If on the day named in the summons, or at any 
 continuation or adjournment of the court, the defendant 
 shall not appear, or sufficiently excuse his absence, or 
 shall neglect to answer when called in court, the court, 
 upon due proof of service of the summons, may either 
 adjourn the cause from time to time or proceed to the 
 hearing of the cause on the part of the plaintiff only, 
 and the judgment thereupon shall be as valid as if both 
 parties had attended; provided that the court in any 
 such case, at the same or any subsequent court, may set 
 aside any judgment so given in the absence of the 
 defendant, and the execution thereupon, and may 
 grant a new trial upon such terms, if any, as it may 
 think fit. 
 
RULES UNDER EMPLOYERS AND WORKMEN ACT, 1875 . 
 
 177 
 
 Judgment Summons, 
 
 9 . No orHer of commitment under the Debtors Act, 
 1869 (c), shall be made unless a summons to a 2 )pear and 
 be examined on oath, hereinafter called a judgment 
 summons, shall have been personally served upon the 
 judgment debtor, which service where made out of the 
 district shall be proved by affidavit. 
 
 10 . A judgment summons may issue although no 
 distress warrant has been applied for. 
 
 11 . Every judgment summons shall be according to 
 the form in the schedule, and be served not less than 
 two clear days before the day on which the judgment 
 debtor is required to appear, except the judgment debtor 
 is stated to be about to remove, or is keeping out of the 
 way to avoid service. 
 
 12 . The hearing of a judgment summons may be 
 adjourned fi’om time to time. 
 
 13. Any witness may be summoned to prove the 
 means of the judgment debtor, in the same manner as 
 Avitnesses are summoned to give evidence upon the 
 hearing of a plaint. 
 
 14. An order of commitment made under the Debtors 
 Act, 1869, shall be according to the form in the 
 schedule, and shall, on whate\^er day it may be issued, 
 bear date on the day on Avhich the order for commit¬ 
 ment was made, and shall continue in force for one year 
 from such date and no longer. 
 
 15. When an order of commitment for non-payment 
 of money is issued, the defendant may, at any time 
 before his body is delivered into the custody of the 
 gaoler, pay to the officer holding such order the amount 
 indorsed thereon as that on the payment of which he 
 may be discharged; and on receiving such amount the 
 officer shall discharge the defendant, and shall forth¬ 
 with pay over the amount to the clerk of the court. 
 
 (f) Sec anic^ p. 142. 
 
 D. N 
 
178 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 10. The sum indorsed on the order of commitment 
 as that upon payment of which the prisoner may be 
 discharged may be paid to the clerk of the court from 
 which the commitment order was issued, or to the 
 gaoler in whose custody the prisoner is. Where it is 
 paid to the clerk, he shall sign and seal a certificate of 
 such payment, and upon receiving such certificate by 
 post or otherwise, the gaoler in whose custody the 
 prisoner shall then be shall forthwith discharge such 
 prisoner. And where it is paid to the gaoler, he shall, 
 upon payment to him of such amount, together with 
 costs sufficient to pay for transmitting by post office 
 order or otherwise such amount to the court imder the 
 order of which the prisoner was committed, sign a 
 certificate of such pa}Tnent, and discharge the prisoner. 
 
 17. A certificate of payment by a prisoner shall be 
 according to the form in the schedule. 
 
 18. All costs incurred by the plaintiff in endeavour¬ 
 ing to enforce an order shall be deemed to be due in 
 pursuance of such order under section 5 of the Debtors 
 Act, 1869, unless the court shall otherwise order. 
 
 Costs. 
 
 19. The costs to be paid in the first instance by every 
 person seeking the assistance of the coirrt shall be those 
 contained in the Schedule B. to these Eules annexed. 
 
 20 . The court may, in its discretion, allow any party, 
 in respect of any expense he may have incurred in the 
 employment of a solicitor, any sum not exceeding ten 
 shillings where the sum claimed exceeds forty shillings, 
 and not exceeding fifteen shillings where it exceeds five 
 pounds. 
 
 Forms. 
 
 21 . The forms given in the schedule shall be used, 
 with such variations as may be necessary to meet the 
 circumstances of each court. 
 
 13th August, 1875. 
 
 Cairns, C. 
 
RULES UNDER EMPLOYERS AND WOROIEN ACT, 1875 . 
 
 179 
 
 SCHEDULE. 
 
 1 . 
 
 Summons to appear. 
 
 Employers and Worhnen Act, 1875. 
 
 In the [county of . Petty sessions district of .] 
 Between A. B., plaintiff, 
 
 [address^ description^'] 
 and 
 
 C. D., defendant, 
 
 [address^ description.] 
 
 You are hereby summoned to appear on the day of , 
 18 , at the hour of in the noon, at , before 
 
 [two of such justices of the peace for the above county as might there 
 5e], to answer the plaintiff, to a claim, the particulars of which 
 are hereunto annexed. 
 
 Given under my hand and seal this day of , 18 . 
 
 J. S. (L.S.) 
 
 Note. —(This, and all other summonses issued under the Em¬ 
 ployers and Workmen Act, 1875, may be signed by the clerk to 
 the justices, where such justices shall, by a general direction, au¬ 
 thorize their clerks to sign them in lieu of one of themselves.) {d) 
 
 2 . 
 
 Summons to Witness. 
 
 Employers and Workmen Act^ 1875. 
 
 In the [county of . Petty sessions district of .] 
 Between A. B., plaintiff, 
 and 
 
 C. D., defendant. 
 
 Y'ou are hereby required to attend at on the 
 
 day of , 187 , at the hour of in the noon, to 
 
 give evidence in the above cause on behalf of the [plaintiff or 
 defendant^ as the case may he]. 
 
 Given under my hand and seal this day of , 187 . 
 
 J. S. (L.S.) 
 To 
 
 (^d) See observation ante, pp. 125, 126. 
 
 N 2 
 
180 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 3 . 
 
 Judgment for Plaintiff. 
 
 Employers and Worhmen Act^ 1875. 
 
 In the [county of . Petty sessions district of .] 
 Between A. B., plaintiff, 
 and 
 
 C. D., defendant. 
 
 It is this day adjudged that the plaintiff do recover against the 
 defendant the sum of £ for debt [or damages], and £ 
 for costs, amounting together to the sum of £ 
 
 And it is ordered that the defendant do pay the same to the 
 plaintiff on or before the day of [or by instalments 
 
 of for every days; the first instalment to be paid on 
 
 or before the day of , 18 ]; and if the same be not 
 paid as ordered, it is hereby further ordered that the same be 
 levied by distress and sale of the goods and chattels of the said 
 defendant. 
 
 Given under our hands and seals this day of 
 
 Signatures of two of the justices ) J. S. (l s.) 
 by whom order made. J J. S. (l.S.) 
 
 4. 
 
 Judgment for Defendant. 
 
 Employers and Workmen Act^ 1875. 
 
 In the [county of . Petty sessions district of .] 
 Between A. B., plaintiff, 
 and 
 
 C. D., defendant. 
 
 Upon hearing this cause this day, it is adjudged that judgment 
 be entered for the defendant, and that the plaintiff do pay the 
 sum of £ for the defendant’s costs on or before the 
 
 day of ; and if the same be not paid as ordered it is hereby 
 
 further ordered that the same be levied by distress and sale of 
 the goods and chattels of the said plaintiff. 
 
 Given under our hands and seals this day of , 187 . 
 
 Signatures of two of the justices > J. S. (l s.) ' 
 by whom order made. > J. S. (l.S.) 
 
RULES UNDER ElVIPLOYERS AND WORKMEN ACT, 1875. 
 
 181 
 
 5. 
 
 Judgment Summons. 
 
 Employers and Workmen Act, 1875, a7id the Debtors Act, 1869. 
 
 In the [county of . Petty sessions district of .] 
 Between A. B., plaintiflf, 
 
 [address, description,'] 
 and 
 
 C. D., defendant, 
 
 [address, description.] 
 
 Whereas the plaintiff [or defendant] obtained an order against 
 you the above-named defendant [or plaintiff] in this court on 
 the day of , 187 , for the payment of pounds, 
 
 shillings and pence. 
 
 And whereas you have made default in payment of the sum 
 payable in pursuance of the said order. 
 
 Y^ou are therefore hereby summoned to appear personally in 
 this court at [place where court holden], on the day 
 
 of , 187 , at the hour of in the noon, to be 
 
 examined on oath by the court touching the means you have or 
 have had since the date of the order to satisfy the sum payable 
 in pursuance of the said order; and also to show cause why you 
 should not be committed to prison for such default. 
 
 Given under my hand and seal this day of , 187 . 
 
 J. S. (l.s.) 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 Amount of order and costs. 
 
 Costs of distress against the goods, if any . 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 { Paid into court. 
 
 Instalments which were not re¬ 
 quired to have been paid be¬ 
 fore the date of the summons . 
 
 Sum payable. 
 
 Costs of this summons. 
 
 Amount upon the payment of which no further pro¬ 
 ceedings will be had until default in payment of 
 next instalment. 
 
182 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 6 . 
 
 Order of Commitment. 
 
 Employers and WorhnenAct^ 1875, and the Debtors Act^ 1869. 
 
 In the \county of . Petty sessions district of .] 
 
 Between A. B., plaintiff, 
 and 
 
 C. D., defendant. 
 
 To the constable of and all other peace officers of the 
 
 county, and to the governor or keeper of the \_prison of the county 
 to which debtors are committed']. 
 
 Whereas the plaintiff [or defendant] obtained an order against 
 the defendant [or plaintiff] in this court on the day of 
 
 ,187 , for the payment of £ 
 
 And whereas the defendant hath made default in payment of 
 , payable in pursuance of the said order. 
 
 And whereas a summons was, at the instance of the plaintiff 
 [or defendant] duly issued out of this court, by which the defen¬ 
 dant [or plaintiff] was required to appear personally at this court 
 on the day of , 187 , to be examined on oath touching 
 the means he had then or had had since the date of the order to 
 satisfy the sum then due and payable in pursuance of the order, 
 and to show cause why he should not be committed to prison for 
 such default. 
 
 And whereas, at the hearing of the said summons, the defen¬ 
 dant [or plaintiff] appeared [or the summons was proved to have 
 been personally and duly served] and it has now been proved to 
 the satisfaction of the court that the defendant [or plaintiff] now 
 has [or has had] since the date of the order the means to pay the 
 sum then due and payable in pursuance of the order, and has re¬ 
 fused [or neglected] [or then refused or neglected] to pay the 
 same, and the defendant [or plaintiff] has shown no cause why 
 he should not be committed to prison. 
 
 Now, therefore, it is ordered that, for such default as aforesaid, 
 the defendant [or plaintiff] shall be committed to prison for 
 days, unless he shall sooner pay the sum stated below as that 
 upon the payment of which he is to be discharged. 
 
 These are, therefore, to require you, the said constable and 
 peace officers, to take the defendant [or plaintiff] and to deliver 
 him to the governor or keeper of the [prison aforesaid\ and you 
 the said governor or keeper to receive the defendant [o?-plaintiff] 
 and him safely keep in the said prison for days from the 
 
RULES UNDER EMPLOYERS AND WORKMEN ACT, 1875. 
 
 183 
 
 arrest under this order, or until he shall be sooner discharged by 
 due course of law. 
 
 Given under our hands and seals this [insert date of order'\ day 
 of , 187 . 
 
 Signatures of hoo of the justices ^ J. S. (l.s.) 
 hy whom order made. S J* S. (l.s.) 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 Total sum payable at the time of hearing of the judg¬ 
 ment summons. 
 
 Hearing of summons, and cost of order 
 
 Total sum upon payment of which the prisoner will be 
 discharged. 
 
 7 . 
 
 Certificate for the Discharge of a Prisoner from 
 Custody. 
 
 Employers and Workmen Act, 1875, and the Debtors Act, 1869. 
 
 In the [county of . Petty sessions district of .] 
 
 Between A. B., plaintiff, 
 and 
 
 C. D., defendant. 
 
 1 hereby certify that the defendant [or plaintiff] who was com¬ 
 mitted to your custody by virtue of an order of commitment under 
 the seals of two justices of this court, bearing date the day 
 
 of , 187 , has paid and satisfied the sum of money for the 
 non-payment whereof he was so committed, together with all 
 costs due and payable by him in respect thereof; and that the 
 defendant [or plaintiff] may, in respect of such order, be forth¬ 
 with discharged out of your custody. 
 
 Dated this day of , 187 . 
 
 Clerk of the court. 
 
 To the governor or keeper of 
 
184 
 
 THE LABOUR LAAVS. 
 
 8 . 
 
 Warrant of Distress for Payment of Money by 
 Plaintiff. 
 
 Employers and Workmen Act^ 1875. 
 
 In the [county of . Petty sessions district of .] 
 
 Between A. B., plaintiflf, 
 and 
 
 C. D., defendant. 
 
 Whereas at a court holden at on the day of , 
 187 , it was ordered by the court that judgment should be 
 
 entered for the defendant, and that the plaintiff should pay to the 
 defendant, on or before the day of , the sum of £ 
 for the defendant’s costs of suit; and that if the same were not 
 paid as ordered, it was further ordered that the same should be 
 levied by distress and sale of the goods and chattels of the said 
 plaintiff. 
 
 And whereas default has been made in payment according to 
 the said order. These are therefore to command you forthwith 
 to make distress of the goods and chattels of the plaintiff (except¬ 
 ing the wearing apparel and bedding of him or his family, and 
 the tools and implements of his trade, if any, to the value of five 
 pounds), the sum of £ , being the amount due to the de¬ 
 
 fendant under the said order, together with the reasonable charges 
 for taking and keeping the said distress; and that you do pay 
 what you shall have so levied to the clerk of this court. 
 
 Given under my hand and seal this day of , 187 . 
 
 J. S. (l.s.) 
 
 To the constable of , and all other 
 peace officers in the county. 
 
 Notice.— The goods and chattels are not to be sold until after 
 the end of five clear days ne^ct following the day on which they 
 were seized, unless they be of a perishable nature, or at the request 
 of the said plaintiff. 
 
RULES UNDER EMPLOYERS AND WORKMEN ACT, 1875 . 
 
 185 
 
 9. 
 
 Warrant of Distress for Payment of Money by 
 Defendant. 
 
 Employers and Workmen Acty 1875. 
 
 In the [county of . Petty sessions district of .] 
 
 Between A. B., plaintiff, 
 and 
 
 C. D., defendant. 
 
 Whereas on the day of 187 , the plaintiff obtained 
 
 a judgment in this court against the defendant for the sum of 
 £ ; and it -was thereupon ordered by the court that the 
 
 defendant should pay the same to the plaintiff on the day 
 
 of [or by instalments of for every days] ; and 
 
 that if the same were not paid as ordered, it was further ordered 
 that the same should be levied by distress and sale of the goods 
 and chattels of the said defendant; 
 
 And whereas default has been made in payment according to 
 the said order: These are therefore to command you forthwith 
 to make distress of the goods and chattels of the defendant 
 (except the wearing apparel and bedding of him or his family, 
 and the tools and implements of his trade, if any, to the value of 
 five pounds), the sum of £ , being the amount due to the 
 
 plaintiff under the said order, together -with the reasonable 
 charges of taking and keeping the said distress; and that you do 
 pay what you shall have so levied to the clerk of this court. 
 
 Given under my hand and seal this day of 187 . 
 
 J. S. (l.s.) 
 
 To the constable of , and all other peace 
 officers in the county of 
 
 Notice. —The goods and chattels are not to be sold until after 
 the end of five clear days next following the day on which they 
 were seized, unless they be of a perishable nature, or at the re¬ 
 quest of the defendant. 
 
THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 186 
 
 10 . 
 
 Undertaking in Writing by Defendant to perform 
 Contract. 
 
 Employers and Workmen Act^ 1875. 
 
 In the [county of . Petty sessions district of .] 
 
 Between A. B., plaintifiF, 
 and 
 
 C. D., defendant. 
 
 Whereas it has been found by this court on the day 
 
 of 187 , that the defendant had broken the contract for 
 
 the breach of which he was summoned: 
 
 And whereas the court would have awarded to the plaintiff the 
 sum of £ by way of damages suffered by him in conse¬ 
 
 quence of such breach, and would have ordered him to have paid 
 such sum, but that the defendant was willing to give security for 
 the performance by him of so much of the contract as remains un¬ 
 performed : 
 
 Now therefore I the undersigned defendant, and we the under¬ 
 signed sureties [or the undersigned surety], do undertake that 
 tlie said defendant will perform so much of the said contract as 
 remains unperformed, that is to say, [here set out so much of the 
 contract as remains to he performed] : 
 
 And I the said defendant, and we [or I] the said sureties [or 
 surety], hereby severally acknowledge ourselves bound to forfeit 
 to A. B., the plaintiff, the sum of pounds and shillings, 
 in case the said defendant fails to perfonn what he has hereby 
 undertaken to perform. 
 
 (Signed where not taken orally) C. D., Defendant. 
 
 G h’ ! 
 
 Taken [orally] before me this day of 187 . 
 
 J. S. (L.S.) 
 
 Note.—W liere the undertaking is given orall}^ strike out the 
 words “undersigned” where they occur, and insert the word 
 “ orally” after “ Taken.” 
 
EULES UNDEE EMPLOYEES AND WOEKMEN ACT, 1875 . 
 
 187 
 
 11 . 
 
 Order on an Apprentice to perform his Duties. 
 
 Employers and Worhmen Act^ 1875. 
 
 In the [county of . Petty sessions district of .] 
 
 Between A. B., plaintiff, 
 and 
 
 C. D., defendant. 
 
 It is ordered that the defendant do forthwith perform the duties 
 he has contracted to perform under his apprenticeship to the 
 plaintiff. 
 
 Given under our hands and seals this day of , 187 . 
 
 Signatures of two of the justices ^ J. S. (l.s.) 
 hy lohom order made. S J- S. (l.s.) 
 
 12 . 
 
 Order rescinding a Contract of Apprenticeship. 
 
 In the [county of . Petty sessions district of .] 
 
 Between A. B., plaintiff, 
 and 
 
 C. D., defendant. 
 
 It is adjudged that the instrument of apprenticeship made be¬ 
 tween the plaintiff and defendant be rescinded, and that the 
 plaintiff [or defendant] do pay to M. N. of the sum of 
 pounds, being the whole [or a part] of the premium paid by the 
 said M. N. on the binding of the defendant [or plaintiff] as ap¬ 
 prentice to the plaintiff [or defendant]. 
 
 Given under our hands and seals this day of , 187 . 
 
 Signatures of two of the justices l J. S. (l.s.) 
 hy whom order made. \ S. (l.s.) 
 
188 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 13. 
 
 Committal of an Apprentice. 
 
 Employers and Workmen Act^ 1875. 
 
 In the [county of . Petty sessions district of .] 
 Between A. B., plaintiff, 
 and 
 
 C. D., defendant. 
 
 To the constable of and all other the peace officers of 
 
 Whereas on the day of , 187 , it was ordered that 
 
 the defendant should forthwith perform the duties he had con¬ 
 tracted to perform under his contract of apprenticeship to the 
 plaintiff: 
 
 And whereas it hath been made to appear to the satisfaction of 
 the court on the oath of the plaintiff [and of G. H. of ] 
 that the defendant has failed to comply with the requirements of 
 the said order : 
 
 Now, therefore, it is ordered that the said defendant be com¬ 
 mitted to prison for days. 
 
 These are therefore to require you the constable of and 
 
 others to take the defendant and deliver him to the governor or 
 keeper of the [prison ], and you the said governor or keeper 
 to receive the defendant and him safely keep in the said prison 
 for days from the arrest under this order, or until he shall 
 
 be sooner discharged by due course of law. 
 
 Given under our hands and seals this day of , 187 . 
 
 Signatures of two of the justices ^ J. S. (l.s.) 
 hy whom order made. i J. S. (l.s.) 
 
 14. 
 
 Acceptance of Security for Performance of Con¬ 
 tract BY AN Apprentice. 
 
 Employers and Workmen Act, 1875. 
 
 In the [county of . Petty sessions district of .] 
 Between A. B., plaintiff, 
 and 
 
 C. D., defendant, 
 and 
 
 E. F., bondsman under the contract of appren¬ 
 ticeship of the defendant. 
 
 Whereas on the day of , 187 , it was ordered that 
 the defendant should forthwith perform the duties he had con- 
 
RULES UNDER EMPLOYERS AND WORKMEN ACT, 1875 . 
 
 189 
 
 traded to perform under his contract of apprenticeship to the 
 plaintiff: 
 
 And whereas it hath been made to appear to the satisfaction 
 of the court on the oath of the plaintiff [and of G. H. of ] 
 
 that the defendant has failed to comply with the requirements of 
 the said order: 
 
 And whereas by the said failure the defendant hath rendered 
 himself liable to be committed : 
 
 And whereas E. F. [or R. S. of ] is willing to give se¬ 
 
 curity to the amount of pounds for the due performance by 
 the defendant for. his duties under his said contract of appren¬ 
 ticeship : 
 
 Now, therefore, the court doth direct such security to be forth¬ 
 with given, and doth order that if payment of the said sum be 
 not made on the defendant failing to perform his contract such 
 sum may be levied by distress of the goods and chattels of the 
 said E. F. [or R. S.], or an application be made to this court for 
 commitment of the said E. F. [or R. S.] according to the provi¬ 
 sions of this act. 
 
 Given under our hands and seals this day of , 187 . 
 
 Signatures of two of the justices } J. S. (l.s.) 
 by whom order made. ) J. S. (l.s.) 
 
 lo. 
 
 Application for the summoning of a Bondsman for 
 AN Apprentice. 
 
 Employers and Workmen. 
 
 In the [county of . Petty sessions district of .] 
 
 Between A. B., plaintiff, 
 and 
 
 C. D., defendant. 
 
 The plaintiff in this case applies to the court to direct that 
 E. F., of , who is liable under the instrument of the appren¬ 
 ticeship of the defendant to the plaintiff for the good conduct of 
 the defendant as apprentice to the plaintiff, be summoned to at¬ 
 tend at the hearing of the proceeding. 
 
 Signed A. B., plaintiff. 
 
 It is hereby directed by the court that E. F. be summoned 
 accordingly. 
 
 Given under my hand and seal this day of , 187 . 
 
 J. S. (l.s.) 
 
190 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 16. 
 
 Summons to a Bondsman for an Apprentice. 
 
 Employers and Workmen Acty 1875. 
 
 In the [county of . Petty sessions district of .] 
 
 To E. F. of 
 
 Take notice that you are hereby summoned to attend at 
 on the day of , 187 , at o’clock in the 
 
 noon, to show cause why the court should not, in addition to or 
 in substitution for any order to be made against the said de¬ 
 fendant, order you to pay the amount of any damages which it 
 may find that tlie plaintiff has suffered in consequence of the 
 breach of tlie contract of apprenticeship made between you and 
 tlie plaintiff and the defendant. 
 
 Given under my hand and seal this day of , 187 . 
 
 J. S. (l.s.) 
 
 17 . 
 
 Order on a Bondsman for an Apprentice to pay 
 Damages. 
 
 Employers and Workmen Act^ 1875. 
 
 In the [county of . Petty sessions district of .] 
 
 Between A. B., plaintiff, 
 and 
 
 C. D., defendant, 
 and 
 
 E. F., bondsman under the contract of appren¬ 
 ticeship of the defendant. 
 
 It is adjudged that the said bondsman do pay to the plaintiff, 
 on or before the day of , 187 , the sum of pounds 
 for damages suffered by him in consequence of the breach of the 
 contract of apprenticeship made between the plaintiff, defendant, 
 and tlie said bondsman ; and if the same be not paid as ordered, 
 it is hereby further ordered that the same be levied by distress 
 and sale of the goods and chattels of the said bondsman. 
 
 Given under our hands and seals this day of , 187 . 
 
 Signatures of tioo of the justices ) J. S. (L.S.) 
 hy whom order made. 5 J. S. (L.S.) 
 
RULES UNDER ElVIPLOYERS AND WORKMEN ACT, 1875. 
 
 191 
 
 18. 
 
 Plaint and Minute Book. 
 Employers and Workmen Act^ 1875. 
 
 Date. 
 
 Plaintiff. 
 
 Residence. 
 
 Trade. 
 
 Defendant. 
 
 1 Residence. 
 
 Trade. 
 
 P.articulars 
 
 of Dispute. 
 
 Order made. 
 
 Subsequent 
 
 Proceedings. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 SCHEDULE B. 
 
 s. d. 
 
 For entry of every plaint, including summons thereon 1 0 
 
 For order on a plaint.2 0 
 
 For every undertaking given by way of security . 2 0 
 
 For judgment summons, including hearing . .10 
 
 For warrant of distress or order of commitment. .20 
 
 For summons to witness.10 
 
 N.B.—Where the sum claimed exceeds IZ., or the sum in 
 respect of the non-payment of which the summons for or order of 
 commitment or warrant of distress issues exceeds IZ., an addi¬ 
 tional fee of one shilling shall be taken. 
 
 For mileage in serving or exe¬ 
 cuting process. 
 
 For affidavit and postage 
 
 Such reasonable cost as may 
 be allowed by the court. 
 
 7 
 
 13th August, 1875. 
 
 Cairns, C. 
 
192 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 Short title. 
 
 Commoncc- 
 Uicnt of act. 
 
 Amendment of 
 law as to con¬ 
 spiracy in trade 
 disputes. 
 
 38 & 39 ViCT. c. 86. 
 
 An Act for amending the Law relating to Conspiracy, 
 and to the Protection of Property, and for other 
 purposes. [13th August, 1875.] 
 
 Be it enacted by the Queen’s most Excellent Majesty, 
 by and with the advice and consent of the Lords 
 Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present 
 Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, 
 as follows:— 
 
 1 . This act may be cited as the Conspiracy, and 
 Protection of Property Act, 1875. 
 
 2. This act shall come into operation on the first day 
 of September one thousand eight hundred and seventy- 
 five. 
 
 Conspiracy, and Protection of Property. 
 
 3. An agreement or combination by two or more 
 persons to do or procure to be done any act in con- 
 temj)lation or furtherance of a trade dispute between 
 employers and workmen shall not be indictable as a 
 conspiracy if such act committed by one person would 
 not be punishable as a crime («). 
 
 Nothing in this section shall exempt from punishment 
 any persons guilty of a conspiracy for which a punish¬ 
 ment is awarded by any act of parliament. 
 
 Nothing in this section shall affect the law relating 
 to riot, unlawful assembly, breach of the peace, or 
 sedition, or any olfence against the state or the sovereign. 
 
 («) For the history and scope of this clause, sec ante^ pp. 73- 79, 
 and p. 101. See also 34 & 35 Viet. c. 31, jjost, p. 282. 
 
CONSPIRACY AND PROTECTION OF PROPERTY ACT, 1875. 
 
 193 
 
 A crime for the purposes of this section means an 
 offence punishable on indictment, or an offence which 
 is punishable on summary conviction, and for the com¬ 
 mission of which the offender is liable under the statute 
 making the offence punishable to be imprisoned either 
 absolutely or at the discretion of the court as an alter¬ 
 native for some other punishment. 
 
 Where a person is convicted of any such agreement 
 or combination as aforesaid to do or procure to be done 
 an act which is punishable only on summary conviction, 
 and is sentenced to imprisonment, the imprisonment 
 shall not exceed three months, or such longer time, if 
 any, as may have been prescribed by the statute for the 
 punishment of the said act when committed by one 
 person. 
 
 4 . Where a person employed by a municipal authority 
 or by any company or contractor upon whom is imposed 
 by act of iDarliament the duty, or who have otherwise 
 assumed the duty of supplying any city, borough, town, 
 or place, or any part thereof, with gas or water, wilfully 
 and maliciously (5) breaks a contract of service with 
 that authority or company or contractor, knowing or 
 having reasonable cause to believe that the probable 
 consequences of his so doing, either alone or in com¬ 
 bination with others, will be to deprive the inhabitants 
 of that city, borough, town, place, or part, wholly or to 
 a great extent of their supply of gas or water, he shall 
 on conviction thereof by a court of summary jurisdiction 
 or on indictment as hereinafter mentioned, be liable 
 either to pay a penalty not exceeding twenty pounds or 
 to be imprisoned for a term not exceeding three months, 
 with or without hard labour. 
 
 Every such municipal authority, company, or con¬ 
 tractor as is mentioned in this section shall cause to be 
 
 (i) See post, sect. 15, and ante, pp. 94, 155, 15G. 
 
 D. O 
 
 Breach of con¬ 
 tract by per¬ 
 sons employe 
 in supply of 
 gas or water. 
 
194 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 Breach of con¬ 
 tract involving 
 inj ury to per¬ 
 sons or pro¬ 
 perty. 
 
 Penalty for 
 neglect by 
 master to 
 
 posted up, at the gasworks or waterworks, as the case 
 may be, belonging to such authority or company or 
 contractor, a printed copy of this section in some con¬ 
 spicuous place w^here the same may be conveniently read 
 by the persons employed, and as often as such copy 
 becomes defaced, obliterated, or destroyed, shall cause 
 it to be renewed with all reasonable despatch. 
 
 If any municipal authority or company or contractor 
 make default in complying with the provisions of this 
 section in relation to such notice as aforesaid, they or 
 he shall incur on summary conviction a penalty not 
 exceeding five pounds for every day during* which such 
 default continues, and every person w^ho unlawfully 
 injures, defaces, or covers up any notice so posted up 
 as aforesaid in pursuance of this act, shall be liable on 
 summary conviction to a penalty not exceeding forty 
 shillings (c). 
 
 6. Where any person wilfully and maliciously (d) 
 breaks a contract of service or of hiring, knowing or 
 having reasonable cause to believe that the probable 
 consequences of his so doing, either alone or in com¬ 
 bination with others, will be to endanger human life, or 
 cause serious bodily injury, or to expose valuable pro¬ 
 perty whether real or personal to destruction or serious 
 injury, he shall on conviction thereof by a court of 
 summary jurisdiction (e), or on indictment as herein¬ 
 after mentioned, be liable either to pay a penalty not 
 exceeding twenty pounds, or to be imprisoned for a 
 term not exceeding three months, with or Avithout hard 
 labour. 
 
 Miscellaneous, 
 
 6. Where a master, being legally liable to provide 
 for his servant or apprentice necessary food, clothing, 
 
 (c) See post, sects. 14, 18 and (e) As to the constitution of 
 21, and pp. 167, 168. courts of summary jurisdiction, 
 
 {d) See^os^, sect. 16, anda/i^^, post, sect. 13; in Scotland, 
 
 pp. 1)1, 166, 15G. sect. 18; in Ireland, sect. 20. 
 
CONSPIRACY AND PROTECTION OF PROPERTY ACT, 1875. 
 
 195 
 
 medical aid or lodging, wilfully and without lawful 
 excuse refuses or neglects to provide the same, whereby 
 the health of the servant or apprentice is or is likely to 
 be seriously or permanently injured, he shall, on sum¬ 
 mary conviction, be liable either to pay a penalty not 
 exceeding twenty pounds, or to be imprisoned for a 
 term not exceeding six months, with or without hard 
 labour (/). 
 
 7 . Every person who, with a view to compel any 
 other person to abstain from doing or to do any act 
 which such other person has a legal right to do or 
 abstain from doing, wrongfully and without legal autho¬ 
 rity,— 
 
 1. Uses violence to or intimidates such other person 
 
 or his wife or children, or injures his property; 
 or, 
 
 2. Persistently follows such other person about from 
 
 place to place; or, 
 
 3. Hides any tools, clothes or other property owned 
 
 or used by such other person, or deprives him of 
 or hinders him in the use thereof; or, 
 
 4. Watches or besets the house or other place where 
 
 such other person resides, or works, or carries on 
 business, or happens to be, or the approach to 
 such house or place ; or, 
 
 5. Follows such other person with two or more other 
 
 persons in a disorderly manner in or through any 
 street or road, 
 
 shall, on conviction thereof by a court of summary juris¬ 
 diction, or on indictment as hereinafter mentioned, be 
 liable either to pay a penalty not exceeding twenty 
 pounds, or to be imprisoned for a term not exceeding 
 three months, with or without hard labour. 
 
 (/) See ante, p. 157, and see sect. 2G of Offences against the Person 
 Act, 24 & 25 Viet. c. 100, i)ost, Appendix. 
 
 o 2 
 
 provide food, 
 clothing, &c. 
 for servant or 
 apprentice. 
 
 Penalty for 
 intimidation or 
 annoyance by 
 violence or 
 otherwise. 
 
196 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 Reduction of 
 penalties. 
 
 power for 
 offender under 
 this act to l)C 
 tried on indict¬ 
 ment and not 
 l>y court of 
 suminnry juris¬ 
 diction. 
 
 Proceedings 
 before court of 
 summary 
 jurisdiction. 
 
 Attending at or near tlie house or place where a per¬ 
 son resides, or works, or carries on business, or happens 
 to be, or the approach to such house or place, in order 
 merely to obtain or communicate information, shall not 
 be deemed a watching or besetting within the meaning 
 of this section {g), 
 
 8 . Where in any act relating to employers or work¬ 
 men a pecuniary penalty is imposed in respect of any 
 offence under such act, and no power is given to reduce 
 such penalty, the justices or court having jurisdiction in 
 respect of such offence may, if they think it just so to 
 do, impose by way of penalty in respect of such offence 
 any sum not less than one fourth of the penalty imposed 
 l^y such act. 
 
 Legal Proceedings, 
 
 9. Where a person is accused before a coimt of sum¬ 
 mary jurisdiction of any offence made punishable by 
 this act, and for which a penalty amounting to twenty 
 pounds, or imprisonment, is imposed, the accused may, 
 on appearing before the court of summary jurisdiction, 
 declare that he objects to being tried for such offence 
 by a court of summary jurisdiction, and thereupon the 
 court of summary jurisdiction may deal with the case 
 in all respects as if the accused were charged with an 
 indictable offence and not an offence punishable on sum¬ 
 mary conviction, and the offence may be prosecuted on 
 indictment accordingly. 
 
 10. Every offenee under this act which is made 
 punishable on conviction by a court of summary juris¬ 
 diction or on summary conviction, and every penalty 
 under this act recoverable on summary conviction, may 
 
 (i7) This section is in snhstitii- Law Amendment Act, 1871, see 
 tion for the now repealed Criminal ante, pp. 96, 156. 
 
CONSPIRACY AND PROTECTION OF PROPERTY ACT, 1875. 
 
 197 
 
 be prosecuted and recovered in manner provided by the 
 Summary Jurisdiction Act (A). 
 
 11. Provided, that upon the hearing and determining Regulations ns 
 of any indictment or information under sections four, evidence, 
 five and six of this act, the respective parties to the 
 
 contract of service, their husbands or wives, shall be 
 deemed and considered as competent witnesses. 
 
 12. In England or Ireland (z), if any party feels Appeal to 
 aggrieved by any conviction made by a court of sum- gions^^^ 
 mary jurisdiction on determining any information under 
 
 this act, the party so aggrieved may appeal therefrom, 
 subject to the conditions and regulations follomng : 
 
 (1.) The appeal shall be made to some court of 
 general or quarter sessions for the county or 
 ■place in which the cause of appeal has arisen, 
 holden not less than fifteen days and not more 
 than four months after the decision of the 
 court from which the appeal is made: 
 
 (2.) The appellant shall, within seven days after the 
 cause of appeal has arisen, give notice to the 
 other party and to the court of summary juris¬ 
 diction of his intention to appeal, and of the 
 ground thereof: 
 
 (3.) The appellant shall immediately after such notice 
 enter into a recognizance before a justice of 
 the peace, with or without sureties, conditioned 
 personally to try such appeal, and to abide the 
 judgment of the court thereon, and to pay 
 such costs as may be awarded by the court : 
 
 (4.) Where the appellant is in custody the justice 
 may, if he think fit, on the appellant entering 
 
 (7i) See posty sect. 13 ; as to (i) As to appeal in Scotland, 
 
 Scotland, sect. 18 ; and as to Ire- see post, sect. 20. 
 land, sect. 21. 
 
198 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 General defini¬ 
 tions : “ The 
 Summary 
 Jurisdiction 
 Act/» 
 
 “ Court of 
 summary juris¬ 
 diction.” 
 
 into such recognizance as aforesaid, release 
 him from custody: 
 
 (5.) The court of appeal may adjourn the appeal, 
 and upon the hearing thereof they may con¬ 
 firm, reverse, or modify the decision of the 
 court of summary jurisdiction, or remit the 
 matter to the court of summary jurisdiction 
 with the opinion of the court of appeal thereon, 
 or make such other order in the matter as the 
 court thinks just, and if the matter be remitted 
 to the court of summary jurisdiction the said 
 last-mentioned court shall thereupon re-hear 
 and decide the infoimiation in accordance with 
 the opinion of the said court of appeal. The 
 court of appeal may also make such order as 
 to costs to be paid by either party as the 
 court thinks just. 
 
 Definitions, 
 
 13. In this act,— 
 
 The expression ^Hhe Summary Jurisdiction Act” 
 means the act of the session of the eleventh and twelfth 
 years of the reign of her present Majesty, chapter forty- 
 three, intituled An Act to facilitate the performance 
 of the duties of justices of the peace out of sessions 
 within England and Wales with respect to summary 
 convictions and orders,” inclusive of any acts amend¬ 
 ing the same; and 
 
 The expression court of summary jurisdiction” 
 means— 
 
 (1.) As respects the city of London, the Lord Mayor 
 or any alderman of the said city sitting at the 
 Mansion House or Guildhall justice room; 
 and 
 
 (2.) As respects any police court division in the 
 metropolitan police district any metropolitan 
 
CONSPIRACY AND PROTECTION OF PROPERTY ACT, 1875. 
 
 199 
 
 police magistrate sitting at the police court 
 for that division ; and 
 
 (3.) As respects anj city, toTO, liberty, borough, 
 place, or district for which a stipendiary 
 magistrate is for the time being acting, such 
 stipendiary magistrate sitting at a police 
 court or other place appointed in that behalf; 
 and 
 
 (4.) Elsewhere, any justice or justices of the peace to 
 whom jurisdiction is given by the Summary 
 Jurisdiction Act; provided that, as respects 
 any case within the cognizance of such justice 
 or justices as last aforesaid, an information 
 under this act shall be heard and determined 
 by two or more justices of the peace in petty 
 sessions sitting at some place appointed for 
 holding petty sessions (k). 
 
 Nothing in this section contained shall restrict the 
 jurisdiction of the lord mayor or any alderman of the 
 city of London, or of any metropolitan police or sti¬ 
 pendiary magistrate, in respect of any act or jurisdiction 
 which may now be done or exercised by him out of 
 court. 
 
 14 . The expression municipal authority” in this Definitions of 
 
 act means any of the following; authorities, that is to 
 
 ^ authority and. 
 
 say, the Metropolitan Board of Works, the Common “ public com- 
 
 Council of the city of London, the Commissioners of 
 Sewers of the city of London, the town council of any 
 borough for the time being subject to the act of the 
 session of the fifth and sixth years of the reign of King 
 William the Fourth, chapter seventy-six, intituled 
 “ An Act to provide for the Regulation of Municipal 
 Corporations in England and Wales,” and any act 
 amending the same, any commissioners, trustees, or 
 
 (k) See ante, pp. 108, 109. 
 
200 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 otlicr persons invested, by s-Ry local act of parliament 
 vdtli powers of improving, cleansing, lighting, or paving 
 any town, and any local board. 
 
 Any municipal authority or company or contractor 
 who has obtained authority by or in pursuance of any 
 general or local act of parliament to supply the streets 
 of any city, borough, town, or place, or of any part 
 thereof, with gas, or whifch is required by or in pur¬ 
 suance of any general or local act of parliament to 
 supply water on demand to the inhabitants of any city, 
 borough, town, or place, or any part thereof, shall for 
 the purposes of this act be deemed to be a municipal 
 authority or company or contractor upon whom is 
 imposed by act of parliament the duty of supplying 
 such city, borough, town, or place, or part thereof^ with 
 gas or water. 
 
 “ Maliciously ” 
 in this act 
 construed as in 
 Malicious 
 Injuries to 
 Property Act. 
 
 15. The word maliciously ” used in reference to 
 any offence under this act shall be construed in the 
 same manner as it is required by the fifty-eighth section 
 of the act relating to malicious injuries to property, 
 that is to say, the act of the session of the twenty- 
 fourth and twenty-fifth years of the reign of her present 
 IMajesty, chapter ninety-seven, to be construed in 
 reference to any offence committed under such last- 
 mentioned act (/). 
 
 Saving Clause, 
 
 Saving as to 16. Nothing in this act shall apply to seamen or to 
 sea service. . , 
 
 apprentices to the sea service. 
 
 Repeal, 
 
 Repeal of acts. 17^ after the commencement of this act, 
 
 there shall be repealed:— 
 
 I. The act of the session of the thirty-fourth and 
 thirty-fifth years of the reign of her present 
 
 (0 See ante, pp. 155, 156, and j)pst, p. 273. 
 
CONSPIRACY AND PROTECTION OF PROPERTY ACT, 1875. 
 
 201 
 
 Majesty, chapter thirty-two, intituled An Act 
 to amend the Criminal Law relating to violence, 
 threats, and molestation” {m); and 
 
 II. The Master and Servant Act, 1867,” and the 
 enactments specified in the first schedule to that 
 act( 72 ), with the exceptions following as to the 
 enactments in such schedule ; (that is to say,) 
 
 (1.) Except so much of sections one and two of 
 
 (7n) As to this act, see antej 
 pp. 40, 96. 
 
 (to) It is to be regretted that 
 the first intention of the Govern¬ 
 ment to embody the repealed sta¬ 
 tutes and sections in a separate 
 act was not adhered to. The 
 mode of repeal adopted by refer¬ 
 ence to a schedule in a now re¬ 
 pealed act is irregular and incon¬ 
 venient. It makes it necessary to 
 add the schedule here:— 
 
 The First Schedule of the 
 Master and Servant Act, 
 1867. 
 
 Enactments referred to. 
 
 7 Geo. 1, stat. 1, c. 13, ss. 4, 6.— 
 An act for regulating the jour¬ 
 neymen tailors within the weekly 
 hills of mortality. 
 
 9 Geo. 1, c. 27, s. 4.—An act for 
 preventing journeymen shoe¬ 
 makers selling, exchanging or 
 pawning boots, shoes, slippers, 
 cut leather, or other materials 
 for making boots, shoes or 
 slippers, and for better regu¬ 
 lating the said journeymen. 
 
 13 Geo. 2, c. 8, ss. 7, 8.—An act 
 to explain and amend an act 
 made in the first year of the 
 reign of her late Majesty Queen 
 Anne, intituled An act for the 
 more effectual preventing the 
 
 abuses and frauds of persons 
 employed in the working up the 
 woollen, linen, fustian, cotton 
 and iron manufactures of this 
 kingdom; and for extending the 
 said act to the manufactures of 
 leather. 
 
 20 Geo. 2, c. 19.—An act for the 
 better adjusting and more easy 
 recovery of the wages of certain 
 servants; and for the better 
 regulation of such servants and 
 of certain apprentices. 
 
 27 Geo. 2, c. 6.—An act to repeal 
 a proviso in an act made in the 
 twentieth year of his present 
 Majesty’s reign, intituled An 
 act for the better adjusting and 
 more easy recovery of the wages 
 of certain servants, and for the 
 better regulation of such ser¬ 
 vants and of certain apprentices, 
 which provides that the said act 
 shall not extend to the stan¬ 
 naries in Devon and Cornwall. 
 
 31 Geo. 2, c. 11, s. 3.—An act to 
 amend an act made in the third 
 year of the reign of King Wil¬ 
 liam and Queen Mary, intituled 
 An act for the better explana¬ 
 tion and supplying the defects 
 of the former laws for the 
 settlement of the poor, so far as 
 the same relates to apprentices 
 gaining a settlement by inden- 
 
202 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 the act passed in the thirty-third year of the 
 reign of King George the Third, chapter 
 
 ture; and also to empower jus¬ 
 tices of the peace to determine 
 differences between masters and 
 mistresses and their servants 
 in husbandry, touching their 
 wages, though such servants are 
 hired for less time than a year. 
 
 6 Geo. 3, c. 25.—An act for better 
 regulating apprentices and per¬ 
 sons working under contract. 
 
 17 Geo. 3, c. 56, ss. 8, 19.—An 
 act for amending and rendering 
 more effectual the several laws 
 now in being, for the more 
 effectual preventing frauds and 
 abuses by persons employed in 
 the manufacture of hats, and 
 in the W’oollen, linen, fustian, 
 cotton, iron, leather, fur, hemp, 
 flax, mohair and silk manufac¬ 
 tures; and also for making pro¬ 
 visions to prevent frauds by 
 journeymen dyers. 
 
 33 Geo. 3, c. 55, ss. 1, 2.—An act 
 to authorize justices of the peace 
 to impose fines upon constables, 
 overseers, and other peace or 
 parish officers, for neglect of 
 duty, and on masters of ap¬ 
 prentices for ill-usage of such 
 their apprentices; and also to 
 make provision for the execu¬ 
 tion of warrants of distress 
 granted by magistrates. 
 
 39 & 40 Geo. 3, c. 77, s. 3.—An 
 act for the security of collieries 
 and mines, and for the better 
 regulation of colliers and miners. 
 
 69 Geo. 3, c. 92, ss. 6, 6.—An act 
 to enable justices of the peace 
 in Ireland to act as such, in 
 certain cases, out of the limits 
 of the counties in which they 
 
 actually are; to make provision 
 for the execution of warrants of 
 distress granted by them; and to 
 authorize them to impose fines 
 upon constables and other offi¬ 
 cers for neglect of duty, and on 
 masters for ill-usage of their 
 apprentices. 
 
 4 Geo. 4, c. 29.—An act to in¬ 
 crease the power of magistrates 
 in cases of apprenticeships. 
 
 4 Geo. 4, c. 34.—An act to en¬ 
 large the powers of justices in 
 determining complaints between 
 masters and servants, and be¬ 
 tween masters, apprentices, ar¬ 
 tificers and others. 
 
 10 Geo. 4, c. 52.—An act to ex¬ 
 tend the powers of an act of the 
 fourth year of his present Ma¬ 
 jesty, for enlarging the powers 
 of justices in determining com¬ 
 plaints between masters and 
 servants to persons engaged in 
 the manufacture of silk. 
 
 6 & 6 Viet. c. 7.—An act to ex¬ 
 plain the acts for the better 
 regulation of certain appren¬ 
 tices. 
 
 6 & 7 Viet. c. 40, s. 7.—An act to 
 amend the laws for the preven¬ 
 tion of frauds and abuses by 
 persons employed in the woollen, 
 worsted, linen, cotton, flax, mo¬ 
 hair and silk hosiery manufac¬ 
 tures ; and for the further 
 securing the property of the 
 manufacturers and the wages of 
 the workmen engaged therein. 
 
 14 & 15 Viet. c. 92, s. 16.—The 
 Summary Jurisdiction (Ireland) 
 Act, 1851. 
 
CONSPIRACY AND PROTECTION OF PROPERTY ACT, 1875. 
 
 203 
 
 fifty-five, intituled An Act to authorize 
 justices of the peace to impose fines upon con¬ 
 stables, overseers and other peace or parish 
 officers for neglect of duty, and on masters of 
 apprentices for ill-usage of such their ap¬ 
 prentice; and also to make provision for the 
 execution of warrants of distress granted by 
 magistrates,” as relates to constables, over¬ 
 seers and other peace or parish officers; and 
 (2.) Except so much of sections five and six of 
 an act passed in the fifty-ninth year of the 
 reign of King George the Third, chapter 
 ninety-two (o), intituled An Act to enable 
 justices of the peace in Ireland to act as such, 
 in certain cases, out of the limits of the coun¬ 
 ties in which they actually are; to make pro¬ 
 vision for the execution of warrants of distress 
 granted by them; and to authorize them to 
 impose fines upon constables and other officers 
 for neglect of duty, and on masters for ill- 
 usage of their apprentices,” as relates to con¬ 
 stables and other peace or parish officers; and 
 (3.) Except the act of the session of the fifth 
 and sixth years of the reign of her present 
 Majesty, chapter seven, intituled An Act 
 to explain the Acts for the better regulation of 
 certain apprentices;”(/?) and 
 (4.) Except sub-sections one, two, three and five 
 of section sixteen of The Summary Juris¬ 
 diction (Ireland) Act, 1851,” relating to cer¬ 
 tain disputes between employers and the per¬ 
 sons employed by them; and (g), 
 
 III. Also there shall be repealed the following enact- 
 
 (o) The whole of this act except (p) See ante, ^.151 (n.). 
 
 8. 3 was expressly repealed by the (q) See this section in the Ap- 
 Stat. Law Rev. Act, 1873, so the pendix,y 705 ^. 
 exception (2) is inoperative. 
 
204 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 ments making breaches of contract criminal, and 
 relating to the recovery of wages by summary pro¬ 
 cedure ; (that is to say,) 
 
 (a, ) An Act passed in the fifth year of the reign 
 of Queen Elizabeth, chapter four, and intituled 
 i( Act touching dyvers orders for artificers, 
 labourers, servantes of husbandrye, and ap¬ 
 prentices;” and 
 
 (/>.) So much of section two of an act passed in 
 the twelfth year of King George the First, 
 chapter thirty-four, and intituled An Act to 
 prevent unlaivful combination of workmen 
 employed in the woollen manufactures, and 
 for better payment of their wages,” as relates 
 to departing from sendee and quitting or re¬ 
 turning work before it is finished (y>); and 
 (c.) Section twenty of an act passed in the fifth 
 year of King George the Third, chapter 
 fifty-one, the title of which begins ivith the 
 words An Act for repealing several laws re¬ 
 lating to the manufacture of woollen cloth in 
 the county of T ork,” and ends with the words 
 for preserving the credit of the said manu- 
 factm’e at the foreign market” (^); 
 
 (^Z.) An act passed in the nineteenth year of 
 King George the Third, chapter forty-nine, 
 and intituled An Act to prevent abuses in 
 the payment of wages to persons employed in 
 the bone and thread lace manufiictoryand 
 (e,) Sections eighteen and twenty-three of an 
 act passed in the session of the third and 
 fourth years of her present Majesty, chapter 
 ninety-one, intituled An Act for the more 
 effectual prevention of frauds and abuses com¬ 
 mitted by weavers, sewers and other persons 
 
 ( 2^) Sec post, Appendix. 
 
 (q) See post, Appendix. 
 
CONSPIRACY AND PROTECTION OF PROPERTY ACT, 1875. 
 
 205 
 
 employed in the linen, hempen, union, cotton, 
 silk and woollen manufactures in Ireland, and 
 for the better payment of their wages, for one 
 year, and from thence to the end of the next 
 session of parliament;” (?’) and 
 (f.) Section seventeen of an act passed in the 
 session of the sixth and seventh years of her 
 present Majesty, chapter forty, the title of 
 which begins with the words An Act to 
 amend the laws,” and ends with the words 
 workmen engaged therein ;^\s) and 
 {g.) Section seven of an act passed in the session 
 of the eighth and ninth years of Her present 
 Majesty, chapter one hundred and twenty- 
 eight, and intituled An Act to make further 
 regulations respecting the tickets of work 
 to be delivered to silk weavers in certain 
 cases ”(^). 
 
 Provided that,— 
 
 (1.) Any order for wages or further sum of com¬ 
 pensation in addition to wages made in pur¬ 
 suance of section sixteen of The Summary 
 Jurisdiction (Ireland) Act, 1851” (m), may be 
 enforced in like manner as if it were an order 
 made by a court of summary jurisdiction in pur¬ 
 suance of the Employers and Workmen Act, 
 1875, and not otherwise; and 
 (2.) The repeal enacted by this section shall not 
 affect— 
 
 (a,) Anything duly done or suffered, or any 
 right or liability acquired or incurred under 
 any enactment hereby repealed; or 
 (b.) Any penalty, forfeiture, or punishment in- 
 
 (r) See posty Appendix. (?/) See this section in the Ap- 
 
 (s) See Appendix. pendix, 
 
 {t) See Appendix. 
 
206 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 Application to 
 Scotland. 
 
 Definition. 
 
 Recovery of 
 penalties, &c. 
 in Scotland. 
 
 curred in respect of any offence committed 
 against any enactment hereby repealed; or 
 (c.) Any investigation, legal proceeding, or 
 remedy in respect of any such right, lia¬ 
 bility, penalty, forfeiture, or punishment as 
 aforesaid; and any such investigation, legal 
 proceeding, and remedy may be carried on 
 as if this act had not passed. 
 
 Application of Act to Scotland, 
 
 18. This act shall extend to Scotland, with the 
 modifications following; that is to say, 
 
 (1.) The expression ^‘municipal authority” means 
 the toAvn council of any royal or parliamentary 
 burgh, or the commissioners of police of any 
 burgh, toAvn, or populous place under the 
 provisions of the General Police and Improve¬ 
 ment (Scotland) Act, 1862, or any local 
 authority under the provisions of the Public 
 Health (Scotland) Act, 1867 : 
 
 (2.) The expression “ The Summary Jurisdiction 
 Act” means the Summaiy Procedure Act, 
 1864, and any acts amending the same: 
 
 (3.) The expression the court of summary jurisdic¬ 
 tion” means the sheriff of the county or any 
 one of his substitutes. 
 
 19. In Scotland the folloAving proAusions shah have 
 effect in regard to the prosecution of offences, recovery 
 of penalties, and making of orders under this act: 
 
 (1.) EA^ery offence under this act shall be prosecuted, 
 every penalty recovered, and every order made 
 at the instance of the Lord Advocate, or of 
 the Procurator Fiscal of the sheriff court: 
 
 (2.) The jn’oceedings may be on indictment in the 
 Court of J usticiary in Edinburgh, or on 
 circuit, or in a sheriff court, or may be taken 
 
CONSPIRACY AND PROTECTION OF PROPERTY ACT, 1875 . 
 
 207 
 
 summarily in the sheriff court under the pro¬ 
 visions of the Summary Procedure Act, 1864: 
 
 (S.) Every person found liable on conviction to pay 
 any penalty under this act shall be liable, in 
 default of payment within a time to be fixed 
 in the conviction, to be imprisoned for a term, 
 to be also fixed therein, not exceeding two 
 months, or until such penalty shall be sooner 
 paid, and the conviction and warrant may be 
 in the form of No. 3 of Schedide K. of the 
 Summary Procedure Act, 1864: 
 
 (4.) In Scotland aU penalties imposed in pursuance 
 of this act shall be paid to the clerk of the 
 court imposing them, and shall by him be 
 accounted for and paid to the Queen’s and 
 Lord Treasurer’s Pemembrancer, and be car¬ 
 ried to the consolidated fund. 
 
 20 . In Scotland it shall be competent to any person 
 to appeal against any order or conviction under this act 
 to the next circuit Court of Justiciary, or where there 
 are no circuit courts to the High Court of Justiciary at 
 Edinburgh, in the manner prescribed by and under the 
 rules, limitations, conditions, and restrictions contained 
 in the act passed in the twentieth year of the reign 
 of his Majesty King George the Second, chapter forty- 
 three, in regard to appeals to circuit courts in matters 
 criminal, as the same may be altered or amended by 
 any acts of parliament for the time being in force (a:). 
 
 Application of Act to Ireland, 
 
 21 . This act shall extend to Ireland, with the modi¬ 
 fications following; that is to say. 
 
 The expression ^^the Summary Jurisdiction Act” 
 shall be construed to mean, as regards the police 
 
 (x) See “The Summary Pro- cate to the 38 & 39 Viet. c. 86), 
 secution& Appeals (Scotland) Act, and extending the time for lodging 
 1875” (38 & 39 Viet. c. 62), giving appeals under 20 Geo. 2, c. 43. 
 an appeal on points of law (appli- 
 
 Appeal in 
 Scotland as 
 prescribed by 
 20 Geo. 2, c. 43. 
 
 Application to 
 Ireland. 
 
208 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 district of Dublin metropolis, the acts regulating 
 the powers and duties of justices of the peace for 
 such district; and elsewhere in Ireland, the Petty 
 Sessions (Ireland) Act, 1851, and any acts amend- 
 ing the same: 
 
 The expression "" court of summary jurisdiction” shall 
 be construed to mean any justice or justices of the 
 peace, or other magistrate to whom jurisdiction is 
 given by the Summary Jurisdiction Act: 
 
 The court of summary jurisdiction, when hearing and 
 determining complaints under this act, shall in the 
 police district of Dublin metropolis be constituted 
 of one or more of the divisional justices of the said 
 district, and elsewhere in Ireland of two or more 
 justices of the peace in petty sessions sitting at a 
 place appointed for holding petty sessions: 
 
 The expression municipal authority” shall be con¬ 
 strued to mean the town council of any borough 
 for the time being, subject to the act of the session 
 of the third and fourth years of the reign of her 
 present Majesty, chapter one hundred and eight, 
 entitled ‘‘ An Act for the Eegulation of Municipal 
 Corporations in Ireland,” and any commissioners 
 invested by any general or local act of parliament, 
 with power of improving, cleansing, lighting, or 
 paving any town or township. 
 
( 209 ) 
 
 APPENDIX 
 
 OF UNREPEALED STATUTES RELATING 
 TO EMPLOYERS AND WORKMEN. 
 
 Note.— Statutes are cited from the Bevised Edition, so far as that 
 Edition extends. 
 
 1 Anne, stat. 2, c. 22. 
 
 An Act for the more effectual preventing the Abuses and 
 Frauds of Persons employed in the working up the 
 Woollen, Linen, Fustian, Cotton and Iron Manufac¬ 
 tures of this Kingdom {a). 
 
 Sect. 1. ‘‘If any person or persons employed in the working 
 up the woollen . . . linen, fustian, cotton or iron manufactures 
 within this kingdom shall imbezel or purloyn any . . . wifts, 
 See., or any other materials of wool, &c. or iron, with which 
 he, she or they is or shall be intrusted to work upon . . . being 
 thereof lawfully convicted by the oath of one or more credible 
 witness or witnesses, or by the confession of the party or par¬ 
 ties accused of the same before one justice of the peace of the 
 said county where such offence shall be committed, shall forfeit 
 double the value of the damages done for the use of the poor 
 of the said parish, and in case the offender or offenders so con¬ 
 victed as aforesaid shall neglect or refuse to pay their forfeiture 
 or forfeitures as aforesaid, that then it shall and may be lawful 
 for the said justice to cause the said offender to be committed 
 to the house of correction until satisfaction shall be made; and 
 in case it shall appear to the said justice that the said offender 
 is not able to make satisfaction, then the said offender shall 
 be there publickly whipped and kept to hard labour for any time 
 not exceeding fourteen days.’' 
 
 (a) Chapter 18 in the common 
 printed editions of the statutes. It 
 was made perpetual, 9 Anne, c. 30, 
 and extended to Scotland by 13 
 Geo. 2, c. 8. This act was repealed 
 in part by 58 Geo. 3, c. 51, s. 2 ; 
 1 & 2 Will. 4,c. 36, ss. 1, 2 ; C & 7 
 
 Viet. C.40, s. 1, and by Statute Law 
 Rev. Act, 1867. Except so far as ex¬ 
 tended to leather by 13 Geo. 2, c. 8, 
 this act, as regards England, only 
 applies to iron ; see 6 & 7 Viet, 
 c. 40, ss. 1, 33. 
 
 D. 
 
 P 
 
210 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 Sect. 2. ‘‘ Every person or persons buying or receiving any 
 materials of . . . iron, and being thereof lawfully con¬ 
 victed in manner aforesaid, shall suffer the like penalties and 
 forfeitures as one convicted pursuant to this act for purloyning 
 and imbezeling of the said materials.” 
 
 “All wages, demands, frauds and defaults of labourers in the 
 . . . iron manufactures, for or concerning any work done in the 
 same manufactures, shall and may be heard and determined by 
 any two justices of the peace” [&c.; with appeal to quarter 
 sessions]. 
 
 9 Geo. 1, c. 27. 
 
 An Act for ■preventing Journeymen Shoemakers selling, 
 exchanging or pawning Boots, Shoes, Slippers, Cut 
 J^eather, or other Materials for making Boots, Shoes 
 or Slipj)ers, and for better regulating the said Journey¬ 
 men. 
 
 Sect. 1. On due proof of any journeyman shoemaker, or other 
 person hired or employed as such within the bills of mortalit}^, 
 purloining boots, &c., a justice may convict him, and may 
 award satisfaction for damages sustained, which may be levied 
 by distress. 
 
 Sect. 2. Confederates liable to the same punishment. 
 
 Sect. 3. Justices may issue warrants, &c. to search for 
 leather, &c. purloined, and may cause goods to be restored to 
 owners. 
 
 Sect. 4 repealed, 38 & 39 Viet. c. 86, s. 17 ; see ante, p. 202. 
 Sect. 5. Persons aggrieved may appeal to the sessions. 
 
 12 Geo. 1, C. 34. 
 
 An Act to prevent Unlawful Combinations of JVorkmen 
 employed in the Woollen Manufactures, and for better 
 payment of their fCages (Z>). 
 
 Sect. 2 (c). Any woolcombcr, weaver, servant or person 
 hired, retained or employed in the art or mystery of a wool- 
 
 (If) Repealed in part by 22 Geo. 3, 
 c. 40, s. 4; extended to Scotland and 
 Ireland l)y 57 Geo. 3, c. 122, s. 3; 
 repealed in part by 58 Geo. 3, c. 61, 
 B. 2 ; 0 Geo. 4, c. 129, s. 2 ; 9 Geo. 
 I, c. 31, s. 1; 2 Geo. 4, c. 74, s. 125 ; 
 1 2 4, c. 30, ss. 1,2; 0 & 7 
 
 Viet. c. 40. ss. 133 ; Statute Law 
 Rev. Act, 1867. See also 38 & 39 
 Viet. c. 86, s. 17, a/ite,p. 204. 
 
 (r) The act may be regarded as 
 not in force in England, so far as it 
 originally extended, as it was ap- 
 l)arently confined to workmen em- 
 
13 Geo. 2, c. 8. 
 
 211 
 
 comber or weaver, who shall wilfully damnify, spoil or destroy 
 (without the consent of the owner) any of the goods, wares or 
 work committed to his care or charge, or wherewith he shall 
 be entrusted, on summary conviction to forfeit and pay double 
 value, to be levied by distress, and in default by imprisonment, 
 not exceeding three months. 
 
 13 Geo. 1, c. 26. 
 
 An Act for better Regulation of the Linen and Hempen 
 Mamifactures in that part of Great Britain called 
 Scotland {d). 
 
 Sect. 10. “ If any weaver shall neglect to weave any linen 
 yarn delivered to him by any person or persons into such cloth 
 and within such time and in such manner as was contracted and 
 agreed for, or shall waste, imbezle or damnify, or suffer to be 
 wasted, imbezeled or damnified any linen yarn delivered to him, 
 such weaver being thereof convicted, in such manner as is after 
 mentioned, shall for every such offence make good the party’s 
 damage, and shall further forfeit and pay to the person aggrieved 
 a sum not exceeding forty shillings sterling, nor less than five 
 shillings sterling, in such manner as is hereinafter mentioned.” 
 
 Sect. 31. Offences to be heard and determined by one or 
 more justice or justices of the peace, &c. 
 
 Sect. 32. Appeal to quarter sessions. 
 
 13 Geo. 2, c. 8. 
 
 An Act to explain and amend an Act made in the First 
 Year of the Reign of her late Majesty Queen Anne, 
 intituled An Act for the more effectual preventing the 
 Abuses and Frauds of Persons employed in the working 
 up the Woollen, Linen, Fustian, Cotton and Iron Manu¬ 
 factures of this Kingdom f and for extending the said 
 Act to the Manufactures of Leather (e). 
 
 Sect. 1. Recites doubts as to whether 1 Ann. st. 2, c. 22, 
 extends to the embezilling woollen, linen, fustian, cotton and 
 
 ployed in the woollen manufacture, (<f) Expressly repealed in part, 
 and therefore repealed as to Eng- Statute Law KeVision Act, 1867. 
 land by 6 & 7 Viet. c. 40 ; but see (e) Repealed as to the payment 
 its extension by 22 Geo. 2, c. 27, of forfeitures and substituted pro- 
 post. visions, .58 Geo. 3, c. 51 ; and so 
 
 P 2 
 
212 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 iron manufactures, actually wrought or made up into merchant¬ 
 able wares, and as to the application of forfeitures, and that the 
 forfeitures and penalties of recited act have proved ineffectual, 
 and provides forfeitures and penalties “ if any person or per¬ 
 sons who shall be hired or employed in the working up of any 
 woollen, linen, fustian, cotton or iron manufactures” shall ‘‘pur¬ 
 loin, imbezil, secret, sell, pawn, exchange, or otherwise illegally 
 dispose of any of the materials with which he, she or they shall 
 be respectively intrusted to work up such woollen, linen, fus¬ 
 tian, cotton or iron manufactures, whether the same or any part 
 thereof be or be not first wrought, made up or manufactured, 
 or shall reel short or false yarn.” 
 
 Sect. 2. Imposes the like forfeitures and penalties on every 
 person who “ shall buy or receive, accept or take by way of 
 gift, pawn, pledge or sale, of or from any or either of the per¬ 
 sons herein, or in the said recited act mentioned, any woollen, 
 linen, fustian, cotton or iron manufactures, either before or after 
 the same shall be wrought, made up, manufactured or converted 
 into merchantable wares, knowing the same to be so purloined 
 or embezilled.” 
 
 Sect. 3. Application of forfeitures. 
 
 Sect. 4. Recites that “ many frauds and abuses have of late 
 been likewise committed by persons employed in cutting out 
 and manufacturing of skins, leather and other materials into 
 gloves, breeches, boots, shoes, slippers, and other wares and 
 manufactures, by purloining, embezilling, secreting, selling, 
 pawning, or exchanging such skins, leather, and other materials, 
 or in some other manner, wherefore it is become necessary to 
 make provision for discovering, preventing and punishing such 
 offences, and for the better regulating such persons as are or 
 shall he em})loyed in the premises last mentioned,” and provides 
 forfeitures and penalties that if “any person or persons, hired 
 or employed, or to be hired or employed, in cutting, paring, 
 washing, dressing, sewing, making up, or otherwise manufac¬ 
 turing of gloves, breeches, leather, skins, boots, shoes, slippers, 
 wares, or other goods or materials to be made use of in any of 
 the trades or employments, or in manner last mentioned, or in 
 any branch or particular thereof, shall fraudulently purloiu, 
 embezil, secret, sell, pawn, or exchange all or any part of the 
 gloves, breeches, leather, skins, parings, or shreads of gloves, 
 or leather, or other materials with which he, she, or they 
 shall be entrusted to work up or manufacture, or shall purloin, 
 embezil, secret, sell, pawn, or exchange any gloves, breeches, 
 
 much as regulated or related to the mohair, and silk manufactures, or 
 payment of wages in goods or truck, any manufactures made of those 
 1 & 2 Will. 4, c. 3G ; and repealed materials, by (> & 7 Viet. c. 40; see 
 as to England, so far as relates to also 38 & 39 Viet. c. 86, s. 17, antey 
 tbe woollen, linen, cotton, flax, p. 202. 
 
15 Geo. 2 , c. 27. 
 
 213 
 
 boots, shoes, slippers, or wares when made, wrought up or 
 manufactured, or do or wilfully permit any other act, Avherchy 
 to lessen the value of such or any part of such gloves, breeches, 
 leather, skins, parings or shreads of gloves, or leather, boots, 
 shoes, slippers or other wares last particularized, either before 
 or after the same shall be respectively so made into wares.” 
 
 Sect. 5. Receivers subject to the same penalties. 
 
 Sect. 6. “ To prevent oppression of the labourers and work¬ 
 men employed in any respect in or about making or manufac¬ 
 turing of gloves, breeches, boots, shoes, slippers, wares or 
 goods of that sort before mentioned;” “all goods and materials 
 delivered out to be wrought up in the manufacture lust men¬ 
 tioned shall be delivered with a declaration at the same time of 
 the true weight, quantity, or tale thereof, on pain that every 
 offender . . . shall forfeit and pay to such labourer, manu¬ 
 
 facturer, or worker, double the value of what shall be due for 
 such work by him, her or them done and performed ; and if 
 any such labourer, manufacturer, or worker, as is last described, 
 shall be guilty of any fraud, abuse, neglect, or default in the 
 •work by him, her or them undertaken to be done, then such 
 labourer, manufacturer, or worker shall allow and answer to the 
 owner of such work double the damages thereby sustained.” 
 
 Sects. 7 and 8 repealed, 38 & 39 Viet. c. 86, s. 17; see ante, 
 
 p. 201. 
 
 Sect. 9. Appeal to quarter sessions. 
 
 Sect. 10. No person by virtue of recited or this act to suffer 
 the punishment therein directed twice for one and the same 
 fact and offence. 
 
 Sect. 11. Acts 1 Ann. st. 2, s. 22, and this act, to extend to 
 Scotland. 
 
 15 Geo. 2, c. 27. 
 
 An Act for the more effectual 'preventing any Cloth or 
 Woollen Goods remaining upon the Rack or Tenters, 
 or any Woollen Yarn or Wooll left out to dry, from 
 being stolen or taken away in the Night-time, 
 
 Sect. 1. Recites that “ clothiers and others concerned in the 
 'v\’oollen manufacture are under a necessity of letting their 
 cloth and other woollen goods remain upon the rack or tenters ; 
 as also of suffering their wooll to lie exposed in the night-time, 
 in order the better to dry and prepare the same, whereby their 
 said goods are more frequently liable to be stolen by wicked and 
 evil designing persons, who are encouraged in their wicked¬ 
 ness by the difficulty of proving the identity of the goods 
 stolen,” and therefore “ to secure the property of such clothiers 
 
214 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 and others concerned in the woollen tnanufacture, and to' 
 facilitate a discovery of such goods so stolen,” in case “ any 
 cloth or woollen goods remaining upon the rack and tenters, or 
 any woollen yarn or wooll left out to dry, shall be stolen or 
 taken away in the night-time,” empowers justices to issue 
 search warrants, and constables to apprehend suspected persons 
 found in possession of such goods, and carry them before justices; 
 “ and if the said person or persons so suspected, apprehended 
 and carried before the said justice or justices shall not then and 
 there give a satisfactory account how he, she or they acquired 
 the property or possession of such cloth, woollen goods, 
 woollen yarn, or wooll, or shall not, within some convenient 
 time to be set by the said justice or justices, produce the party 
 or parties of whom he, she or they received the same, or some 
 other credible witness to depose upon oath such property or 
 right to the possession of the said cloth, woollen goods, woollen 
 yarn or wooll (which oath the said justice or justices is and are 
 hereby empowered to administer), that the said person or per¬ 
 sons so suspected, and not giving such satisfactory account, nor 
 producing any such witness upon oath to testify as aforesaid, 
 shall be deemed and adjudged as convicted of the said offence 
 of stealing or taking away the said cloth, woollen goods, 
 woollen yarn, or wooll, and shall for the first offence forfeit and 
 pay to the owner of such cloth, woollen goods, woollen yarn or 
 wooll, treble the value thereof,” to be levied by distress, and in 
 default of distress imprisonment for three mouths or until pay¬ 
 ment. Second offence six months’ imprisonment besides penalty. 
 Third offence indictable as a felony. 
 
 Sect. 2. Appeal from summary conviction to quarter ses¬ 
 sions. 
 
 Sect. 3. ‘‘ This act shall not extend to alter or repeal any 
 law now in force for the punishment of any person or persons 
 stealing or receiving such cloth, woollen goods, woollen yarn, 
 or wooll, except in such cases where the proof is laid upon the 
 offender or offenders as aforesaid.” 
 
22 Geo. 2 , c. 27. 
 
 215 
 
 22 Geo. 2 , c. 27. 
 
 An Act for the more effectual preventing of Frauds and 
 Abuses committed by Persons employed in the Manu¬ 
 facture of Hats, and in the Woollen, Linnen, Fustian, 
 Cotton, Iron, Leather, Furr, Hemp, Flax, Mohair, and 
 Silk Manufactures ; and for preventing unlawful com¬ 
 binations of Journeymen Dyers and Journeymen Hot 
 Pressers, and of all Persons employed in the said 
 several Manufactures, and for the better Payment of 
 their Wages {f). 
 
 Sect. 1. E-ecites several provisious of 13 Geo. 2, c. 8 (^), 
 aud that penalties and forfeitures are insufficient, and that many 
 persons employed in the making of felts or hats, and in prepar¬ 
 ing or working up the manufactures of furr, hemp, flax, mohair 
 and silk, and also the manufactures made up of wooll, furr, 
 hemp, flax, mohair, cotton, or silk, or some of them mixed one 
 with another, have of late been guilty of divers frauds and 
 abuses by purloining, imbezilling, secreting, selling, pawning, 
 exchanging, or otherwise unlawfully disposing of the materials 
 with which they have been entrusted ; and it is therefore become 
 necessary to make provision for preventing such offences for the 
 future.” Therefore, for amending and rendering more eflfectual 
 the 13 Geo. 2, and for extending the provisions and regula¬ 
 tions therein and herein made to the several manufactures 
 hereinbefore mentioned forfeitures and penalties are imposed, 
 “if any person or persons whatsoever who shall be hired or 
 employed to make any felt or hat, or to prepare or work up 
 any woollen, linnen, fustian, cotton, iron, leather, furr, hemp, 
 flax, mohair, or silk manufactures, or any manufactures made 
 up of wooll, furr, hemp, flax, cotton, mohair, or silk, or of any 
 of the said materials mixed one with another, shall . . . pur¬ 
 loin, imbezzil, secrete, sell, pawn, exchange, or otherwise un¬ 
 lawfully dispose of any of the materials with which he, she or 
 they shall be respectively entrusted, whether the same or any 
 part thereof be, or be not, first wrought, made up, manufac¬ 
 tured or converted into merchantable wares.” 
 
 (/) So much repealed by 14 
 Geo. 3, c. 44, as subjects any person 
 to any punishment for reeling short 
 yarn, and fresh provisions ; punish¬ 
 ments altered, 17 Geo. 3, c. 56; 
 provisions of, as to recovery of 
 wages, extended to cutlery, 57 Geo. 
 3, c. 115, and to colliers, 57 Geo. 3, 
 c. 122; application of penalties 
 altered, 58 Geo. 3, c. 51; so much as 
 extended provisions of 12 Geo, 1 to 
 persons therein mentioned, repealed, 
 
 6 Geo. 4, c. 129 and 9 Geo. 4, c. 31 
 (as to England), and 9 Geo. 4, c. 74 
 (as to India) ; repealed, as to the 
 payment of wages in goods, 1 & 2 
 Will. 4, c. 36; as to England, so 
 far as relates to the woollen, linen, 
 cotton, flax, mohair and silk manu¬ 
 factures, or any manufactures of 
 those materials, by 6 & 7 Viet. c. 40. 
 Sections 3, 10 and 11 repealed. 
 Statute LawKev. Acts, 1867, 1871. 
 
 G) See ante, p. 211, 
 
216 
 
 THE LABOUH LAWS. 
 
 Sect 2. Penalties and forfeitures for buying or receiving any 
 of the materials from persons known to be hired or employed, 
 and without consent of employers, or for buying or receiving 
 materials knowing them to be so purloined or embezzled. 
 
 Sect. 3. Repealed. 
 
 Sect. 4. Power to justices to grant warrants to search houses 
 of convicted persons, and for seizure and disposal of property if 
 not proved to have been honestly and lawfully acquired. 
 
 Sect. 5. Notice to be given to the convict of property seized, 
 and if detained in prison he is to be brought before justices in 
 order to prove the property. 
 
 Sect. 6. Appeal to sessions. 
 
 Sect. 7. Penalty on persons entrusted with materials before 
 mentioned to work up, not returning unused materials within a 
 certain time (h). 
 
 Sect. 8. Justices empowered to issue warrant, and to hear 
 and determine complaints. 
 
 Sect. 9. Repealed (?). 
 
 Sects. 10 and 11. Repealed. 
 
 Sect. 12. Recites several clauses of 12 Geo. 1, c. 34, 
 aha, that “ if any wooll comber, weaver, servant, or person 
 hired, retained or employed in the said art or mystery, shall 
 wilfully damnify, spoil or destroy (without the consent of the 
 owner) any of the goods, wares or work committed to his care 
 or charge, or wherewith he shall be entrusted, such offender, 
 being thereof convicted, shall forfeit and pay to the owner or 
 owners of such goods or wares so damnified, spoiled or de¬ 
 stroyed, double the value thereof, to be levied by distress and 
 sale of the offender’s goods and chattels, by warrant or warrants 
 under the hands and seals of any two or more justices of the 
 peace within their respective jurisdictions; and for want of 
 sufficient distress, such justices shall commit the party or 
 parties offending to the house of correction, there to be kept to 
 hard labour for any time not exceeding three months, or until 
 satisfaction be made to the party or parties aggrieved for the 
 same” (k) : and it also recites the right of appeal given by the 
 statute; and “that it is necessary that the said several provi¬ 
 sions and regulations in the said last in part recited act should 
 be extended to journeymen dyers, journeymen hot pressers, 
 and all other persons employed in the woollen manufactures of 
 this kingdom, and also to journeymen, servants, workmen, and 
 
 (h) For twenty-one days, fixed by 
 this statute, eight davs were substi¬ 
 tuted by 17 Geo. 3, c. 66, s. 7; and 
 punishment made same as for em¬ 
 bezzlement. 
 
 (0 This section provided for the 
 punishment of person employed pro¬ 
 curing or permitting himself to be 
 
 employed for another master before 
 completing work. This provision 
 was repealed and fresh provisions 
 substituted by 17 Geo. 3, c. 56, s. 8, 
 in its turn repealed by the Conspi¬ 
 racy and Protection of Property Act, 
 1875. 
 
 (^) See ante, p. 210. 
 
27 Geo. 2, c. 7. 
 
 217 
 
 labourers employed in the making of felts or hats, and in the 
 manufactures of silk, mohair, furr, hemp, flax, linnen, cotton, 
 fustian, iron and leather, or any manufactures made up of 
 wooll, furr, hemp, flax, cotton, mohair, or silk, or of any of the 
 said materials mixed up one with another;” and enacts that the 
 said several before-recited clauses in the act 12 Anne, and all 
 the provisions, regulations, pains, penalties and forfeitures 
 therein contained shall “ extend and be construed, deemed and 
 adjudged to extend to journeymen dyers, journeymen hot 
 pressers, and all other persons whatsoever employed in or 
 about any of the woollen manufactures of this kingdom, and 
 also to journeymen, servants, workmen, and labourers, and all 
 other persons whatsoever employed in the making of felts or 
 hats, or in or about any of the manufactures of silk, mohair, 
 furr, hemp, flax, linnen, cotton, fustian, iron or leather, or in 
 or about any manufactures made up of wooll, furr, hemp, flax, 
 cotton, mohair, or silk, or of any of the said materials mixed 
 one with another, in as full and ample manner as the said pro¬ 
 visions, regulations, pains, penalties and forfeitures are by the 
 said last-mentioned act declared to extend to the several and 
 respective persons therein named.” 
 
 27 Geo. 2, c. 7. 
 
 An Act for the more effectual preventing of Frauds and 
 Abuses committed by Persons employed in the Manufac¬ 
 ture of Clocks and Watches, 
 
 Sect. 1. Recites “that many persons employed in the making 
 of clocks and watches have of late been guilty of divers frauds 
 and abuses by purloining, imbezzilling, secreting, selling, pawn¬ 
 ing, or otherwise unlawfully disposing of the clocks and 
 watches, or such parts thereof, or the materials for making the 
 same with which they have been intrusted, to the great loss of 
 their employers ; and the laws in being have been found in- 
 sufiicient to prevent such frauds and abuses, and to punish the 
 offender and enacts, “ that if any person or persons whatso¬ 
 ever, who shall be hired or employed by any person or persons 
 practising the trade or trades of clockinaking or watchmaking, 
 or any part or branch, or parts or branches of such trade or 
 trades, to make, provide, alter, repair or clean any clock or 
 clocks, watch or watches, or any part or parts of a clock or 
 clocks, watch or watches, or be intrusted by any person 
 or persons practising the said trade or trades, with any gold, 
 silver, or other metal or material, to be, or that shall be, in the 
 whole or in part wrought or manufactured for any part or parts 
 of a clock or clocks, watch or watches, or any diamond or 
 other precious stone, to be, or that shall be, set or fixed in or 
 
218 
 
 the labour laws. 
 
 about any clock or clocks, watch or watches, shall . . . 
 
 nurloin imbezzil, secrete, sell, pawn, exchange or otherwise 
 unlawfully dispose of any clock or watch, or any part or parts 
 of any clock or watch, or any gold, silver or other metal or 
 material, or any part thereof, or any diamond or other precious 
 stone, with which such person or persons shall be intrusted by 
 any person or persons practising the said trade or trades, or 
 any part or branch, or parts or branches of such trade or 
 trades, and shall be thereof convicted [&c.] before any one or 
 more justice or justices of the peace of the county [&c.] where 
 such offence shall be committed, or where the person or per¬ 
 sons so charged shall reside or inhabit . . • every such 
 
 offender shall for the first offence forfeit twenty pounds” [the 
 section then provides for the enforcement, and for a second or 
 other subsequent offence]. 
 
 Sect. 2. Penalty for buying, receiving or taking, by way of 
 gift, pawn, pledge, sale or exchange, or in any other manner, 
 any of the goods or materials aforesaid, knowing the same to 
 be purloined or embezzilled, and for second or subsequent 
 oifence. 
 
 vSect. 3. Appeal to quarter sessions. 
 
 Sect. 4. Form of conviction. 
 
 Sect. 5. Warrants for apprehending offenders. 
 
 30 Geo. 2, c. 12. 
 
 An Act to amend an Act made in the Twenty-ninth Year 
 of the reign of his present Majesty, intituled An Act 
 to render more effectual an Act passed in the Twelfth 
 Year of the Reign of his late Majesty King George, to 
 prevent unlawful Combinations of Workmen employed 
 in the Woollen Manufactures, and for better Payment 
 of their Wages; and also an Act passed in the 
 Thirteenth Year of the Reign of his said late Majesty, 
 for the better Regulation of the Woollen Manufacture, 
 and for preveniinq Disputes among the Persons con¬ 
 cerned therein; and for limiting a time for prosecuting 
 for the Forfeiture appointed by the aforesaid Act in 
 case of Payment of the Workmens Wages in any other 
 manner than in Money ” (/). 
 
 The only section of this act, if any, capable of being enforced, 
 is sect. 4, which enacts that “if any clothier or maker of any 
 
 (0 Although the act recited in the repealed by the Statute Law Revi- 
 title (29 Geo. 2, c. 33) was wholly sion Act, 1867, that repeal does not 
 
14 Geo. 3, c. 25. 
 
 219. 
 
 mixed, medley or white broad cloth, shall refuse or neglect to 
 pay to the weaver or weavers employed by him or them, his 
 or their wages or price agreed on in money within two days 
 next after the work shall be performed and delivered to such 
 employer, or some person on his behalf (the same being de¬ 
 manded of such employer or person employed on his behalf), 
 then, and in every such case, every such clothier or person so 
 offending shall for every such offence forfeit and pay the sum 
 of forty shillings, to be recovered in such manner and form, 
 and by such ways and means, and to be paid, applied and dis¬ 
 posed of as the several penalties and forfeitures incurred and 
 made payable by the said recited act made in the twenty-ninth 
 year of his present majesty’s reign, are thereby directed and 
 appointed to be recovered and applied.” 
 
 It is unnecessary to consider the effect on this section of the 
 repeal of the act referred to, 29 Geo. 2, c. 33, as stated 
 in the note, for practically there is no necessity to resort to 
 this mode of recovering wages. It is possible, however, that 
 resort may be had to this section (which is printed in the 
 revised edition of the Statutes) in certain contingencies. 
 
 5 Geo. 3, c. 51. 
 
 Act for repealing several Laws relatmg to the Manu¬ 
 facture of Woollen Cloth in the County of Yorkf ^c. 
 
 This act, which was repealed in part by 6 Geo. 3, c. 23, 
 ss. 14, 27, and by 49 Geo. 3, c. 109, s. 2, and sect. 20 of which 
 is repealed by the Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 
 1875, s. 17, ante, p. 204, even assuming that any part of it is 
 practically in force, is too local to admit of further notice 
 here. 
 
 14 Geo. 3, c. 25. 
 
 An Act for the more effectual preventing Frauds and 
 Embezzlements by Persons employed in the Woollen 
 Manufactory (m). 
 
 Sect. 1. Recites that “frauds are frequently committed and 
 embezzlements made by persons employed in the woollen manu- 
 
 appear to have had the effect of re- Will. 4, c. 36 ; and sect. 1 was re¬ 
 pealing this act. So much however pealed by the Statute Law Revision 
 of the 30 Geo. 2, c. 12, as regulates Act, 1867. 
 
 or relates to the payment of the (m) No part of this statute has 
 wages of workmen in goods or by been repealed, 
 way of truck was repealed by 1 & 2 
 
220 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 factory, particularly by their secreting, selling, or otherwise 
 illegally disposing of the working tools and materials they are 
 intrusted with, by the weavers taking the biers out of the 
 chains and withholding part of the woof or abb yarn delivered 
 to them, and by the pickers, scribblers and spinners embezzling 
 part of the wool and yarn entrusted to them, and also by 
 damping, steaming and watering the residue in order to make 
 up the deficiency in weight occasioned by such embezzlement, 
 and also by taking off, picking or cutting out the list, forrel or 
 other marks of any piece or pieces of cloth, by means whereof 
 tlie clothiers sustain great damage and loss ; and whereas the 
 abuses committed in the clothing manufacture by persons 
 carrying, collecting, buying and receiving from the labourers 
 employed in that manufacture ends of yarn, wefts, thrurabs, 
 short yarn and other refuse of cloth, drugget and other woollen 
 goods, and goods mixed with wool, have been found very detri¬ 
 mental to the said manufactures; and the said frauds and abuses 
 are frequently carried on and committed so secretly that the 
 laws now in being are by no means sufficient to prevent the 
 same, whereby persons employed in the said manufacture are 
 tempted and encouraged to embezzle, purloin, secrete, sell and 
 detain the goods and materials with which they are intrusted 
 by the clothiers and other woollen manufacturers, so that the 
 cloth made comes out defective in the substance, perfection and 
 excellence intended by the clothier, to the discredit of the manu¬ 
 facturer and injury of the publick and enacts, “that if any 
 j)icker, scribbler, spinner or weaver, or other person or persons 
 whatsoever who shall be any ways employed in or about the 
 making or manufacturing of woollen cloth, or in preparing 
 materials for that purpose, shall not return all working tools or 
 implements, wool, yarn, chain, woof or abb delivered out to be 
 -worked up and manufactured, and all such materials as afore¬ 
 said, wherewith lie, she or they shall be intrusted, or give a 
 satisfactory account touching the same respectively to his, her 
 or their employer, when thereunto required by the person or 
 jicrsons by whom he, she or they shall have been so intrusted, 
 or by his or their known clerk or servant, or shall fraudulently 
 steam, damp or water the wool or yarn delivered to him, her 
 or them to be worked up, or if any person or persons shall take 
 off, cut or pick out the list, forrel or other mark of any piece 
 of cloth, and shall be convicted of any such offence before some 
 justice or justices of the peace for the county [8cc.] where the 
 person or persons so offending shall reside . . . every such 
 jierson so convicted shall be committed to the house of correc¬ 
 tion for the space of one calendar mouth.” 
 
 Sect. 2. Power to justice, where persons abscond and sell 
 tools or materials, or fraudulently buy or receive the same, to 
 issue warrant to constable to search; and constable may seize 
 
14 Geo. 3, c. 44. 
 
 221 
 
 tools, &c. and bring the persons in whose custody they are 
 found before the same or other justice. 
 
 Sect. 3. Justice to allow a reasonable time for producing 
 persons or witnesses, and accused person to enter into recogni¬ 
 zances, with or without sureties, to appear. 
 
 Sect. 4. Justice upon information may issue warrant to search 
 for and seize refuse of cloth, and to bring persons in whose 
 possession found before him or another justice. 
 
 Sect. 5. Offenders, on a second offence, to be dealt with by 
 justices at quarter sessions in a summary way, and liable to 
 three months’ imprisonment. 
 
 Sect. 6. If previous conviction at quarter sessions, offender 
 liable to six months’ imprisonment and whipping. 
 
 Sect. 7. Appeal to quarter sessions from summary convic¬ 
 tion. 
 
 Sect. 8. Form of conviction. 
 
 Sect. 9. Conviction to be returned to sessions. 
 
 Sect. 10. Information for offences to be within three months. 
 
 14 Geo. 3, c. 44. • 
 
 An Act to amend an Act made in the Twenty-second Year 
 of the Reign of his late Majesty King George the Second, 
 intituled An Act for the more effectual preventing of 
 Frauds and Abuses committed by Persons employed in 
 the Manufacture of Hats, and in the Woollen, Linen, 
 Fustian, Cotton, Iron, Leather, Fur, Hemp, Flax, 
 Mohair ajid Silk Manufactures, and for preventing 
 unlawful Combinations of Journeymen Dyers and 
 Journeymen Hot Pressers, and of all Persons em¬ 
 ployed in the said several Manufactures, and for the 
 better Payment of their Wages ^\n). 
 
 Sect. 1. Reciting that the punishments inflicted by the act 
 22 Geo. 2, c. 27, for reeling false or short yarn, were too severe, 
 on which account offenders went frequently unpunished, and 
 many honest, industrious persons were deterred from spinning, 
 repealed so much of the recited act as subjected any person to 
 punishment for reeling false or short yarn (o). 
 
 (n) See the recited act 22 Geo. 2, 
 c. 27, ante, p. 215, and note (/). 
 This act (14 Geo. 3, c. 44) made no 
 provision for the recovery of penal¬ 
 ties, but this defect was remedied 
 by 15 Geo. 3, c. 14. 
 
 (o) This section (1) was repealed 
 by the Statute Law Revision Act, 
 1871, but it is necessary to refer to 
 it to render the rest of the act in¬ 
 telligible. The introduction of 
 steam power and machinery and 
 
222 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 Sect. 2. Penalties for reeling false or short yarn, not ex¬ 
 ceeding 205. and not less than 5s .; for the second offence, not 
 exceeding 5l. and not less than 2/., and for a third or other 
 offence, one month’s hard labour, and to be whipped. 
 
 Sect. 3. Form of conviction. 
 
 Sect. 4. Copy of conviction to be delivered to any applicant. 
 
 Sect. 5. Appeal to quarter sessions. 
 
 17 Geo. 3, c. 11. 
 
 An Act for more effectually preventing Frauds and 
 Abuses committed by Persons employed in the Manu¬ 
 factures of combing Wool, Worsted Yarn and Goods 
 made from JVorsted in the Counties of York, Lancaster 
 and Chester, 
 
 Sect. 1. Recites 22 Geo. 2, c. 27 (p), 14 Geo. 3, c. AA {q\ 
 and 15 Geo. 3, c. 14 (r), and reciting that “the good purposes 
 of the said laws have been greatly frustrated, from the manu¬ 
 facturers of combing wool, Avorsted yarn and goods made from 
 worsted, being unwilling to expose themselves singly to the 
 loss attending the resentment of the spinners and workpeople, 
 by prosecuting them for offences against the said acts and that 
 “ this important branch of the woollen manufactory will be 
 greatly prejudiced thereby, unless the manufacturers are enabled 
 jointly to carry these laAvs into effectual execution.” 
 
 The section then provides for a general meeting of the manu¬ 
 facturers of the three counties, and the election of a committee, 
 and the appointment of inspectors. Sects. 2 to 7 relate to 
 meetings and poAvers of committal. Sect. 8 empowers justices 
 of West Riding to appoint inspectors of AA^orsted yarn, and by 
 sect. 9 committee to station inspectors and alloAv them salaries. 
 Sect. 10 requires insjAectors to use diligence in prosecuting 
 offenders. Sect. 11 contains directions hoAV AAmrsted yarn 
 shall bo reeled, and sects. 12—14 impose penalties for fiilse 
 reeling and on agents and persons for having possession of 
 Avorsted yarn not properly reeled. Sect. 15 provides for the 
 appointment of inspectors on A'acancies by death or removal, 
 and sect. 16 for their punishment for screening offenders from 
 
 other legislation has rendered the 
 act apparently ohsolctc. The re¬ 
 peal of the general penal provisions 
 of master and servant lav'^ may how¬ 
 
 ever cause its occasional use again. 
 ij)) See ante, p. 215. 
 
 Iq) Ante, p. 221. 
 
 (j’) Ante, p. 221. note {n) 
 
17 Geo. 3, c. 55. 
 
 223 
 
 justice ( 5 ). Sect. 20 gives a form of conviction. Sects. 21—22 
 relate to appeal. Sect. 23 proceedings not to be quashed for 
 want of form. Sect. 24. Limitation of actions, general issue 
 and treble costs. Sect. 24 public act. 
 
 17 Geo. 3, c. 55. 
 
 An Aetfor the better regulating the Hat ]\Ianufactorg(t), 
 
 Sect. 2. Master hat makers to employ a jourueymau for 
 every apprentice. 
 
 Sect. 3. Recites 22 Geo. 2, c. 27 (m), requires recognizance on 
 appeal to sessions. 
 
 Sect. 6. Hat maker not to act as a justice of the peace in 
 execution of the act. 
 
 Sect. 7. Act not to repeal 22 Geo. 2, c. 27. 
 
 Sect. 8. Appeal to sessions. 
 
 Sect. 9. Limitation of actions. Sect. 10. Pleading general 
 issue and double costs (a?). 
 
 Sect. 11. Public act. 
 
 (s) Sects. 17,18 and 19 (providing 
 for expenses of the act), and so 
 much as relates to the limitation of 
 actions for anything done in pur¬ 
 suance of the act as to pleading of 
 the general issue, and as to treble 
 costs, repealed by Statute Law 
 Revision Act, 1861. The rest of 
 the act is printed in the revised 
 
 edition of the statutes. 
 
 {t) Part of sect. 3 and sect. 4 
 were repealed by 6 Geo. 4, c. 129; 
 ss. 1 and 5 by Statute Law Revision 
 Act, 1871. The rest of the act is 
 printed in the revised statutes. 
 
 (?0 See ante^ p. 215. 
 
 ( X) Repealed as to double costs, 
 5 & 6 Viet. c. 97, s. 2. 
 
224 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 17 Geo. 3, c. 56. 
 
 An Act for amending and rendering more effectual the 
 several Laws now in being for the more effectual pre^ 
 venting of Frauds and Abuses by Persons employed in 
 the Manufacture of Hats, and in the Woollen, Linen, 
 Fustian, Cotton, Iron, Leather, Fur, Hemp, Flax, 
 Mohair and Silk Manufactures, and also for making 
 Provisions to prevent Frauds by Journeymen Dyers (z/). 
 
 Sect. 1. Recites 22 Geo.2, c. 27, s. 1 {z), ‘‘And whereas it is 
 thought necessary to vary the punishment for the offences 
 hereinbefore recited:” and enacts that so much of the said 
 recited act as prescribes what the punishment shall be in any 
 of the cases before mentioned, or before whom such conviction 
 shall be had, whether for a first offence or a second or any sub¬ 
 sequent offence, shall be repealed ; and instead of inflicting the 
 punishment so directed the justices of the peace before whom 
 the conviction shall be shall commit the person convicted to the 
 liouse of correction or other public prison, there to be kept to 
 hard labour, in the case of a first offence, for any time not less 
 than fourteen days nor more than three months, and in the case 
 of a second or any subsequent offence, for any time not less than 
 three months nor more than six months, and may likewise, for 
 the first or for any subsequent offence, order the person con¬ 
 victed to be once publicly whipped if such additional punish¬ 
 ment shall by the said justice or justices be deemed proper. 
 
 Sect. 2. No person charged with any offence against the 
 22 Geo. 2, c. 27, shall be liable to be convicted unless before 
 two or more justices of the peace for the county, riding, divi¬ 
 sion, city, liberty, town or place where the offence shall be 
 committed ; anything contained in the said recited act to the 
 contrary hereof notwithstanding. 
 
 (//) By fi & 7 Viet. c. 40, so much 
 of the 17 Geo. 3, c. 56, “ as relates 
 to the woollen, linen, cotton, flax, 
 mohair, and silk manufactures, or 
 any of them, or any manufactures 
 whatsoever made of wool, cotton, 
 flax, mohair, or silk materials, 
 whether the same he or he not 
 mixed with each other or with any 
 other materials,” so far as respects 
 ” the manufactures, trades, occupa¬ 
 tions, and employments following 
 (that is to say), the manufacture of 
 woollen, worsted, linen, cotton, flax, 
 mohair, or silk materials in, on, 
 {>r by the stocking-frame, warp- 
 inachine, or cny other machine em¬ 
 
 ployed in the manufacture of frame¬ 
 work, knitted or looped fabrics, and 
 every trade, occupation, operation, 
 or employment whatsoever eon- 
 nccted with or incidental to the 
 manufacture of stockings, gloves 
 and other articles of hosiery,” was 
 repealed (6 & 7 Viet. c. 40, ss. I 
 and 34). The 17 Geo. 3, c. 56, 
 extended however to Scotland, and 
 the repeal only applies to England 
 (see 6 & 7 Viet. c. 40, s. 33). 
 
 The 38 & 39 Viet. c. 86, s. 17, re¬ 
 pealed ss. 8 & 9 of 17 Geo. 3, c. 56 
 (see ante, p. 202). 
 
 (r) See ante, p. 215. 
 
17 Geo. 3, c. 56. 
 
 225 
 
 Sect. 3. Recites 22 Geo. 2, c. 27, s. 2, and that “it is 
 thought necessary to increase the pecuniary penalties directed 
 by the said recited act for the said offences last mentioned, and 
 to vary the application of the said penalties for the same, and 
 further to change the consequences of non-payment.” And 
 repeals so much of the 22 Geo. 2, c. 27, “ as enacts what the 
 penalty or punishment shall be for such buying, receiving, 
 accepting or taking by way of gift, pawn, pledge, sale or ex¬ 
 change, or in any other manner, as is described by the said act 
 in the terms aforesaid, and how such penalty shall be applied, 
 and what punishment shall be inflicted in case of non-pay¬ 
 ment and instead thereof enacts that “ the penalty for the 
 first offence shall be any sum not more than forty pounds nor 
 less than twenty pounds, as the justices before whom the con¬ 
 viction shall be shall judge to be most proper; and every such 
 pecuniary penalty shall he applied, under the direction of the 
 justices before whom the conviction shall be, in manner fol¬ 
 lowing ; (that is to say,) in the first place, the expenses of the 
 prosecution shall be thereout defrayed, and then such satisfac¬ 
 tion shall be made thereout to the party or parties injured as 
 the said justices shall think proper, and afterwards so much of 
 the said penalty shall be paid to the informer or informers as 
 such justices shall think fit, not exceeding in any case ten 
 pounds, and the remainder, if any, shall be paid and distributed 
 to and amongst the poor of the parish, town or place where the 
 conviction shall be, or for the use of such public charity or 
 charities as such justices shall appoint.” (The remainder of 
 section provides for enforcement of penalties.) 
 
 Sect. 4. Provides for quarter sessions dealing with second 
 offences. 
 
 Sect. 5. Recites that “ many frauds are practised in respect 
 to such materials as aforesaid, by persons who sell them 
 knowing them to have been purloined or embezzledand 
 enacts that “ if any person shall sell, pawn, pledge, exchange or 
 otherwise unlawfully dispose of, or ofler to sell, pawn, pledge, 
 exchange, or otherwise unlawfully dispose of, any such mate¬ 
 rials as aforesaid, whether wrought or unwrought, mixed or 
 unmixed, knowing them to have been purloined or embezzled, 
 every such person lawfully convicted shall be liable to the same 
 punishment as he or she would be liable to by virtue of this act 
 on being convicted of receiving purloined or embezzled mate¬ 
 rials knowing them to have been purloined or embezzled.” 
 
 Sect. 6. Recites that “ such materials as aforesaid which 
 have been purloined or embezzled are frequently received by 
 persons knowing the same to have been so purloined or em¬ 
 bezzled, and such materials being afterwards worked up or 
 otherwise disposed of renders it difficult to convict such 
 offenders;” and enacts that “ when any person or persons shall 
 
 Q 
 
 D. 
 
226 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 be brought or charged upon oath before any two or more 
 justices of the peace, by virtue of this act, with being suspected 
 of or with having purloined or embezzled or with having re¬ 
 ceived any such materials as aforesaid, whether the same be 
 wrought or unwrought, mixed or unmixed, knowing the same 
 to have been either purloined or embezzled or received from 
 some person or persons not entitled to dispose thereof, and it shall 
 be made appear upon the oath or (being of the people called 
 quakers) upon the affirmation of one or more credible witness 
 or w'itnesses, to the satisfaction of such justices, that such 
 person or persons hath or have purloined or embezzled or hath 
 or have received any such materials as aforesaid, knowing the 
 same to have been purloined or embezzled or received from 
 some person or persons not entitled to dispose thereof, it shall 
 and may be lawful for such justices, or for the justices at their 
 general or general quarter sessions of the peace, and they are 
 hereby respectively authorized and empowered (if they shall 
 think fit) to convict such person or persons of having purloined 
 or embezzled or of having received such materials as aforesaid, 
 knowing the same to have been purloined or embezzled or 
 received from some person or persons not entitled to dispose 
 thereof, although no proof shall be given to whom such mate¬ 
 rials belong; and the person or persons so convicted shall for 
 every such ofifence be subject to such and the like penalties and 
 ])unishmcnts, at the discretion of such justices respectively, as 
 persons convicted of buying or receiving any such materials as 
 aforesaid, knowing the same to have been purloined or em¬ 
 bezzled, are by this act subject and liable to.” 
 
 Sect. 7. Recites 22 Geo. 2, c. 27, s. 7 {ante, p. 215), and 
 substitutes eight for twenty-one days as the time allowed for 
 returning work. 
 
 Sect. 8. Repealed by 38 & 39 Viet. c. 86, s. 17, a7ite, p. 202. 
 
 Sect. 9. Recites that “ it frequently happens that persons 
 receive the said materials in fictitious names, in order to be 
 manufactured, and that persons receive such materials in their 
 own names, in order to be manufactured by themselves, and 
 afterwards deliver the same to others to be manufactured, with¬ 
 out tlio knowledge or consent of the owners thereof, and that 
 carriers, or other persons employed to deliver materials to 
 workmen to bo j)reparcd or manufactured, do designedly 
 " deliver such materials to other persons than those intended by 
 the owner of such materials and enacts that “ if any person 
 shall receive any of the aforesaid materials in a fictitious name, 
 in order to bo manufactured, or if any person shall receive in 
 his or hor own name any of the said materials, in order to be 
 nianiifactured by liiinself or lierself, and afterwards deliver the 
 same, or any part thereof, to any other person to be manu- 
 actuiod (without the consent of tJio owner thereof), or if any 
 
17 Geo. 3, c. 56. 
 
 227 
 
 carrier, or other person employed to deliver any such materials 
 to any workman to be prepared or wrought up, shall designedly 
 deliver the same to any other person than the person to whom 
 such materials were ordered or intended to be delivered by the 
 owner thereof, all and every person and persons offending in 
 any of the cases aforesaid shall for every such offence be liable 
 to prosecution, in the same manner and to the same punishment 
 as is by this act directed in respect to persons taking in any of 
 the said materials in order to work-up, and afterwards wilfully 
 neglecting or refusing the performance of their work for the 
 space of time aforesaid.” 
 
 Sect. 10. Provides for search warrants and arrest of persons 
 in whose possession materials are found. 
 
 Sect. 11. Arrest of suspected persons carrying property 
 supposed to have been purloined. 
 
 Sect. 12. Justices may, at the request of persons brought 
 before them, appoint a reasonable time to produce the persons 
 entitled to dispose of the materials, &c., on the persons making 
 such request entering into a recognizance, &c. 
 
 Sect. 13. On any person being convicted of a misdemeanor 
 as aforesaid the materials so found shall be deposited in the 
 hands of the churchwardens, &c.; and if any person can prove 
 his property in the said materials, they shall be delivered to 
 him, on paying the charges of removing, &c., but if no person 
 prove his property in them, they shall be sold, &c. 
 
 Sect. 14. “Every person deemed and adjudged guilty of a 
 misdemeanor, in having in his or her possession any materials 
 suspected to be purloined or embezzled, and not producing the 
 party or parties, being duly entitled to dispose of the same, of 
 whom he or she bought or received the same, nor giving a 
 satisfactory account how he or she came by the same, or of a 
 misdemeanor in having, carrying or conveying of the said 
 materials suspected to be purloined or embezzled, and not pro¬ 
 ducing the party or parties, being duly entitled to dispose of 
 the same, of whom he or she bought or received the same, nor 
 any credible witness to testify upon oath or (being of the people 
 called quakers) upon solemn affirmation the sale or delivery 
 thereof, nor giving a satisfactory account how he or she came 
 by the same (as the case shall be), shall for every such mis¬ 
 demeanor forfeit, for the first offence, the sum of twenty pounds, 
 and for the second offence the sum of thirty pounds, and for 
 every subsequent offence the sum of forty pounds.” [The rest 
 of the section relates to the enforcement and application of 
 penalties.] 
 
 Sect. 15. Recites that “it sometimes happens, by occasion of 
 the very long detention of such materials as aforesaid, delivered 
 out to journeymen or other persons employed to work up the 
 same, it cannot be known to the master or owners of such 
 Q2 
 
228 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 materials whether the same may have been purloined or 
 embezzled, or whether the said materials are wholly or in part 
 wrouo-ht or begun to be wrought, or in what state or condition 
 such ^materials may be;” and for remedy whereof enacts 
 “ that it shall be lawful for the owner or owners of any such 
 materials, from time to time, as occasion shall require, to de¬ 
 mand entrance, and enter, at all seasonable hours in the day¬ 
 time, into the shops or outhouses of any person or persons 
 employed by him or them to work-up any of the said materials, 
 or other place or places where the work shall be carried on, 
 and there to inspect the state and condition of such materials.” 
 [Penalty for refusal.] 
 
 Sect. 16. All penalties in the act 22 Geo. 2 and in this act, 
 relating to the said materials, shall be applicable to the tools, 
 &c. with which any person is entrusted for manufacturing the 
 same. 
 
 Sect. 17. Recites that “journeymen dyers, servants and ap¬ 
 prentices frequently abuse the trust reposed in them, by dyeing 
 goods for their own profit, without the consent of their masters,” 
 and enacts that “ if any person hired, retained, or employed as a 
 journeyman dyer, or as a servant or apprentice, in the dyeing 
 of any felt or hat, or any woollen, linen, fustian, cotton, leather, 
 fur, flax, mohair, or silk materials, Avhether the same shall be 
 w'rought or unwrought, or shall be mixed or unmixed with 
 other of the said materials, shall, without the consent of the 
 master, person or persons, by whom such journeyman, servant 
 or apprentice, shall be hired, retained, or employed, wilfully 
 dye any of the said materials, whether wrought or unwrought, 
 or mixed or unmixed with other of the said materials, or with¬ 
 out such consent shall wilfully receive any such materials as 
 aforesaid, for the purpose of dyeing the same, whether the 
 same shall be dyed or prepared for dyeing, he or she so guilty 
 of either of the said ofiences shall for the first offence forfeit 
 the sum of ten shillings, and for the second offence the sum of 
 twenty shillings, and for every subsequent offence the sum of 
 forty shillings ; or if any person shall procure any such mate- 
 l ials as aforesaid to be dyed by any person so hired, retained, 
 or employed as a journeyman, servant or apprentice, without 
 the consent of his or her master or employer, or shall offer any 
 such materials to any such journeyman, servant or apprentice, 
 for the purpose aforesaid, he or she so offending, being thereof 
 lawfully convicted by the oath or (being of the people called 
 quakers) affirmation of one or more credible witness or wit¬ 
 nesses, before two or more justices of the peace for the county, 
 riding, division, city, libertj'-, town, or place where the offence 
 shall be committed, shall for the first offence forfeit the sum of 
 five shillings, and for the second offence the sum of twenty 
 shillings, and for every subsequent offence the sum of four 
 
28 Geo. 3, c. 55. 
 
 229 
 
 pounds ; and each of the said penalties shall be paid to the in¬ 
 former or informers.” [Imprisonment in case of nonpa 3 "ment.] 
 Sect 18. Repealed by Statute Law Revision Act, 1861. 
 
 Sect. 19. Repealed by 38 & 39 Viet. c. 86, s. 17, 
 
 p. 202. 
 
 Sect. 20. Appeal against orders and judgment of justices 
 under act, or under 12 Geo. 1, c. 34, or 22 Geo. 2, c. 27. 
 
 Sects. 21, 22. Form of and filing convictions against act, or 
 against 22 Geo. 2, c. 27. 
 
 Sect. 23. No repeal of former law, except as expressly pro¬ 
 vided. 
 
 Sect. 24. Repealed, Statute Law Revision Act, 1871. 
 
 Sect. 25. Limitation of actions, general issue, and costs. 
 
 28 Geo. 3, c. 55. 
 
 An Act for the better and more effectual Protection of 
 Stocking Frames, and the Machines or Engines 
 annexed thereto, or used thereivith; and for the Pu~ 
 nishment of Persons destroying or injuring of such 
 Stocking Frames, Machines, or Engines, and the 
 Framework-knitted Pieces, Stockings, and other Articles 
 and Goods used and made in the Hosiery or Frame¬ 
 work-knitted Manufactory; or breaking or destroying 
 any Machinery contained in any Mill or Mills used, or 
 any way employed in preparing or spinning of Wool 
 or Cotton for the Use of the Stocking Frame. 
 
 Sect. 1. Recites that “ the frames for making of framework- 
 knitted pieces, stockings, and other articles and goods in the 
 hosiery or framework-knitted manufactory, are very valuable 
 and expensive machines, and generally the property of the 
 hosier or manufacturer, who lets the same to hire to his work¬ 
 men, or framework-knitters ; and it hath frequently happened 
 that the hosier, or manufacturer, being the owner or employer 
 of such frame or frames, and having so put and let the same 
 out to hire, and wanting, for the accommodation of his trade 
 and business, to take and remove such frame or frames from 
 the use and possession of one workman into the hands and cus¬ 
 tody of another, and having for such purpose given the cus¬ 
 tomary and usual notice to the workman in whose hands or 
 custody such frame was, so to deliver up the same, such work¬ 
 man hath wilfully detained and withheld the same, and some¬ 
 times absolutely and unlawfully sold and disposed thereof, to 
 the great grievance, inconvenience, and loss of such hosier or 
 manufacturer.” . . . “ That if any framework-knitter or frame- 
 
230 
 
 the labour laws. 
 
 work-koltters, who shall or may rent or take by the hire, any 
 stockin«r frame or frames, either with or without any machine 
 or eno-ine thereto annexed, or therewith to be employed, of and 
 from^any person or persons whomsoever, shall at any time, 
 from and after the passing of this act, refuse to yield up and 
 re-deliver such frame or frames, with the machine or engine 
 therewith let (if any such there shall be) to the person or per¬ 
 sons of whom he or they shall or may so rent the same, having 
 received from such person or persons fourteen days previous 
 notice for such purpose, then, and in every such case, the person 
 so offending, being thereof lawfully convicted by the oath or (if 
 the owner or employer thereof be of the people called quakers) 
 solemn affirmation of the owner or employer of such frame or 
 frames, or by the oath or affirmation of any other credible wit¬ 
 ness or witnesses, before any one or more justice or justices of 
 the peace of the county, riding, division, city, liberty, town, or 
 place, where such offence shall be committed, or where the 
 person or persons so charged shall reside or inhabit (which 
 oath or affirmation the said justice or justices is and are hereby 
 impowered and required to administer), the person or persons 
 so offending shall, for every such offence, forfeit the sum of 
 twenty shillings to and for the use of the poor of the parish 
 where such offence shall be committed.” [Punishment in default.] 
 
 Sect. 2. “That if any person so renting or taking to hire 
 any stocking frame, with or without any such machine or 
 engine as aforesaid, shall at any time, from and after the passing 
 oAhis act, sell or otherwise unlawfully dispose of any such 
 stocking frame, or the machine or engine therewith let (if any 
 such there shall be), without the consent of the owner or owners 
 thereof, every such offender, being thereof lawfully convicted 
 upon any indictment to be found against him, shall suffer soli¬ 
 tary imprisonment in the common gaol or house of correction 
 of the county, riding, division, city, liberty, town or place 
 wherein such offence shall have been committed, without bad 
 or mainprize, for a space not less than three calendar months, 
 nor exceeding twelve calendar months.” 
 
 Sect. 3. “ If any person or persons shall \>dlfully and know'- 
 ingly receive or purchase any such stocking frame, machine 
 or^engine so sold or unlawfully disposed of as aforesaid, con¬ 
 trary % the true intent and meaning of this act, and shall 
 thereof be lawfully convicted on any indictment to be found 
 against him or them, every such offender or offenders shall be 
 subject to such and the like punishment as by this act is in¬ 
 flicted or provided to be inflicted on such person so selling or 
 unlawfully disposing of any such stocking frame, machine or 
 engine as aforesaid.” 
 
 Sect. 4. Repealed, Statute Law Revision Act, 187L 
 
39 & 40 Geo. 3, c. 77. 
 
 231 
 
 32 Geo. 3, c. 56. 
 
 An Act for preventing the Counterfeiting of Certificates of 
 
 the Character of Servants, 
 
 Sects. 1 to 6. Peoalty of 201. on any person personating a 
 master, &c. or giving a false character to a servant; or assert¬ 
 ing that a servant has been hired for a period of time or in a 
 station; or was discharged at any other time, or had not been 
 hired in any previous service, contrary to the fact; or any per¬ 
 son offering himself as a servant, pretending to have served 
 where he has not served, or with a false certificate, or who 
 shall alter any certificate; or who having been before in service 
 shall pretend not to have been in such service. 
 
 Sect. 7. Repealed, Statute Law Revision Act, 1871. 
 
 Sect. 8. Offender discovering accomplice before information, 
 indemnified. 
 
 Sect. 9. Conviction. 
 
 Sect. 10. Appeal to quarter sessions. 
 
 39 & 40 Geo. 3, c. 77. 
 
 An Act for the Security of Collieries and Mines, and for 
 the better Regulation of Colliers and Miners («). 
 
 Sect. 4. “ And whereas the owners and lessees of coal, iron 
 stone, or iron ore, contracting to get the same raised by weight, 
 are often under the necessity of advancing money to the collier.-' 
 and miners upon the measure thereof in heaps at or near the 
 colliery or mine work before the same can be carried to be 
 weighed, and great frauds are practised in the walling and 
 stacking of such coal, iron stone, and iron ore, by which the 
 colliers and miners obtain money beyond what they earn or are 
 able to repay, and miners often defraud each other by convey¬ 
 ing away iron stone from one heap into another; be it therefore 
 further enacted, that if any person or persons shall w^all or 
 stack, or cause to be walled or stacked, any coal, iron stone, 
 or iron ore in any false or fraudulent manner, with an intent to 
 deceive his or their employer or employers, or if any person 
 or persons shall take or remove any iron stone or iron ore with 
 
 {a) Sections 1, 2, 5, and 7 of this Viet. c. 86, s. 17 (see ante, p. 202). 
 act were expressly repealed by the Sects. 6,7, 8, and 10 are immaterial 
 Statute Law Revision Act, 1871; in relation to sect. 4. 
 sect. 3 is repealed by the 38 & 39 
 
232 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 intent to defraud the person or persons who shall have raised 
 the same, and shall be thereof convicted, either by the con¬ 
 fession of the party offending or upon the oath of one or more 
 credible witness or witnesses, before any one or more justice or 
 justices of the peace for the county wherein such offence shall 
 have been committed, it shall and may be lawful for such 
 justice or justices to commit any such person to the house of 
 correction or common gaol for the same county, for any time 
 not exceeding three months.” 
 
 Sect. 9. “No person shall be prosecuted for any offence 
 against this act unless such prosecution be begun within nine 
 calendar months after the offence committed.” 
 
 43 Geo. S, c. 86. 
 
 An Act to frevent Unlaivful Combinations of Workmen, 
 Artificers, Journeymen and Labourers in Ireland, and 
 for other purposes relating thereto. 
 
 Sects. 1 to 5 and sect. 10, repealed by 6 Geo. 4, c. 129, s. 2. 
 Sect. 8 repealed by 9 Geo. 4, c. 53. Sects. 15 and 16, and 
 also part of sect. 20 and schedule, repealed by Statute Law 
 Kevision Act, 1872. 
 
 Sects. 6 and 7 have not been repealed. Sect. 6 makes work¬ 
 men refusing to work, or absenting from work, or returniug 
 w’ork before it is finished, liable to imprisonment for six months, 
 or for three months with hard labour. This section ought not 
 to be treated by magistrates as in force. Sect. 7 imposes a 
 penalty on masters knowingly employing a workman already 
 employed by another. 
 
 5 Geo. 4, c. 96. 
 
 An Act to consolidate and amend the Laws relative to the 
 Arbitration of Disputes between Masters and Workmen. 
 
 [See this act in Lovesy’s Law of Arbitrations between 
 Masters and Workmen.] 
 
1 & 2 Will. 4, c. 37 (truck act.; 
 
 233 
 
 1 & 2 Will. 4, c. 37. 
 
 An Act to prohibit the Payment^ in certain Trades, of 
 Wages in Goods, or otherivise than in the current Coin 
 of the Realm. 
 
 Contracts for the hiring of Artificers must he made in the 
 current Coin of the Realm. '\ —Sect. 1. Whereas it is uecessary 
 to prohibit the payment, in certain trades, of wages in goods, 
 or otherwise than in the current coin of the realm ; be it there¬ 
 fore enacted by the king’s most excellent Majesty, by and Avith 
 the advice and consent of the lords spiritual and temporal, and 
 Commons, in this present parliament assembled, and by the 
 authority of the same. That in all contracts hereafter to be 
 made for the hiring of any artificer in any of the trades herein¬ 
 after enumerated, or for the performance by any artificer of any 
 labour in any of the said trades, the wages of such artificer 
 shall be made payable in the current coin of this realm only, 
 and not otherwise; and that if in any such contract the whole 
 or any part of such wages shall be made payable in any manner 
 other than in the current coin aforesaid, such contract shall be 
 and is hereby declared illegal, null, and void. 
 
 And must not contain any Stipulations as to the manner 
 in which the Wages shall be edcpended.'\ — %c^ct. 2. And be it 
 further enacted, that if in any contract hereafter to be made 
 between any artificer in any of the trades hereinafter enume¬ 
 rated, and his employer, any provision shall be made directly 
 or indirectly respecting the place where, or the manner in 
 which, or the person or persons with whom, the whole or any 
 part of the wages due or to become due to any such artificer 
 shall be laid out or expended, such contract shall be and is 
 hereby declared illegal, null, and void. 
 
 All Wages must be paid to the Workman in Coin-Pay- 
 ment in Goods declared illegal.'] —Sect. 3. And be it further 
 enacted, that the entire amount of the wages earned by or 
 payable to any artificer in any of the trades hereinafter enume¬ 
 rated, in respect of any labour by him done in any such trade, 
 shall be actually paid to such artificer in the current coin of 
 this realm, and not otherwise ; and every payment made to 
 any such artificer by his employer, of or in respect of any such 
 wages, by the delivering to him of goods, or otherwise than in 
 the current coin aforesaid, except as hereinafter mentioned, 
 shall be and is hereby declared illegal, null, and void. 
 
 Artificers may recover Wages, if not paid in the current 
 Coin.] —Sect. 4. And be it further enacted, that every artificer 
 in any of the trades hereinafter enumerated shall be entitled to 
 recover from his employer in any such trade, in the manner by 
 law provided for the recovery of servants’ Avages, or by any 
 
234 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 other lawful ways and means, the whole or so much of the 
 wages earned by such artificer in such trade as shall not have 
 been actually paid to him by such his employer in the current 
 coin of this realm. 
 
 In an Action brought for Wages no Set-off shall be allowed 
 for Goods supplied by the Employer^ or by any Shop in 
 xohich the Employer is mterestedJ] —Sect. 5. And be it further 
 enacted, that in any action, suit, or other proceeding to be 
 hereafter brought or commenced by any such artificer as afore¬ 
 said, against his employer, for the recovery of any sum of 
 money due to any such artificer as the wages of his labour 
 in any of the trades hereinafter enumerated, the defendant shall 
 not be allowed to make any set-off, nor to claim any reduction 
 of the plaintiff’s demand, by reason or in respect of any goods, 
 wares, or merchandize had or received by the plaintiff as or on 
 account of his wages or in reward for his labour, or by reason 
 or in respect of any goods, wares, or merchandize sold, de¬ 
 livered, or supplied to such artificer at any shop or warehouse 
 kept by or belonging to such employer, or in the profits of 
 Avhich such employer shall have any share or interest. 
 
 No Employer shall have any Action against his Artificer 
 for Goods supplied to him on account of Wages.'] —Sect. 6. 
 And be it further enacted, that no employer of any artificer 
 in any of the trades hereinafter enumerated shall have or be 
 entitled to maintain any suit or action in any court of law 
 or equity against any such artificer, for or in respect of any 
 goods, wares, or merchandize sold, delivered, or supplied to 
 any such artificer by any such employer, whilst in his employ¬ 
 ment, as or on account of his wages or reward for his labour, 
 or for or in respect of any goods, wares, or merchandize sold, 
 delivered, or supplied to such artificer at any shop or warehouse 
 kept by or belonging to such employer, or in the profits of 
 which such employer shall have any share or interest. 
 
 If the Artificer or his Wife or Children become charge¬ 
 able to the Parish, the Overseers may recover any Wages 
 earned within the Three preceding Months, and not paid in 
 Cash.] —Sect. 7. And be it further enacted, that if any such 
 artificer as aforesaid, or his wife or wddow, or if any child of 
 any such artificer, not being of the full age of tw^enty-one years, 
 shall become chargeable to any parish or place, and if within 
 the space of three calendar months next before the time when 
 any such charge shall be incurred such artificer shall have 
 earned or have become entitled to receive any wages for any 
 labour by him done in any of the said trades, which wages 
 shall not have been paid to such artificer in the current coin 
 of this realm, it shall be lawful for the overseers or overseer of 
 the poor in such parish or place to recover from the employer 
 of such artificer in wdiose service such labour was done the full 
 
235 
 
 1 & 2 Will. 4, c. 37 (truck act.) 
 
 amount of wages so unpaid, and to proceed for the recovery 
 thereof by all such ways and means as such artificer himself 
 might have proceeded for that purpose; and the amount of the 
 wages which may be so recovered shall be applied in reim¬ 
 bursing such parish or place all costs and charges incurred in 
 respect of the person or persons to become chargeable, and the 
 surplus shall be applied and paid over to such person or per¬ 
 sons. 
 
 J^ot to invalidate the Payment of Wages in Ba?ik JVotes, if 
 Artificer consentsf\ —Sect. 8. Provided always, and be it 
 further enacted, that nothing herein contained shall be con¬ 
 strued to prevent or to render invalid any contract for the pay¬ 
 ment, or any actual payment, to any such artificer as aforesaid, 
 of the whole or any part of his wages, either in the notes of 
 the governor and company of the Bank of England, or in the 
 notes of any person or persons carrying on the business of a 
 banker, and duly licensed to issue such notes in pursuance of 
 the laws relating to his Majesty’s revenue of stamps, or in drafts 
 or orders for the payment of money to the bearer on demand, 
 drawn upon any person or persons carrying on the business of 
 a banker, being duly licensed as aforesaid, within fifteen miles 
 of the place where such drafts or orders shall be so paid, if such 
 artificer shall be freely consenting to receive such drafts or 
 orders as aforesaid, but all payments so made with such con¬ 
 sent as aforesaid, in any such notes, drafts or orders as afore¬ 
 said, shall for the purposes of this act be as valid and effectual 
 as if such payments bad been made in the current coin of the 
 realm. 
 
 Penalties on Employers entering into Contracts hereby de¬ 
 clared illegal.~\ — ^ect. 9. And be it further enacted, that anv 
 employer of any artificer in any of the trades hereinafter enume¬ 
 rated, who shall, by himself or by the agency of any other person 
 or persons, directly or indirectly enter into any contract or make 
 any payment hereby declared illegal, shall for the first offence 
 forfeit a sum not exceeding ten pounds nor less than five pounds, 
 and for the second offence any sum not exceeding twenty pounds 
 nor less than ten pounds, and in case of a third offence any such 
 employer shall be and be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and, 
 being thereof convicted, shall be punished by fine only, at the 
 discretion of the court, so that the fines shall not in any case 
 exceed the sum of one hundred pounds. 
 
 Penalties how to he recovered—Second Offence~Proviso,~\ 
 — Sect. 10. And be it further enacted, that all offences com¬ 
 mitted against this act, and not hereinbefore declared a misde¬ 
 meanor, shall be inquired of and determined, and that all fines 
 and penalties for such offences shall be sued for and recovered by 
 any person or persons who shall sue for the same, before any two 
 justices of the peace having jurisdiction within the county, 
 
236 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 ridiug, city, or place in which the offence shall have been com¬ 
 mitted; and that the amount of the fines, penalties, and other 
 punishments to be inflicted upon any such offenders shall, 
 within the limits hereinbefore prescribed, be in the discretion 
 of such justices, or, in cases of misdemeanor, of the court before 
 which the offence may be tried; and in case of a second offence 
 against this act, it shall be sufficient evidence of the previous 
 conviction and offence, if a certificate, signed by the clerk of the 
 peace or other officer having the custody of the record of such 
 previous conviction, shall be produced before the said justices 
 inquiring of such second offence, in which certificate shall he 
 stated in a compendious form the general nature of the offence 
 for which such previous conviction was had, and the date of 
 such previous conviction ; and so, in like manner, upon the trial 
 of any indictment or information for any such misdemeanor as 
 aforesaid, it shall be sufficient evidence of such second convic¬ 
 tion for a like offence if a certificate thereof, signed by the clerk 
 of the peace or other officer having the custody of the record 
 of such second conviction, in such form as aforesaid, be pro¬ 
 duced to the court and jury: provided always, that no person 
 shall he punished as for a second offence under this act unless 
 ten days at the least shall have intervened between the convic¬ 
 tion of such person for the first and the conviction by such 
 person of the second offence, but each separate offence com¬ 
 mitted by any such person before the expiration of the said 
 term of ten days shall be punishable by a separate penalty, as 
 though the same were a first offence; and that no person shall 
 be punished as for a third offence under this act, unless ten 
 days at the least shall have intervened between the conviction 
 of such person for the second and the conviction by such person 
 of the third offence; hut each separate offence committed by 
 any such person before the expiration of the said term of ten 
 days shall be punishable by a separate penalty, as though the 
 same were a second offence; and that the fourth or any subse¬ 
 quent offence which may be committed by any such person 
 against this act shall he inquired of, tried and punished in the 
 manner hereinbefore provided in respect of any third offence; 
 and that if the person or persons preferring any such informa¬ 
 tion shall not he able or shall not see fit to produce evidence of 
 any such previous conviction or convictions as aforesaid, any 
 such offender as aforesaid shall be punished for each separate 
 offence by him committed against the provisions of this act by 
 an equal number of distinct and separate penalties, as though 
 each of such offences were a first or a second offence, as the 
 case may be; and that no person shall he proceeded against or 
 jniuished as for a second or as for a third offence at the distance 
 of more than two years from the commission of the next pre¬ 
 ceding offence. 
 
237 
 
 1 & 2 Will. 4, c. 37 (truck act.) 
 
 Justicesmay compel the Attendance of TFitnesses.^ —Sect. 11. 
 And be it further enacted, that it shall be lawful for any one 
 justice of the peace, in all cases where any information or com¬ 
 plaint shall be made as aforesaid, and he is hereby authorized 
 and required, at the request in writing of any of the parties to 
 the said complaint, and on the oath of the informer or com¬ 
 plainant, or of the person informed or complained against, that 
 he believes that the attendance of any person or persons as a 
 witness or witnesses will be material to the hearing of such 
 information, to issue his summons to any such person or per¬ 
 sons, witness or witnesses, to* appear and give evidence on oath 
 before himself and such other justice or justices as shall hear 
 and determine such information or complaint, the time and 
 place of hearing and determining the same being specified in 
 the said summons ; and if any person or persons so summoned 
 shall not appear before the said last-mentioned justices at the 
 time or place so specified in the said summons, and shall not 
 offer any reasonable excuse for the default, to the satisfaction 
 of the said last-mentioned justices, or appearing according to 
 the directions of the said summons shall not submit to be 
 examined as a witness or witnesses, then and in every such 
 case it shall be lawful for such last-mentioned justices, and 
 they are hereby authorized, (proof on oath, in the case of any 
 person not appearing according to such summons, having been 
 first made before such last-mentioned justices of the due service 
 of such summons on every such person, by delivering the same 
 to him or to her, or by leaving the same at the usual place of 
 abode of such person, twenty-four hours at the least before 
 the time appointed for such person to appear before such last- 
 mentioned justices,) by warrant under the hands and seals of 
 such last-mentioned justices to commit such person or persons 
 so making default in appearing, or appearing and refusing to 
 give evidence, to some prison within the jurisdiction of the 
 said justices, there to remain without bail or mainprize for any 
 time not exceeding fourteen days, or until such person or 
 persons shall submit to be examined and give evidence. 
 
 Power to levy Penalties by Distress.^ — Sect. 12. And be it 
 further enacted, that all justices of the jDeace shall and are 
 hereby empowered, on the conviction of any person or persons 
 for any ofifence against this act, in default of payment of any 
 penalty or forfeiture, together with the reasonable costs and 
 charges attending such conviction, to cause the same to be 
 levied by distress and sale of the goods and chattels of the 
 oflfender or offenders, by warrant or warrants under the hands 
 and seals of such justices, together with the reasonable costs 
 of such distress and sale; and in case it shall appear to the 
 satisfaction of such justices, either by the confession of the 
 offfender or oflfenders or by the oath of one or more credible 
 
238 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 witness or witnesses, that he, she, or they hath not or have 
 not goods and chattels within the jurisdiction of such justices 
 sufficient whereon to levy all such penalties and forfeitures, 
 costs and charges, such justices may, without issuing any 
 w^arrant of distress, commit the offender or offenders to the 
 common gaol for three calendar months (unless the same be 
 sooner paid), in such manner as if a warrant of distress had 
 been issued, and a return of nulla bona made thereon. 
 
 A Partner not to he liable in Person for the Offence of 
 his Co-partner^ but the Partnership Property to be so liable.'] 
 —Sect. 13. And be it further enacted, that no person shall be 
 liable to be convicted of any offence against this act committed 
 by his or her copartner in trade, and without his or her know¬ 
 ledge, privity, or consent; but it shall be lawful, when any 
 penalty, or any sum for wages, or any other sum, is ordered to 
 be paid, under the authority of this act, and the person or per¬ 
 sons ordered to pay the same shall neglect or refuse to do so, 
 to levy the same by distress and sale of any goods belonging 
 to any copartnership concern or business in the carrying on of 
 which such charges may have become due or such offence may 
 have been committed; and in all proceedings under this act to 
 recover any sum due for wages it shall be lawful in all cases 
 of copartnership for the justices, at the hearing of any com¬ 
 plaint for the non-payment thereof, to make an order upon any 
 one or more copartners for the payment of the sum appearing 
 to be due; and in such case the service of a copy of any sum¬ 
 mons or other process, or of any order, upon one or more of 
 such copartners, shall be deemed to be a sufficient service 
 upon all. 
 
 How Summonses are to be served.] —Sect. 14. And it is 
 declared and enacted, that in all cases it shall be deemed and 
 taken to be sufficient service of any summons to be issued 
 against any offender or offenders by any justice or justices of 
 the peace, under the authority of this act, if a duplicate or true 
 copy of the same be left at or upon the place used or occu¬ 
 pied by such offender or offenders for carrying on his, her, 
 or their trade or business, or at the place of residence of 
 any such offender or offenders, being at or upon any such 
 place as aforesaid, the same being directed to such offender 
 or offenders by his, her, or their right or assumed name or 
 names. 
 
 Form of Conviction^ ^c.] — Sect. 15. And be it further enacted, 
 that the justices before whom any person shall be convicted of 
 any offence against this act, or by whom any person shall be com¬ 
 mitted to the common gaol, in default of a sufficient distress, or 
 for not appearing as a witness or not submitting to be examined, 
 shall cause all such convictions, and the summonses for the 
 attendance of witnesses, and the warrants or orders for such 
 
239 
 
 1 & 2 Will. 4, c. 37 (truck act.) 
 
 commitments, and the warrant or order for any such distress, 
 to he drawn up in the form or to the effect set forth in the 
 schedule to this act annexed, with such additions or variations 
 as may be necessary for adapting the same to the particular 
 circumstances of the case. 
 
 Justices to return Convictions to the Clerk of the Peace, who 
 is to deliver Copies to Persons applying.~\ —Sect. 16. And be it 
 further enacted, that the justices before whom any conviction 
 shall be had under this act shall cause the same to be returned 
 to the next general or quarter sessions of the peace holden for 
 the county or place wherein the offence shall have been com¬ 
 mitted, and the same shall then and there be delivered to the 
 clerk of the peace, or other person acting as such, to be by him 
 filed among the records of the said court; and such clerk of the 
 peace, or other person acting as such, is hereby required, on 
 the tender and payment to him of the sum of one shilling, to 
 grant to any person or persons, on demand, a copy of any such 
 conviction, with a certificate thereupon indorsed or thereunto 
 annexed, that the same is a true and accurate copy of the ori¬ 
 ginal conviction returned to such general or quarter sessions as 
 aforesaid. 
 
 Convictions not to he quashed for want of Form.~\ —Sect. 17. 
 And be it further enacted, that no conviction, order, or adjudi¬ 
 cation made by any justices of the peace under the provisions 
 of this act shall be quashed for want of form, nor be removed 
 by certiorari or otherwise into any of his Majesty’s superior 
 courts of record; and no warrant of distress, or of commitments 
 in default of sufficient distress, shall be held void by reason of 
 any defect therein, provided it be therein alleged that the party 
 has been convicted, and there be a good and valid conviction 
 to sustain the same. 
 
 Application of Penalties.'] —Sect. 18. And be it further 
 enacted, that out of any penalty or forfeiture incurred by any 
 offence committed against this act it shall be lawful for the 
 court or justices imposing the same to award any sum to the 
 informer, not exceeding in any case the sum of twenty pounds ; 
 and the rest of any such pecuniary penalty or forfeiture shall 
 go to the treasurer of the county in which the oflfence shall be 
 committed, in aid of the rates of such county : provided always, 
 that every proceeding whatsoever for any offence against this 
 act shall be commenced within three calendar months after such 
 offence shall have been committed. 
 
 Specification of the Trades to which the Act is to apply.] 
 —Sect. 19. And be it further enacted, that nothing herein 
 contained shall extend to any artificer, workman, or labourer, 
 or other person engaged or employed in any manufacture, trade, 
 or occupation, excepting only artificers, workmen, labourers, 
 and other persons employed in the several manufactures, trades, 
 
240 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 and occupations following ; (that is to say,) in or about the 
 making, casting, converting, or manufacturing of iron or steel, 
 or any parts, branches, or processes thereof; or in or about the 
 working or getting of any mines of coal, ironstone, limestone, 
 salt rock ; or in or about the working or getting of stone, slate, 
 or clay ; or in the making or preparing of salt, bricks, tiles, or 
 quarries ; or in or about the making or manufacturing of any 
 kinds of nails, chains, rivets, anvils, vices, spades, shovels, 
 screws, keys, locks, bolts, hinges, or any other articles or hard¬ 
 wares made of iron or steel, or of iron and steel combined, or of 
 any plated articles of cutlery, or of any goods or wares made of 
 brass, tin, lead, pewter, or other metal, or of any japanned goods 
 or wares whatsoever; or in or about the making, spinning, throw¬ 
 ing, twisting, doubling, winding, weaving, combing, knitting, 
 bleaching, dyeing, printing, or otherwise preparing of any kinds 
 of woollen, worsted, yarn, stuff, jersey, linen, fustian, cloth, 
 serge, cotton, leather, fur, hemp, flax, mohair, or silk manufac¬ 
 tures whatsoever, or in or about any manufactures whatsoever 
 made of the said last-mentioned materials, whether the same be 
 or be not mixed one with another; or in or about the making 
 or otherwise preparing, ornamenting, or finishing of any glass, 
 porcelain, china, or earthenware whatsoever, or any parts, 
 branches, or processes thereof, or any materials used in any of 
 such last-mentioned trades or employments ; or in or about the 
 making or preparing of bone, thread, silk, or cotton lace, or of 
 lace made of any mixed materials. 
 
 Domestics.']— 20. And be it further enacted, that no¬ 
 thing herein contained shall extend to any domestic servant or 
 servant in husbandry. 
 
 Certain Persons not to act as Justices.] —Sect. 21. And be 
 it further enacted, that no justice of the peace, being a person 
 also engaged in any of the trades or occupations enumerated in 
 this act, or the father, son, or brother of any such person, shall 
 act as a justice of the peace under this act. 
 
 County Magistrates to act in Cases where those of Toims, 
 S)'C. are disqualified as above^ —Sect 22. And be it further 
 enacted, that in all cities, boroughs, or corporate towns, where 
 the magistrates for the time being are disqualified by the fore¬ 
 going clause from administering this act, then and in every such 
 case, and so often as the same shall happen, it shall be lawful 
 for the magistrates of the county in which the offence may be 
 committed (and not disqualified as aforesaid) to administer, and 
 they are hereb}'" authorized and empowered to hear, examine, 
 and determine any offences committed against this act, in any 
 such cities, boroughs, or corporate towns; and it shall be law¬ 
 ful for the complainant to remove the cases of information or 
 complaint from the said cities, boroughs, or corporate towns to 
 any other court of session or petty session not exceeding twelve 
 
241 
 
 1 & 2 Will. 4, c. 37 (truck act). 
 
 miles from the place where the offence shall have been com¬ 
 mitted ; any law, charter, usage, or custom to the contrary not¬ 
 withstanding. 
 
 Particular Exceptions to the Generality of the Lawr ^— 
 Sect. 23. And be it further enacted and declared, that nothing 
 herein contained shall extend or be construed to extend to pre¬ 
 vent any employer of any artificer, or agent of any such em¬ 
 ployer, from supplying or contracting to supply to any such 
 artificer any medicine or medical attendance, or any fuel, or any 
 materials, tools, or implements to be by such artificer employed 
 in his trade or occupation, if such artificers be employed in 
 mining, or any hay, corn, or other provender to be consumed 
 by any horse or other beast of burden employed by any such 
 artificer in his trade or occupation; nor from demising to any 
 artificer, workman, or labourer employed in any of the trades 
 or occupations enumerated in this act the whole or any part of 
 any tenement at any rent to be thereon reserved; nor from sup¬ 
 plying or contracting to supply to any such artificer any victuals 
 dressed or prepared under the roof of any such employer, and 
 there consumed by such artificer; nor from making or con¬ 
 tracting to make any stoppage or deduction from the wages of 
 any such artificer, for or in respect of any such rent; or for or 
 in respect of any such medicine or medical attendance ; or for or 
 in respect of such fuel, materials, tools, implements, hay, corn, 
 or provender, or of any such victuals dressed and prepared 
 under the roof of any such employer; or for or in respect of any 
 money advanced to such artificer for any such purpose as afore¬ 
 said : provided always, that such stoppage or deduction shall 
 not exceed the real and true value of such fuel, materials, tools, 
 implements, hay, corn, and provender, and shall not be in any 
 case made from the wages of such artificer, unless the agree¬ 
 ment or contract for such stoppage or deduction shall be in 
 writing, and signed by such artificer. 
 
 Employers may advance Money to Artificers for certain 
 Purposes.'\ —Sect. 24. And be it further enacted and declared, 
 that nothing herein contained shall extend or be construed to 
 extend to prevent any such employer from advancing to any 
 such artificer any money to be by him contributed to any 
 friendly society or bank for savings duly established according 
 to law, nor from advancing to any such artificer any money for 
 his relief in sickness, or for the education of any child or 
 children of such artificer, nor from deducting or contracting to 
 deduct any sum or sums of money from the wages of such 
 artificers for the education of any such child or children of 
 such artificer, and unless the agreement or contract for such 
 deduction shall be in writing, and signed by such artificer. 
 
 Definition of Terms.'] —Sect. 25. And be it further enacted 
 and declared, that in the meaning and for the purposes of this 
 
 D. R 
 
242 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 act all workmen, labourers, and other persons m any manner 
 en<^-ao-ed in the performance of any work, employment, or opera¬ 
 tion,'of what nature soever, in or about the several trades and 
 occupations aforesaid, shall be and be deemed “ artificersand 
 that within the meaning and for the purposes aforesaid, all 
 masters, bailiffs, foremen, managers, clerks, and other persons 
 engaged in the hiring, employment, or superintendence of the 
 labour of any such artificers, shall be and be deemed to be 
 “ employersand that within the meaning and for the pur¬ 
 poses of this act, any money or other thing had or contracted 
 to be paid, delivered, or given as a recompense, reward, or 
 remuneration for any labour done or to be done, whether within 
 a certain time or to a certain amount, or for a time or an 
 amount uncertain, shall be deemed and taken to be the 
 “ wages” of such labour ; and that within the meaning and for 
 the purposes aforesaid, any agreement, understanding, device, 
 contrivance, collusion or arrangement whatsoever on the subject 
 of w'ages, 'whether 'written or oral, whether direct or indirect, 
 to 'which the employer and artificer are parties or are assenting, 
 or by which they are mutually bound to each other, or whereby 
 either of them shall have endeavoured to impose an obligation 
 on the other of them, shall be and be deemed a “ contract.” 
 
 Commencement of Act.'] —Sect. 26. And be it further en¬ 
 acted, that this act shall not commence or take effect till the 
 expimtion of three calendar months next after the day of 
 passing the same. 
 
 To extend over Great Britain.^ —Sect. 27. And be it 
 further enacted, that the provisions of this act shall extend 
 over the whole of that part of the United Kingdom of Great 
 Britain and Ireland called Great Britain. 
 
 [Forms of conviction, summons to witness, warrant of com¬ 
 mitment of a witness, 'warrant to distrain for forfeiture, and of 
 commitment for want of distress, are given in a schedule. See 
 also Oke’s Magisterial Formulist, and the forms given by 
 Jervis’ Act, 11 & 12 Viet. c. 43.] 
 
 For the object and policy of this important statute, commonly called 
 “ the Truck Act,” see the invaluable judgment of Baron Brara’well in the 
 Exchequer Chamber in Archer v. JameSy 2 B. & S. 94; 31 L. J., Q. B. 163. 
 
 As it is more than probable that ” disputes ” between an employer and 
 a workman brought before a court of summary jurisdiction under the 
 Employers and Workmen Act, 1875, will involve questions as to the effect 
 of this statute, it will be useful to give the result of the various, and, to a 
 great extent, conflicting opinions of the courts in cases arising out of it. 
 
 The provisions of the act are cumulative: first, the employer is to pay 
 bis wages in money; secondly, payment otherwise than in money is void; 
 thirdly, payment otherwise than in money is illegal and punishable as an 
 
1 & 2 Will. 4, c. 37 (thuck act); 243 
 
 offence, (Willes, J., Fisher v. Jones, 13 C. B. Kep., N. S. 501; 32 L. J., 
 M. C. 177.) 
 
 First, the persons to whom the statute applies.'] This question depends 
 chiefly on sect. 19. The act “ is to be taken as applicable to those persons 
 only who strictly contract as labourers, that is, to such as enter into a 
 contract to employ their personal services and to receive payment for that 
 service in wages.” (Parke, B., in Riley v. Warden, 2 Exch. Rep. 59; 18 
 L. J. Rep. (N. S.) Exch. 120.) In that case it was held that a person 
 contracting to make a cutting on a projected line of railway, at a certain 
 sura per cubic yard, and employing others with whom he himself worked 
 in making the cutting, was not within the act; so a person agreeing to 
 load ironstone at so much per ton, and employing men to do the work 
 under him and from time to time working personally, but not having 
 stipulated for his own personal labour, was held not to be within the 
 act. {Sharman v. Sanders, 13 C. B. Rep. 166; 20 L. J. Rep. (N. S.) 
 C. P. 99.) 
 
 This was followed by the case of a collier (in Staffordshire called a 
 charter master or butty collier) employed by a colliery or mine owner to 
 get coal or ironstone from a mine, and to be paid at a certain rate per ton 
 on the coal got by him, he having liberty to employ, and almost necessarily 
 employing others under him. In most cases a charter master or butty 
 collier has partners (hence the term “butty”) who work with him, 
 although they may or may not be parties to the agreement or undertaking 
 entered into with the colliery proprietor or mine owner. 
 
 In the first case of this kind before the courts, it appeared that the 
 collier was bound to give his personal services in the performance of the 
 work, and Patteson, J., held that he was within the Truck Act. ( Weaver 
 V. Floyd, 21 L. J. Rep. (N. S.) Q. B. 151.) 
 
 In the subsequent case of Bowers v. Lovehin (6 E. & B. 584; 25 L. J. 
 Rep, (N. S.) Q. B. 371), the agreement was made verbally by the colliery 
 agent with the butty colliers to get ironstone at so much a square yard. 
 No particular quantity was stipulated to be gotten in any specified time. 
 The butty colliers emplo)’^ed a number of men under them. They were 
 themselves treated as working men, by having their wages bill rendered 
 weekly, by being served with notice of the regulations of the colliery in 
 respect to workmen’s rules, and one of them having been dismissed for 
 absence and then taken on again as any other workman, and they engaged 
 to bestow their personal labour in the work. The Court of Queen’s Bench 
 (Lord Campbell, C. J., and Coleridge, Erie, and Crompton, JJ.) were of 
 opinion that the butty colliers were “ artificers ” within the Truck Act, 
 upon the ground that personal labour was required of them. Lord Camp¬ 
 bell also inclined to think that the statute included cases where personal 
 labour was not stipulated for; and Erie, J., expressed a stronger opinion 
 to that effect, namely, that the act was not confined to cases where the 
 workman engaged to give his personal services, but that it applied to con¬ 
 tracts for work by the piece when it was consistent with the contract that 
 the party should work personally, and he has actually done so. That case 
 R 2 
 
244 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS, 
 
 was followed by Ingram v. Barnes (7 E. & B. 115; 26 L. J., Q. B. 82), 
 now the leading authority on the subject, where it was held by the 
 majority of the Court of Queen’s Bench (Lord Campbell, C. J., and 
 Coleridge and Wightman, JJ.; Erie, J., dissenting) and affirmed on appeal 
 (7 E. & B. 132 ; 26 L. J., Q. B. 319), that a labouring man who entered 
 into a written contract with a railway contractor to make as many bricks 
 as the contractor required, taking the clay and finding all labour in prepar¬ 
 ing it, the railway contractor finding all materials and paying so much a 
 thousand for the bricks when finished, was not within the Truck Act, on 
 the ground that there was no contract to do the work personally. Erie, J., 
 in the court below, adhered to his opinion in Bowers v. Lovehin, that a 
 contract is within the act, although the party contracting has the option of 
 doing the work by himself or others, if he actually works himself, so as to 
 make the performance as well as the contract within the act. In the court 
 of appeal, during the argument some of the judges referred to the Master 
 and Servant Act, and put the question whether, supposing the brickmaker 
 had deserted his work, he could have been sent to prison under the Master 
 and Servant Act, or whether he could have enforced payment of his wages 
 under that act, and Cockbum, C. J., expressed a clear opinion that he 
 could not have so recovered his wages. The court distinguished Bowers v. 
 Loveldn, on the ground that there was a contract for personal labour. 
 Lawrence v. Todd (see ante^ p. 114) came next, under the now repealed 
 Master and Servant Act, 4 Geo. 4, c. 34. That case was in the Common 
 Pleas, and two of the judges who concurred in the judgment of Erie, J., 
 namely, Williams and Willes, JJ., were members of the court of appeal in 
 Ingram v. Barnes. Lawrence v. Todd has been followed, however, by 
 the case of Sleeman v. Barrett {2 H\xy\s,. & C. 934; 33 L. J. (N. S.) Ex. 153), 
 where it was held by the Court of Exchequer that butty colliers working 
 under verbal contracts made with a colliery owner, generally by the day 
 but also by the ton or yard, they not being allowed to underlet the work 
 or to work elsewhere, but doing it as they liked, and in fact working 
 manually themselves and employing men under them, for whose wages 
 they were responsible, were not within the Truck Act. Pollock, C. B. 
 (who expressed his dissent from the opinion of Erie, J., in Bowers v. 
 Loveldn')^ founded his judgment, not so much on the question of a man 
 personally labouring, as on the distinction between a contract for labour 
 and a contract for the result of labour or the effect that labour is to pro¬ 
 duce (as a contract for the removal of a large quantity of clay): Bramwell 
 and Channell, BB., rested their judgments partly on the ground that there 
 was no contract with an artificer for labour to be paid wages, and Martin, B., 
 resting on the authorities. 
 
 The question of what facts constituted a contract within the Truck Act 
 came again before the Court of Common Pleas (Montague Smith and 
 Brett, JJ.) in Pillar v. Llynvi Coal and Iron Company, 38 L. J., C. P. 
 294; L. R., 4 C. P. 752. The plaintiff was a tinman, the defendants were 
 a company raising coal and making iron. The plaintiff was verbally 
 employed by the defendants, and worked for several years. His engage- 
 
245 
 
 1 & 2 Will. 4, c. 37 (truck act). 
 
 ment was to work cither at piece work or by day, at the defendants’ option, 
 the piece work being the making of kettles, &c., at fixed prices, out of 
 materials supplied by defendants at varying prices ; the day work being 
 the repairing of the defendants’ buildings. The plaintiff was paid like the 
 other workmen employed by the defendants, that is to say, by intermediate 
 draws,” with accounts made out about every eight weeks ; but he was at 
 liberty to perform the piece work at his own house, and at times worked for 
 other persons. It was held that the plaintiff was obliged to give his 
 personal services, and was therefore an artificer within the act. In giving 
 judgment, after considering this and other questions, Sir M. Smith said : 
 “ It was contended for the defendants that the plaintiff was not a workman 
 but a tradesman, and therefore not an artificer, but on a review of the 
 evidence we draw a different inference from the facts, and come to the 
 conclusion that he was an artificer within the meaning of the act.” After 
 referring to the 25th section, the learned judge proceeded: “ These are 
 very large words, but we have not to construe them unaided, and we must 
 be guided by the judicial interpretation which has been already given to 
 them. It is unnecessary to comment on the other cases which were cited, 
 and it is sufficient to refer to the leading authority of Ingram v. Barnes. 
 The result of that decision is that a man is not an artificer within the act 
 unless the employer has, by the contract of hiring, a right to require his 
 personal work and labour in return for ‘ wages ; ’ of course as wages are 
 defined by the act. With respect to the piece work, it appeared that the 
 plaintiff was at liberty to make the articles at his own house ; and it was 
 contended for the defendants that it followed from this that he might employ 
 others to work upon them. It also appeared that he occasionally worked for 
 other people. Having regard to these facts and to the mode in which the 
 materials were supplied and charged to him, it was contended that the plain¬ 
 tiff was employed in the character of a tradesman and did not contract for 
 his personal labour. Undoubtedly these views require to be considered in 
 coming to a conclusion as to the true nature of the contract; but after 
 giving due effeet to them, we think they are outweighed by the rest of the 
 evidence, which, on the whole, satisfies us that the personal labour and 
 skill of the plaintiff was the essence of the contract.” 
 
 Illegal payments.'] —With regard to what are illegal payments under 
 the statute, it has been held that giving “ shop notes ” in payment of 
 wages, those notes being exchanged for goods, constituted a payment in 
 goods under sect. 3, by the delivery of the notes, so as to make the offence 
 complete at the time of the delivery of the notes, and thus give justices 
 power to convict under sect. 9, although the place where the goods were 
 delivered was not within their jurisdiction. {Athersmith v. Drury^ 1 E. & 
 E. 46; S. C. nom Ashersmith v. Drury^ 28 L. J., M. C. 5.) 
 
 So where the payments were made thus : There were pay days every 
 eight weeks or so, and intermediate draw days ; on the draw days cheques 
 for small amounts were given on a bank nine miles from the works ; on the 
 pay days accounts were made out in which the cheques were entered as 
 cash advanced, certain deductions made, and the balance, if any, paid in 
 
246 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 cash ; the cheques were always taken to the defendant’s shop, where they 
 were exchanged ; they were exchanged in the proportion o onr s i o 
 in the pound in cash, the rest in goods, and it was well undersj^ i T . 
 workman not taking them to the shop would be discharged. 
 tions made from the plaintiff’s wages were for the materials supp le or 
 his piece work, certain coal he wanted, and doctor s sick and sc oo un 
 It was held that the payment by cheque was a subterfuge, and t at t le 
 plaintiff did not freely consent to receive them ; and theiefore, so as to 
 make a good payment under sect. 8, the plaintiff was entitled to recover the 
 amount of wages paid in goods ; that he could not, however, recover the 
 deductions for materials and coals ; fourthly, that as there was no writing 
 as required by sects. 23 and 24, he could recover as respects the deductions 
 for doctor’s sick and school fund. (^Pillar v. Llynvi Coal and Iron 
 Company^ cited ante, p. 244, on another point.) Even if the artificer 
 might have had payment in money had he been so pleased, it does not 
 make the payment valid ; nor does a subsequent payment of the wages in 
 cash avoid the penal consequences attaching to an illegal payment. ( WiU 
 »on V. Coolison, and Fisher v. Jones, 13 C. B. Rep., N. S. 496, 501; 32 
 L. J., M. C. 177.) 
 
 Deductions from Wages.'\ —Great diflficulty has. been found in deter¬ 
 mining the effect of the act, and more especially of sects. 23 and 24, on the 
 question as to deductions from wages permitted by the act. In the first 
 place a difficulty has arisen in detenniuing what constitutes a “ stoppage or 
 deduction ” from fixed wages, as distinguished from items subtracted in 
 order to arrive at the wages payable. It had been held by the Court of 
 Queen’s Bench that the then usual deductions in the hosiery manufacture, 
 namely, (1) frame rent, (2) machine rent, (3) a sum for the use of the 
 factory and for standing room, (4) a sum for winding the yam, (5) fines 
 for absence, (6) gas, and (7) firing, might be treated, not as deductions from 
 wages of so much a dozen for the manufactured article, but that the real 
 wages were ascertainable after these items were calculated ; and that, there¬ 
 fore, they were not stoppages or deductions to which the act applies, and, 
 consequently, not matters requiring a written agreement or contract. 
 {Chawner v. Cummins, 8 Q. B. Rep. 311; 16 L. J., Q. B. 161.) But in 
 the subsequent case of Archer v. James (2 B. & S. 94; 31 L. J., Q. B. 
 163), the judges in the Exchequer Chamber were equally divided on the 
 question as to the nmde of treating the claims in respect of the rent and 
 other matters above-mentioned. The legislature subsequently settled it by 
 passing an act preventing stoppages in the hosiery manufacture, by 
 enacting that no deduction or stoppage of any description shall be made 
 except for bad and disputed workmanship. (See 37 & 38 Viet. c. 48,/^osL) 
 The safer course for courts of summary jurisdiction to adopt will be to 
 treat this last-mentioned act (as interpreted by judicial decision, see post, 
 p. 292), not as engrafting an exception on the earlier Truck Act, but as 
 declaratory of the true meaning of the 1 & 2 Will. 4, c. 37. 
 
 In cases where a written agreement or contract is necessary to make a 
 deduction legal within sect. 23, it is snllicicnt if the agi eeracnt permits de- 
 
7 Yv^ill. 4 & 1 ViCT. c. 67. 
 
 247 
 
 ductions for the subject-matter described, without specifying the amounts to 
 be deducted in respect of them. (Cutts v. Ward^ L. R., 2 Q. B. 357; 36 
 L. J., Q. B. 161.) In that case it was further held, that even assuming that 
 a contract to supply medicine or medical attendance must be in writing 
 under the section, there need not be an actual supply if the written con¬ 
 tract stipulated for the deduction of a certain sum weekly in consideration 
 of an undertaking to supply if required. 
 
 It seems that from the language of the section, “ that such stoppage or 
 deduction shall not exceed the real and true value of such fuel, materials, 
 tools, implements, hay, corn and provender,” that what the legislature 
 contemplated was a sale out and out, not a contract for hiring materials, 
 under which, for example, the master supplied his own materials, and the 
 men engaged to pay him money as a security against breakages. Such a 
 contract would not be within sect. 23, but would come within the scope of 
 the prohibitions in the rest of the act. (Blackburn, J., Cutts v. Ward^ 
 supra; and see per Bramwell, B., Archer v. James, supra.') 
 
 5 & 6 Will. 4 , c. 27. 
 
 An Act to continue and amend certain Regulations for 
 the Linen and Hempen Manufactures in Ireland, 
 
 A temporary act, confined to Ireland, but continued (so far as 
 it has not been repealed) from time to time. See the Ex^Diring 
 Laws Continuation Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Viet. c. 72). 
 
 The 5 & 6 Will. 4, c. 27, was repealed by 3 & 4 Viet. c. 91, so 
 far as relates to the embezzlement of materials, and to manu¬ 
 facturers and weavers; and sects. 9, 15, 27 to 30, and 38 were 
 expressly repealed by the Statute Law Revision Act, 1874. 
 
 It was amended by 5 & 6 Viet. c. 68, and 7 & 8 Viet. c. 47. 
 
 7 Will. 4 & 1 Vict. c. 67. 
 
 An Act to amend an Act of the Fifth Year of His 
 Majesty King George the Fourth for consolidating and 
 amending the Laws relative to the arbitration of dis^ 
 putes between Masters and Workmen, 
 
 [See the statute in Lovesy’s Law of Arbitrations between 
 Masters and Workmen.] 
 
24S 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 2 & 3 ViCT. C. 71. 
 
 An Act for regulatinfj the Police Courts in the Metropolis. 
 
 Disputes about Wages for Labour done on the River, <^c. 
 {except by Trinity Ballastmen) to be settled by Magistrates, 
 provided the Sum hi question does not exceed 5Z.]—Sect. 37. 
 “ And be it enacted, that all differences, complaints, and disputes 
 which shall happen between any bargemen, lightermen, water¬ 
 men, ballastmen (except Trinity ballastmen), coal-whippers, 
 coal porters, sailors, lumpers, riggers, shipwrights, caulkers, or 
 other labourers who work for hire in or upon the River 
 Thames, or the docks, creeks, wharfs, quays, or places adjacent, 
 not being in the eity of London or the liberties thereof, and the 
 owners, masters, or commanders of vessels, or their agents, on 
 the said river, or the docks or creeks thereunto adjoining, or 
 the owners, wharfingers, or occupiers of such wharfs or quays, 
 or their agents or other employers, respecting wages or money 
 due to such labourers for work or loss of time, whether the 
 same persons bo employed for any certain time or in any other 
 mannei*, may be heard and deteimined by any of the said 
 magistrates ; and every such magistrate is hereby empowered 
 to examine upon oath any such labourer as aforesaid, or any 
 other witness or witnesses, touching any such complaint or 
 dispute, and to make such order for payment of so much wages 
 or money to such labourer as to the magistrate shall seem just, 
 ])rovided that the sum ordered do not exceed five pounds, 
 besides all reasonable costs attending the prosecution of the 
 comj)laint.” 
 
 Questions may arise as to the effect of the Employers and Workmen 
 Act, 1875, on the above section. Assuming that the “work for hire” 
 is done under a contract within the definition given by sect. 10 of the 
 Act of 1875 as regards both the subject-matter and the parties (and 
 not otherwise excepted from it), then it is a dispute or matter in respect 
 of which jurisdiction is given by the Act of 1875 to a court of summary 
 jurisdiction, and a police magistrate, in dealing with a case within 
 sect. 37 of 2 & 3 Viet. c. 71, is a court of summary jurisdiction. True 
 that the Act of 1875 docs not in terms exclude any other existing tribunal 
 and is apparently only permissive, merely enacting that a “dispute,” 
 under the act between an employer and a workman, may be heard and 
 determined by a court of summary jurisdiction, and it seems clear that 
 those words would not, under ordinary circumstances, override any court 
 of concurrent jurisdiction; but considerations of another kind may arise 
 in lefcrcnce to the mode of enforcing compliance with the magistrate’s 
 Older. Under the act 2 & 3 Viet. c. 71, coupled with Jervis’s Act, orders 
 or payment of money may be enforced by a general distress, and, in de¬ 
 fault, by imprisonment; while the Emploj ers and Workmen Act, 1876, 
 
5 & 6 Yict. c. 68. 
 
 249 
 
 provides that “an order made by a court of summary jurisdiction, under 
 this act, for the payment of any money, shall not be enforced by imprison¬ 
 ment, except in the manner and under the conditions by this act provided, 
 and no goods or chattels shall be taken under a distress ordered by a court 
 of summary jurisdiction which might not be taken under an execution 
 issued by a county court.” Can a complainant, or a magistrate, or his 
 clerk, at his option, confer or deprive a debtor of rights affecting personal 
 liberty ? It seems to be a startling proposition to say that he can; and 
 yet formerly a plaintiff could exercise a similar power by electing to bring 
 his action and obtain judgment in a superior instead of in a county court. 
 
 In the provisions hitherto mentioned in the Appendix, the breaches of 
 labour contracts have been those punishable criminally by summary con¬ 
 viction or otherwise, and no similar question arises. 
 
 3 & 4 ViCT. c. 91. 
 
 Jin Act for the more effectual Prevention of Frauds and 
 Abuses committed by Weavers, Sewers, and other 
 Persons employed in the Linen, Hempen, Union, 
 Cotton, Silk, and Woollen Manufactures in Ireland, 
 and for the better Payment of their Wages, for One 
 Year, and from thence to the end of the then next Session 
 of Parliament, 
 
 Amended and continued by 5 & 6 Viet. c. 68, and continued 
 by subsequent acts. Both 3 & 4 Yict. c. 91, and 5 & 6 Viet, 
 c. 68, were expressly repealed in part by the Statute Law 
 Eevision Act, 1874 (No. 2). Sects. 18 and 23 were repealed 
 by 38 & 39 Viet. c. 86, sect. 17 {ante, p. 204). The provisions 
 now in force relate chiefly to the fraudulent disposal of mate¬ 
 rials and tools, and to the distraint of employers’ property in 
 possession of a weaver or worker. 
 
 5 & 6 Yict. c. 68. 
 
 An Act to amend and continue to the Twenty-seventh day 
 of July One thousand eight hundred and forty-three, 
 and to the End of the next Session of Parliament, an 
 Act of the Third and Fourth Years of Her present 
 Majesty, for the more effectual Prevention of Frauds 
 and Abuses committed by Weavers, Sewers, and other 
 Persons employed in the Linen, Hempen, Union, Cotton, 
 Silk, and Woollen Manufactures in Ireland, and for 
 the better Payment of their Wages, 
 
 [See the observations on 3 & 4 Yict. c. 91, sujjra,^ 
 
250 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 6 & 7 ViCT. C. 40. 
 
 An Act to amend the Laws for the Prevention of Frauds 
 and Abuses by Persons employed in the Woollen^ 
 Worsted, Linen, Cotton, Flax, Mohair, and Silk 
 Hosiery Manufactures ; and for the further securing 
 the Property of the Manufacturers and the Wages of 
 the Workmen engaged therein. 
 
 Sect. 1 recites 8 & 9 Will. 3, c. 36 {repealed) ; 1 Anne, st. 2, 
 c. 18; 9 Anne, c.30; 12 Geo. 1, c. 34; 13 Geo. 2, c. 8; 22 Geo. 2, 
 c. 27; 17 Geo. 3, c. 56; 32 Geo. 3, c. 44 {repealed) ; and that 
 “ the provisions of the said acts have not been effectual to pre¬ 
 vent frauds, embezzlements, and abuses by persons employed in 
 the woollen, linen, cotton, flax, mohair, and silk hosiery manu¬ 
 factures; and it is expedient to repeal so much of the said recited 
 acts as relates to the said manufactures, and to make further pro¬ 
 visions in lieu thereof, as well for the benefit and encourage¬ 
 ment of trade and manufactures as for the security of the pro¬ 
 perty of manufacturers and the wages of the workmen engaged 
 in the said manufacture.s,’^ and enacts that “ so much of the said 
 recited acts or any of them as relates to the woollen, linen, 
 cotton, flax, mohair, and silk manufactures, or any of them, or 
 any manufactures whatsoever made of wool, cotton, flax, mohair, 
 or silk materials, whether the same be or be not mixed with 
 each other or with any other materials, shall, so far as respects 
 the manufactures, trades, occupations, and employments here¬ 
 inafter mentioned, be and the same are hereby repealed.” 
 
 Persons convicted of Pawning or Embezzling any of the 
 Materials herein particularized to forfeit the Value of the 
 same, with Penalty and Costs.') —Sect. 2. “ If any person 
 whosoever intrusted with any woollen, worsted, linen, cotton, 
 flax, mohair, or silk materials, for the purpose of being pre¬ 
 pared, Avorked up, or manufactured, either by himself or by 
 any person or persons to be employed by or under him, or 
 by himself jointly Avith any person or persons to be employed 
 Avith, by, or under him, or for any purpose or Avork connected 
 Avith manufacture or incidental thereto, or any parts, branches, 
 or processes thereof, or any tools or apparatus for manufac¬ 
 turing the said materials, shall sell, paAA'n, purloin, embezzle, 
 secrete, exchange, or otherwise fraudulently dispose of the same 
 materials, tools, or apparatus, or any part thereof, he shall, 
 upon being thereof laAvfully convicted by the oath of the owner 
 of such materials, tools, or apparatus, or any part thereof, or of 
 any other credible Avitness or Avitnesses, before tAvo or more 
 justices of the peace, forfeit the full A’alue of the same, and also 
 forfeit such penalty, not exceeding ten pounds, together Avith 
 costs, as to the said justices shall seem meet; and every such 
 
6 & 7 ViCT. c. 40. 
 
 251 
 
 forfeiture and penalty shall be applied, under the direction of 
 the convicting justices, in manner following; (that is to say,) 
 in the first place, in making such satisfaction to the party in¬ 
 jured as the said justices shall think proper; and the remainder, 
 if any, shall be applied in the same manner as is hereinafter 
 directed for the disposal of any other penalty under this act; 
 and in default of payment of such forfeiture and penalty, with 
 costs, immediately on conviction, or within such period as the 
 justices so convicting may direct, the said justices may issue 
 their warrant to distrain and sell the goods and chattels of tlie 
 person so convicted for the amount thereof and costs; and 
 the proceeds of any distress, after paying the penalty, forfeiture, 
 and costs and also the costs of such distress, shall be paid over 
 to the person convicted; but if no sufficient distress shall appear 
 or shall be found whereon to levy the said penalty, forfeiture, 
 and costs, the said justices may, either immediately or at any 
 time after such conviction, commit any person so convicted to 
 the common gaol or house of correction, to be there imprisoned, 
 with or without hard labour, as to the said justices shall seem 
 meet, for any term not exceeding three calendar months, unless 
 the amount of such forfeiture and penalty, with costs, or so 
 much thereof as shall not have been paid previously to the 
 commencement of such imprisonment, be sooner paid.” 
 
 Persons neglecting to return Materials within a prescribed 
 Time to be subject to the same Punishment as for Embezzle- 
 7nent.]—^eQ,t. 3. “And be it enacted, that if any person who¬ 
 soever intrusted with any woollen, worsted, linen, cotton, flax, 
 mohair, or silk materials, for the purpose of being prepared, 
 worked up, or manufactured, either by himself or by any person 
 or persons to be employed by or under him, or by himself 
 jointly with any person or persons to be employed with, by, or 
 under him, or for any purpose or work connected with manu¬ 
 facture or incidental thereto, or any parts, branches, or processes 
 thereof, or with any tools or apparatus for manufacturing the 
 said materials, shall neglect or delay to return the said mate¬ 
 rials, tools, or apparatus, or any part thereof, for the space of 
 fourteen clear days after being required so to do by the party 
 intrusting him therewith, or by some person on his behalf, by 
 notice in writing to be served upon or left at the last or usual place 
 of abode or business of such person (unless prevented by some 
 reasonable and sufficient cause, to be allowed by the justices 
 before whom he shall be brought), then and in every such case 
 all, or so much or so many of the said materials, tools, or appa¬ 
 ratus as shall not be returned to the person so intrusting him 
 therewith within the time aforesaid, shall be deemed to be em¬ 
 bezzled by the person so neglecting or delaying to return the 
 same; and the person so neglecting or delaying to return 
 the same shall for every such offence he liable to be proceeded 
 against for embezzlement, in the same manner, and subject to 
 
252 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 the same forfeiture and penalty, with costs, and to be applied 
 in the same manner, as are respectively hereinbefore pre¬ 
 scribed and imposed in respect to persons selling, pawning, 
 purloining, embezzling, secreting, exchanging, or otherwise 
 fraudulently disposing of the said materials.” 
 
 Persons knoiuingly purchasing or receiving embezzled 
 Materials or Tools guilty of a Misdemeanor^ punishable as 
 after mentioned.'] —Sect. 4. “ Any person who shall purchase 
 or take in pawn, or who in any other way shall receive into 
 Ills premises or possession, any woollen, worsted, linen, cotton, 
 flax, mohair, or silk materials, and whether the same or any 
 part of the said materials be or be not wholly or partially 
 wrought, made up, or manufactured into merchantable wares, 
 or any tools or apparatus for manufacturing the same, knowing 
 that such materials, tools, or apparatus are purloined or em¬ 
 bezzled or fraudulently disposed of, or that the person from 
 whom he shall purchase, take in pawn, or receive the same is 
 fraudulently or unlawfully disposing thereof, or knowing such 
 person to be employed or intrusted by any other person or 
 persons to work up either by himself or by or with others the 
 materials so purchased, taken in pawn, or received for any other 
 person or persons, and not having first obtained the consent of 
 the person or persons so employing or intrusting him therewith, 
 shall, on conviction by the oath of the owner or of any other 
 credible witness or witnesses, be deemed and adjudged guilty 
 of a misdemeanor, and be punished in manner hereinafter 
 mentioned.” 
 
 Persons knowingly selling^ ^c. embezzled Materials or Tools 
 guilty of a Misdemeanor, punishable as after mentioned.] — 
 Sect. 5. “ If any person shall sell, pawn, pledge, exchange, or 
 otherwise unlawfully dispose of or offer to sell, pawn, pledge, 
 exchange, or otherwise dispose of any such materials, tools, or 
 apparatus as aforesaid, knowing the same to have been so pur¬ 
 loined or embezzled or received from persons fraudulently dis¬ 
 posing thereof as aforesaid, he shall, on conviction by the oath 
 of the owner of such materials, tools, or apparatus, or any part 
 thereof, or of any other credible witness or witnesses, be 
 deemed and adjudged guilty of a misdemeanor, and be punished 
 in manner hereinafter mentioned.” 
 
 Sect. 6. Justices empowered to issue warrant for appre- 
 licnsion of oflenders against this act, and to commit them for 
 trial. 
 
 Sect. 8. Justice empowered to grant search warrants. 
 
 Peace Officers to apprehend suspected Persons.^ —Sect. 9. 
 “ Every peace officer and constable and every watchman duly 
 appointed by law, during such time as he shall be on duty, 
 shall and may apprehend or cause to bo apprehended any per¬ 
 son whom he may reasonably suspect of having, or carrying or 
 in any way conveying, at any time after sun-setting and before 
 
6 & 7 ViCT. c. 40. 
 
 253 
 
 sun-rising, any such materials, tools, or apparatus as aforesaid, 
 suspected to be purloined, embezzled, or otherwise fraudulently 
 disposed of, and shall lodge such person, together with the pro¬ 
 perty, in a police office or other place of security, in order that 
 he may be brought before a justice of the peace so soon as con¬ 
 venient, who is hereby empowered to discharge such person, 
 or to order his detention until the next court of petty sessions, 
 unless he enter into such bail, with two sufficient sureties, as 
 may be required, for his appearance before such court on any 
 day to be fixed by the said justice ; and if the person so appre¬ 
 hended in the act of committing any such offence as aforesaid, 
 or of conveying any such property as last aforesaid, shall not 
 produce before the said court the person duly entitled to dispose 
 of such property from whom he bought or received the same, 
 or shall not give an account to the satisfaction of the said court 
 that the property is honestly come by, then the person so appre¬ 
 hended shall be deemed and adjudged guilty of a misdemeanor, 
 and be punished in manner hereinafter mentioned, although no 
 proof shall be given as to whom such property belongs.” 
 
 Adjournment of Time for Trial allowed^ on Prisoner 
 finding Bail.~\ —Sect. 10. “It shall be competent for the party 
 accused, in all proceedings brought under authority of this act, 
 to move for and obtain an adjournment of the time fixed for 
 trial for such a reasonable time as may appear to the court to 
 be necessary for the party accused to produce the person duly 
 entitled to sell or dispose of the said property of whom he 
 bought or received the same, or evidence respecting the same ; 
 but the party accused, and requesting such adjournment, shall 
 be detained in custody or committed to prison, unless he enter 
 into such bail, with two sufficient sureties, as shall be required 
 for his appearance before such court at such time and place as 
 shall be appointed.” 
 
 Punishment of Persons convicted of Misdemeanor .— 
 Sect. 11. “Any person who shall be deemed and adjudged 
 guilty of a misdemeanor, agreeably to any of the provisions of 
 this act, shall, in addition to being deprived without compensa¬ 
 tion of any such materials, tools, and apparatus which have 
 been purloined, embezzled, or otherwise fraudulently disposed 
 of, and which shall have been found in his possession, forfeit 
 any sum not exceeding twenty pounds for each offence, together 
 with costs, upon being thereof lawfully convicted hy the oath 
 of one or more credible witness or witnesses, before two or 
 more justices of the peace; and every such forfeiture shall be 
 applied under the direction of the justices so convicting, in 
 manner following; (that is to say,) in the first place, in makino- 
 such satisfaction to the party injured as the said justices shall 
 think fit, and the remainder, if any, shall be applied in the 
 same manner as is hereinafter directed for the disposal of any 
 
254 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 other penalty under this act; and in default of payment of such 
 forfeiture and penalty, with costs, immediately on conviction, 
 or within such period as the court shall direct, any justice or 
 justices may issue his or their warrant to distrain and sell the 
 goods and chattels of the person so convicted, for the amount 
 thereof, and costs; and the proceeds of any distress, after paying 
 the forfeiture and costs, and also the costs of such distress, shall 
 he paid over to the person convicted; but if no sufficient distress 
 shall appear or shall be found whereon to levy the said forfeiture 
 and costs, any justice or justices may, either immediately or at 
 any time after such conviction, commit any person so convicted 
 to the common gaol or house of correction, to be imprisoned 
 there, with or without hard labour, as to the said court shall 
 seem meet, for any term not exceeding four calendar months, 
 unless the amount of such forfeiture and costs, or so much 
 thereof as shall not have been paid previously to the com¬ 
 mencement of such imprisonment, be sooner paid.” 
 
 Disposal of unclaimed Property which has been seized.'] _ 
 
 Sect. 12. “Where no proof shall be given at the time of con¬ 
 viction of the ownership of property found in the possession of 
 a person convicted under this act, the justices or court shall 
 cause the property so found to be deposited in some safe place 
 for any time not exceeding thirty days, and shall, if the pro¬ 
 perty be of sufficient value to pay the expenses thereof, order 
 an advertisement to be inserted in one or more of the public 
 newspapers of the town or city where, or nearest the place 
 where, the same was found, and by fixing a notice on some 
 public place describing such property, and where the same may 
 he inspected, or in case of the said property not being of suffi¬ 
 cient value to pay the said expenses, then by fixing such notice 
 as aforesaid only; and in case any person shall prove his own 
 or his employer’s ownership or property therein upon oath to 
 the satisfaction of a justice, restitution of such property shall 
 bo ordered to the owner thereof, after paying the reasonable 
 cost of removing, depositing, advertising, and giving notice of 
 the same ; but if no ownersliip he proved to such property the 
 justice shall, at the termination of thirty days, order such pro¬ 
 perty to he sold, and after deducting the charges aforesaid, 
 with the charges of sale, shall order the residue to he applied 
 in the same manner as is hereafter directed for the disposal of 
 any other penalty under this act.” 
 
 Owner of Materials may inspect Shops^ S^c. of Persons 
 employed.] — Sect. 13. “It shall be lawful for the owner of any 
 such materials as aforesaid, or any other person duly authorized 
 by him, or other the person who shall have so intrusted such 
 mateiials, from time to time, as occasion shall require, to 
 demand leave of entiaiice and enter at all reasonable hours in 
 the daytime into the shops or outhouses of any person employed 
 
6 & 7 ViCT. C. 40. 
 
 255 
 
 to work up or manufacture, either by himself or by any other 
 person under him, any of the said materials, or other place or 
 places where the work shall be carried on, and there to inspect 
 the state and condition of such materials; and in case of refusal 
 or neglect by any such person or persons so employed to permit 
 such entrance or inspection, such person shall, for so refusing 
 to permit such entrance or inspection, forfeit any sum not ex¬ 
 ceeding twenty shillings, as the justices before whom he shall 
 appear or be brought shall think proper, to be applied in the 
 same manner as is hereinafter directed for the disposal of any 
 other penalty under this act: provided always, that nothing 
 herein contained shall authorize any such owner or other per¬ 
 son as aforesaid to inspect any frame, tools, or apparatus where¬ 
 with such materials are worked up, in case such frame, tools, 
 or apparatus comprise any new invention or improvement not 
 disclosed to the public.” 
 
 Warrant may he granted by Justice on Complaint on 
 Oath that Person is about to abscondr\^ —Sect. 14. “If any 
 manufacturer, agent, or any other person in his employment or 
 service, shall make oath before a justice of the peace that any 
 such materials, tools, or apparatus as aforesaid have been 
 intrusted to any person as aforesaid, and that he has absconded, 
 or that the deponent has just cause to suspect and does suspect 
 that such person is about to abscond, it shall be lawful for such 
 justice and he is hereby required to issue his warrant to appre¬ 
 hend such person, and bring him before him or some other 
 justice of the peace; and if such person shall have absconded, 
 or shall not forthwith give security, to be approved of by 
 the said justice, for the return in a finished state of all such 
 materials so intrusted to him, within such time as shall be then 
 agreed on, such justice shall by warrant order any constable, 
 with his assistants, to enter the house or other premises of such 
 person, and take possession of all such materials, tools, or 
 apparatus so delivered to him as aforesaid, and to bring the 
 same before the said justice or any other justice, when such 
 justice shall direct the same to be delivered to the owner, or 
 his agent or servant, or other person duly authorized by him, 
 and shall forthwith release the person in custody; but if all 
 such materials, tools, or apparatus shall not be found in the 
 house or other premises or the possession of such person, or 
 shall not be produced before such justice, such person shall 
 be deemed and taken to have purloined or embezzled such 
 materials, tools, or apparatus, or such part thereof as shall not 
 be found or produced, and shall be liable to any of the punish¬ 
 ments awarded for such offence.” 
 
 Receiving Goods in fictitious NameJ^ —Sect. 15. “If any 
 person shall receive any of the aforesaid materials in a fictitious 
 name, in order to be manufactured, every such person so of- 
 
256 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 fending, and being convicted thereof on the oath of one or 
 more credible witness or witnesses before two or more justices, 
 shall for every such offence be liable to the same punishment as 
 is hereinbefore directed in respect to persons not fulfilling their 
 
 engagements.” 
 
 Sect. 16. Justice to issue warrant to constable to take pos** 
 session of property intrusted to any person committed for 
 embezzlement, &c. 
 
 Frames^ SfC. not belonging to Workmen not liable to be 
 seized for Rent or Debt owing by Workmen^] —Sect. 18. “No 
 frame, loom, or machine, materials, tools, or apparatus, which 
 shall be intrusted for the purpose of being used or worked in 
 any of the said manufactures, or any work connected there¬ 
 with or incidental thereto, or any parts, branches, or processes 
 thereof, whether such frame, loom, or machine, materials, tools, 
 or apparatus, shall or shall not be rented or taken by the hire, 
 shall at any time or times hereafter be distrained or seized, 
 or be liable to be distrained or seized, for rent or for debt, 
 or under any execution or other proceedings whatever, unless 
 the rent be due or the money be owing by the owner of the 
 said frame, loom, or machine, or of the said materials or tools 
 or apparatus aforesaid, or of any part thereof respectively.” 
 
 In case o f Refusal to restore Frames, S^c. unlawf ully seized. 
 Justice may order their Restoration 19. “If any 
 landlord or other person, by virtue of any distress warrant, 
 execution, or other proceedings for rent in arrear, or money 
 due or alleged to be due by any person whomsoever, shall 
 distrain, seize, carry off, sell, or otherwise dispose of any frame, 
 loom, or machine, materials, tools, or apparatus, belonging 
 to any other person, which shall have been intrusted for the 
 purpose of being used or worked in any of the said manu¬ 
 factures, or any work connected therewith or incidental thereto, 
 or any parts, branches, or processes thereof, and whether the 
 same shall or shall not be rented or taken by the hire, or shall 
 distrain, seize, carry off, sell, or otherwise dispose of any 
 materials as aforesaid, or any tools or apparatus as aforesaid, 
 belonging to any other person, and shall refuse to restore 
 possession of all such frames, looms, machines, tools, or appa¬ 
 ratus to the person owning, letting, or intrusting the same, 
 when demanded by him, or some person duly authorized by 
 him, of the said landlord or other person, or the person acting 
 as agent or bailiff of such landlord or other person, it shall and 
 may be lawful to and for any justice of the peace, upon com- 
 jdaiiit on oath before him, to summon the said landlord or other 
 person to appear before any two or more justices of the peace 
 to answer the said complaint, and on proof of the said offence 
 tlie said justices may thereupon order the property so seized, 
 distrained, carried off, or sold to be forthwith restored, and 
 
6 & 7 Yict. c. 40. 
 
 257 
 
 issue their warrant to a constable or constables empowerin^^ 
 him or them to seize the said property wherever the same shall 
 be found, and deliver possession thereof to the person owning, 
 letting, or intrusting the same, and to levy, by distress and sale 
 of the goods of the said landlord or other person, the costs of 
 obtaining the said order, and recovering and obtaining pos¬ 
 session of the said property; and in case the said property 
 cannot be found and seized within a time not exceeding twenty- 
 one days, to be limited in the said warrant, or in case the said 
 property shall have been damaged by the same having been 
 distrained, seized, carried off, or sold, then it shall be lawful 
 for such two justices, or any other two justices, on proof 
 thereof (the said landlord or other person having been first 
 summoned by a justice'', to issue their warrant to levy by 
 distress and sale of the goods and chattels of such landlord 
 or other person the full value of the said property, or the 
 amount of such damage, as the case may be, together with all 
 costs of recovering and levying the same.” 
 
 Penalty for obliterating Mark on MachmeJ] —Sect. 20. 
 ‘‘ If any person or persons shall obliterate, efface, or alter 
 the owner’s name or initials, or other distinguishing mark, 
 on any frame, loom, or machine, or any bar or part thereof, 
 or the moulds thereof, without the order or authority of the 
 owner thereof, he shall, on conviction thereof before two 
 justices of the peace, forfeit any such sum not exceeding two 
 pounds as such two justices shall order and direct, to be 
 applied, in the first place, in paying the costs of the pro¬ 
 ceedings before such justices, and the surplus, if any, to the 
 party injured; and in default of payment of such forfeiture 
 immediately on conviction, or within such period as the 
 justices so convicting shall direct, then the said justices may, 
 either immediately or at any time after such conviction, commit 
 any person so convicted to the common gaol or house of correc¬ 
 tion, there to be imprisoned, with or without hard labour, as to 
 the said justices shall seem meet, for any term not exceeding 
 two calendar months, unless the amount of such forfeiture be 
 sooner paid.” 
 
 Power to award Costs to Defendant.‘\ —Sect. 21. “And 
 for the discouragement of frivolous and vexatious infor¬ 
 mations and prosecutions under this act, be it enacted, that 
 it shall be lawful for any justices or court of petty sessions 
 before whom any case under this act is tried to award costs 
 to the defendant, with an allowance for his loss of time, in 
 case of acquittal, to be paid by the prosecutor; and also, 
 if it shall appear to such justices or court that the charge 
 was made from a malicious, vexatious, or frivolous motive, 
 or in case the party shall be charged with embezzlement of 
 materials, by reason of any deficiency in the weight of the 
 D. S 
 
 » 
 
258 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 materials which he shall have returned to the person by whom 
 they were iatrusted to such party, as compared with the 
 weio-ht of the materials received, and it shall be proved upon 
 the "hearing of the case that such materials vrere knowingly 
 imd fraudulently delivered to the party charged whilst in a 
 damp state, so that the apparent weight thereof was thereby 
 increased, it shall be lawful for such justices or court to award 
 to the defendant such further sum of money not exceeding 
 twenty pounds as to such justices or court shall seem fit, to be 
 paid by such prosecutor as a compensation for the injury done; 
 and in default of payment such costs and allowances and com¬ 
 pensations may be levied by distress and sale of the prose¬ 
 cutor’s goods.” 
 
 Mode of proceeding to enforce Appearance.'] —Sect. 22. 
 “ Where any person shall be charged on oath with any offence 
 punishable under this act one justice may receive the original 
 information and summon the person charged to appear before 
 any two justices of the peace at a time and place to be named 
 in such summons, and if he shall not appear accordingly then 
 the justices there present may either proceed to hear and 
 determine the case ex parte, or any of such justices may issue 
 a warrant for apprehending such person, and bringing him to 
 answer the said charge before any two or more justices, or the 
 justice before whom the charge shall be made may, if he shall 
 so think fit, issue such warrant in the first instance, without 
 any previous summons, and commit the person so charged to 
 prison, in order that he may be brought forward for trial 
 (unless he enter into such bail as may be required by such 
 justice for his appearance at such time and place as shall be 
 appointed) ; and the justices before whom the person charged 
 shall appear or be brought shall proceed to hear and determine 
 the case; and after adjudication all and every the subsequent 
 proceedings to enforce obedience thereto, 'whether respecting 
 the penalty, forfeiture, distress, imprisonment, costs, or other 
 matter or thing relating thereto, may be enforced by any one 
 of the said justices.” 
 
 Service of Summons.] —Sect. 23. “ Every summons to be 
 granted by a justice of the peace under this act may be served 
 by delivering a copy thereof to the party, or by delivering such 
 copy at the jiarty’s usual place of abode to some inmate thereat, 
 and explaining the purport thereof to such inmate.” 
 
 Limitation of Time within which Proceedings to be com- 
 mcTiced — Prosecutor, S^'C. a competent fPitness.] — Sect. 24. 
 “Every comjilaint and prosecution under this act shall be com¬ 
 menced within six calendar months after the commission of the 
 offence, unless the offending party shall have in the meantime 
 left the country, and not otherwise; and that . . . any 
 
 peison aiding, abetting, party or privy to the commission of 
 
6 & 7 ViCT. c. 40. 
 
 259 
 
 the offence charged, shall in every case under this act be 
 deemed a competent witness to prove the offence.” 
 
 What Justices to have Jurisdiction,^ —Sect. 25. ‘‘ In all 
 complaints, warrants, proceedings or prosecutions under this 
 act, any justice or justices of the peace, and the court of petty 
 sessions for the county, city, borough, or place where the 
 offence shall be committed or the complaint arise, or where the 
 said materials, frame, loom, machine, tools, or apparatus shall 
 be given out or intrusted, lent or hired, or where the manu¬ 
 facturer, master, or employer shall carry on his trade or busi¬ 
 ness, shall have full power and authority to act, and to hear 
 and determine such complaint, warrant, proceeding, or prosecu¬ 
 tion, and do all other matters incident thereto: provided 
 always, that in all convictions or adjudications under this act 
 one at least of the convicting or adjudicating justices shall be a 
 person not engaged in any manufacture, trade, occupation, or 
 employment to which this act extends, and shall not be the 
 father, son, or brother of any such person.” 
 
 Sect. 26. Application of penalties. 
 
 Sect. 27. Scale of imprisonment on summary convictions not 
 specially provided for. 
 
 Sect. 28. Form of conviction. 
 
 Sect. 29. Appeal to quarter sessions in certain cases. 
 
 Sect. 30. Proceedings not to be quashed for want of form, or 
 be removed by certiorari. 
 
 Sect. 31. Limitation of actions against persons acting in 
 execution of this act. 
 
 Sect. 33. This act not to extend to Scotland or Ireland. 
 
 To what Trades this Act shall extend.~\ —Sect. 34. ‘‘ This 
 act shall not extend or be construed to extend to any manufac¬ 
 ture, trade, occupation, or employment, except only the manu¬ 
 factures, trades, occupations, and employments following; (that 
 is to say,) the manufacture of woollen, worsted, linen, cotton, 
 flax, mohair, or silk materials in, on, or by the stocking-frame, 
 warp machine, or any other machine employed in the manufac¬ 
 ture of frame-work, knitted or looped fabrics, and every trade, 
 occupation, operation, or employment whatsoever connected 
 with or incidental to the manufacture of stockings, gloves, and 
 other articles of hosiery.” 
 
 Construction of Terms.~\ —Sect. 35. “ In all cases under 
 this act the singular is to include the plural, and the masculine 
 the feminine ; and in an indictment or information for offences 
 against the property of partners, joint stock companies, or 
 trustees, it shall be sufficient to lay the ownership in the name 
 of one partner or trustee and another or others ; that the words, 
 “ woollen, worsted, linen, cotton, flax, mohair, or silk materials,” 
 shall be construed to extend to any of the said materials mixed 
 with each other or with any other material or materials ; and 
 s 2 
 
260 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 that the words “manufacture” and “work” shall extend to 
 trades, occupations, operations, and employments whatsoever 
 connected with or incidental to the manufacture of any ot tbe 
 said materials, or any parts, branches, or processes thereof, and 
 likewise to such materials, whether the same or any part thereof 
 he or be not in the whole or in part first wrought, made up, or 
 manufactured or converted into merchantable wares.” 
 
 Sects. 7 and 17 of this act were repealed by the Conspiracy 
 
 and Protection of Property Act, 1875 ; and sects. 32, 36 and 37, 
 and the words “ the informer or prosecutor, or,” in sect. 24, 
 were expressly repealed by tbe Statute Law Revision Act, 1874 
 (No. 2). 
 
 7 & 8 ViCT. c. 15. 
 
 An Act to amend the haws relating to Labour in 
 Factories, 
 
 Although the Factory Acts, 1833 to 1871 (5), and subsequent 
 acts, closely affect the relation of employer and employed, and 
 the provisions of these acts may often have to be referred to or 
 borne in mind in regard to “disputes” under the Employers 
 and Workmen Act, 1875, it would be impossible to include 
 them in tbe limits of this work. Nevertheless, the provisions 
 of the 7 & 8 Viet. c. 15 (the Factory Act, 1844), relating to 
 fencing machinery, may be usefully mentioned, for, as has been 
 remarked, “ no portion of the law has given rise to so much 
 discussion in the courts as that which relates to the fencing of 
 dangerous machinery, and the liability of the occupier of the 
 factory to workpeople injured by accidents therefrom. This, 
 indeed, is scarcely to be wondered at, seeing that the accidents 
 officially reported to the inspector of factories as occurring in 
 one half-year reach the number of 3,823.” {Notcutt^s preface 
 to the Factory and Workshop Acts, 1874). 
 
 If “disi)ute” is to be read in the wide sense suggested in a 
 previous part of the work (see ante^ pp. 121, 122), it seems that 
 a claim by a workman against an employer for damages by 
 reason of non-fencing machinery is a matter within the cogni¬ 
 zance of a court of summary jurisdiction under the Employers 
 and Workmen Act, 1875, as “arising out of, or incidental to, 
 
 (?>) All the Factory Acts from of the acts, so far as they relate to 
 the Factory Act, 1833, to the Fac- factories, are to be construed together 
 tory Act, 1874, may bo cited as tbe as one act. (See 34 & 35 Viet. c. 104, 
 factory Act«, 1833 to 1874 (see s. 2.) 
 
 37 8c 38 Viet. c. 44, s. 1), and most 
 
7 & 8 ViCT. c. 15. 
 
 261 
 
 tlieir relation as such”; and, although claims are limited in 
 amount to 10/., it is probable that the ready mode of taking 
 proceedings at a very trifling cost, will make these “ courts of 
 summary jurisdiction ” a medium for enforcing claims of this 
 description. 
 
 In applying the law to those courts it must be borne in mind 
 that only the contracting parties can sue or be sued. 
 
 The 7 & S Viet. c. 15, enacts that (sect. 21) “every fly¬ 
 wheel directly connected with the steam-engine, or water¬ 
 wheel, or other mechanical power, whether in the engine-house 
 or not, and every part of a steam-engine and water-wheel, and 
 every hoist or teagle, near to which children or young persons 
 are liable to pass or be employed, and all parts of the mill 
 gearing in a factory, shall be securely fenced, and every wheel- 
 race not otherwise secured, shall be fenced close to the edge of 
 the wheel-race ; and the said protection to each part shall not 
 be removed while the parts required to be fenced are in motion 
 by the action of the steam-engine, water-wheel, or other mecha¬ 
 nical power for any manufacturing process.” 
 
 The Factory Act, 1856 (19 & 20 Viet. c. 38) enacts (sect. 4), 
 “ the said sect. 21, so far as the same refers to mill gearing, 
 shall apply only to those parts thereof with which children and 
 young persons and women are liable to come in contact, either 
 in passing or in their ordinary occupation in the factory” (c). 
 
 The true construction of the two acts taken together is, tliat 
 every fly-wheel directly connected with the steam-engine or 
 water-wheel, or other mechanical power, whether in the engine- 
 house or not, and every part of a steam-engine and water¬ 
 wheel, must be securely fenced in all cases, whether children 
 or young persons are employed or not. (Bramwell, B., Brilton 
 Y. Great Western Cotton Co., L. Rw, 7 Ex. 130; 41 L. J., Ex. 99.) 
 
 The application of sect. 21 is not restrained to that part of 
 the machinery which first conveys the power ; but it extends 
 to any wheel from first to last which is in any sense the me¬ 
 dium of communication, although that part which actually does 
 the work need not be fenced. {Holmes v. Clarke, 6 H. & N. 
 349; 30 L. J., Ex. 135 ; in error, 7 H. & N. 937; 31 L. J., 
 Ex. 356.) 
 
 Nevertheless, the mill gearing in each separate room of a 
 factory is separate and distinct from the mill gearing in any 
 other room ; and, consequently, the mill gearing in any parti¬ 
 cular room requires fencing only when some manufacturing 
 process is going on in that room. (Coe v. Platt. 7 Exch. Rep. 
 923; 22 L. J., Ex. 164.) 
 
 (c) It seems that this statutory the liability to fence mill gearing 
 limitation was the result of the de- under sect. 21 of 7 & 8 Viet. c. 15, 
 cision in Doel v. Sheppard, 5 E. & existed, although so situated as to 
 B. 856 ; 25 L. J., Q. B. 124; that involve no danger. 
 
262 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 Besides tlie above sections there are various provisions for 
 the protection of children and young persons from accidents, 
 and for giving notice of accidents to surgeons appointed under 
 the Factory Acts, and for notices, by inspectors to factory occu¬ 
 piers, of dangerous machinery. The Secretary of State, on the 
 report and recommendation of an inspector, may empower the 
 inspector to direct one or more actions to be brought in the 
 name and on behalf of any person injured by the machinery for 
 
 the recovery of damages. 
 
 Moreover, the Factory Acts Extension Act, 1867 (30 & 31 
 Viet. c. 103), provides, schedule 9, par. 24, that “ where it 
 appears to one of her Majesty’s principal secretaries of state 
 that the regulations of the Factory Acts relating to the fencing 
 of machinery require to be modified in any particular trade, 
 and that such modifications can be made with due regard to the 
 safety of the children, young persons, and women employed, he 
 may, by order with respect to any particular factory, or any 
 class of factories, modify the said regulations so far as such 
 trade is concerned, upon such terms and in such manner as he 
 thinks fit. Such order shall be advertised in the London 
 Gazette, or otherwise published in such manner as the Secre¬ 
 tary of State may think fit. Any regulations so modified by 
 the said Secretary of State shall be of the same validity as if 
 they had been the original regulations contained in the Factory 
 Acts.” 
 
 The liabilities incurred by a neglect to observ^e the provisions 
 of the Factory Acts respecting the fencing of dangerous ma¬ 
 chinery are thus conveniently stated :— 
 
 1. For not fencing the several parts of the machinery re¬ 
 quired by sect. 21 to be fenced, the offender is liable to a penalty 
 of not less than 5/., and not more than 20/. (7 & 8 Viet. c. 15, 
 s. 59). For not fencing the machinery driving-strap or band 
 as to which the inspector or sub-inspector shall have given 
 notice under sect. 43, requiring it to be securely fenced, the 
 offender is liable to a penalty of not less than 5/., and not more 
 than 20/. (19 & 20 Viet. c. 38, s. 6). 
 
 2. But if any person suffers bodily injury by reason of such 
 neglect to fence, or by reason of the occupier’s neglect to fence 
 any part of the machinery, or any driving-strap or band, of 
 which he shall have received notice from an inspector or sub- 
 inspector, as provided in sect. 43, that the same was deemed to 
 be dangerous, the occupier incurs a penalty of not less than 10/., 
 nor more than 100/. (7 & 8 Viet. c. 15, s. 60). 
 
 3. If any person receives any bodily injury from the ma¬ 
 chinery of any factory, an action may be brought on his behalf, 
 by direction of the inspector, for the recoveiy of damages under 
 
 sect. 24 of 7 & 8 Viet. c. 15. 
 
 4. In the event of personal injuiy to any person employed at 
 
7 & 8 ViCT. c. 15. 
 
 263 
 
 the factory, arising from a neglect to fence any machinery, &c., 
 required by the acts to be fenced, there is authority for saying 
 that the owner or occupier is liable to an action for the recovery 
 of damages at the suit of such person (or, if he is killed, at the 
 suit of his personal representatives, under Lord Campbell’s Act, 
 9 & 10 Yict. c. 93); this action being founded upon the breach 
 of a statutory duty (see Britton v. Great Western Cotton Co.^ 
 L. K., 7 Ex. 130; 41 L. J., Ex. 99; Grey v. Pullen, 5 
 B. & S. 970). But it has been doubted whether, if a person sus¬ 
 tains an injury in consequence of work being imperfectly or 
 improperly performed, any civil liability is imposed upon an 
 owner by reason of a statutable obligation, if without the sta¬ 
 tute he would not have been liable. ( Wilson v. Merry, Law 
 Rep., 1 Scotch Appeal Cases, 326.) With regard to the factory 
 owner or occupier’s liability for the breach of his statutory duty, 
 it is to be observed that the fact that the statute imposes penal¬ 
 ties does not deprive the injured party of any right of action he 
 may have, the remedy by penalties being cumulative. ( Caswell 
 V. Worth, 5 E. & B. 849; 25 L. J., Q. B. 121 ; Couch v. Steel, 
 3 E. & B. 402; 23 L. J., Q. B. 121.) 
 
 Nor does the above-mentioned provision of sect. 24 destroy his 
 right to sue {Caswell v. Worth, supra); and the duty to fence 
 being thus imposed by statute, the master has been held liable for 
 the injury sustained by the servant in consequence of that duty 
 being neglected, notwithstanding the general doctrine that a 
 servant cannot recover for injuries resulting from the careless¬ 
 ness of a workman, if that servant be competent for the dis¬ 
 charge of his duties (c?). {Holmes v. Clarke, 6 H. & N. 349 ; 
 
 (<Z) The rule of law referred to 
 in the text, as to the position of a 
 servant in reference to acts of neg¬ 
 ligence by others in his master’s 
 employ, is of such great importance, 
 and one that may he involved in 
 cases brought before courts of sum¬ 
 mary jurisdiction, that I hope a re¬ 
 ference to two leading cases de¬ 
 cided by the House of Lords on the 
 subject will not be thought out of 
 place. The principle was thus stated 
 by Lord Cran worth :— 
 
 “ When the workman contracts to 
 do work of any particular sort, he 
 knows, or ought to know, to what 
 risks he is exposing himself; he 
 knows, if such be the nature of the 
 risk, that want of care on the part 
 of a fellow-workman may be in¬ 
 jurious or fatal to him, and that 
 against such want of care his em¬ 
 ployer cannot by possibility protect 
 him. If such want of care should 
 
 occur, and evil is the result, he 
 cannot say that he does not know 
 whether the master or the servant 
 was to blame. He knows that the 
 blame was wholly that of the ser¬ 
 vant. He cannot say the master 
 need not have engaged in the work 
 at all, for he was party to its being 
 undertaken. Principle, therefore, 
 seems to me opposed to the doctrine 
 that the responsibility of a master 
 for the ill consequences of his ser¬ 
 vant’s carelessness is applicable to 
 the demand made by a fellow-work¬ 
 man in respect of evil resulting 
 from the carelessness of a fellow- 
 workman when engaged in a com¬ 
 mon work.” Lord Cranworth, Bar- 
 tonnhall Coal Company v. Reid, 3 
 Macq. 282. 
 
 In citing this passage with ap¬ 
 proval, Lord Cairns said in a later 
 case 
 
 “ I would only add to this state- 
 
261: 
 
 the labour laws. 
 
 30 L. J.,EX. 135; in error, 7 H. &N.937; 31 L. J., Ex 356.) 
 Nevertheless, the negligence of the workman himself who 
 complains, is a good defence to an action founded on the 
 statutory duty. (^Holmes v. Clarke^ supra.^ i tti 
 
 Lastly, apart from the obligations imposed by the Factory 
 Acts, the owner or occupier of a factory, by neglecting to 
 provide sufficient fencings, or to take reasonable precautions to 
 prevent accidents from dangerous machinery, may render him¬ 
 self liable to an action at the suit of any injured person, 
 founded upon his common law duty in that respect, and in¬ 
 dependently of any statutory provisions. (Holmes v. Clarke, 
 supra.) For where a servant is employed on machinery, from 
 the use of which danger may arise, it is the duty of the master 
 to take due care, and to use all reasonable means to guard 
 against and prevent any defects from which increased and unne¬ 
 cessary danger may arise. (Id.; Bartonshall Coal Co. v. Reid, 
 3 Macq. II. L. C. 266 ; Roberts v. Smith, 2 H. & N. 213; 26 
 L. J., Ex. 319; Ashworth v. Stanwix, 3 E. & E. 701; 30 
 
 ment of the law, that I do not think 
 the liability or non-liability of the 
 master to his workmen can depend 
 upon the question whether the 
 author of the accident is not, or is, 
 in any technical sense, the fellow- 
 workman or collaboratcur of the 
 sufferer. In the majority of cases 
 in which accidents have occurred 
 the negligence has no doubt been the 
 negligence of a fellow-workman; 
 but the case of the fellow-workman 
 appears to me to be an example of 
 the rule, and not the rule itself. The 
 rule, as I think, must stand upon 
 higher and broader grounds. As is 
 said by a distinguished jurist : 
 ‘ Ej'cmpln non restringunt re- 
 gulam, sed loqnuntur de casibus 
 crehriorihus' (Donellus de Jure 
 Civ. 1. 1), c. 2, n.) The master is 
 not, and cannot be liable to his ser¬ 
 vant, unless there be negligence on 
 the part of the master in that which 
 he, the master, has contracted or 
 undertaken with his servant to do. 
 The master has not contracted or 
 undertaken to execute in person the 
 work connected with his business. 
 The result of an obligation on the 
 master personally to execute the 
 work connected with his business, 
 in place of being beneficial, might 
 be disastrous to his servants, for the 
 master might be incompetent j)er- 
 sonally to perform the Avork. At 
 
 all events, a servant may choose for 
 himself between serving a master 
 who does and a master who docs 
 not attend in person to his business. 
 But what the master is, in my 
 opinion, bound to his servant to do, 
 in the event of his not personally 
 superintending and directing the 
 Avork, is to select proper and com¬ 
 petent persons to do so, and to fur¬ 
 nish them Avith adequate materials 
 and resources for the work. When 
 he has done this he has, in my 
 opinion, done all that he is bound 
 to do. And if the persons so 
 selected are guilty of negligence, 
 this is not the negligence of the 
 master ; and if an accident occurs 
 to a Avorkman to-day in consequence 
 of the negligence of another Avork¬ 
 man, skilful and competent, who was 
 formerly but is no longer in the 
 employment of the master, the 
 master is, in my opinion, not liable, 
 although the tAvo Avorkmen cannot 
 technically be described as felloAv- 
 Avorkraen. As was said in the case 
 of Tarrant v. Webb, 25 L. J., C. P. 
 2G3, negligence cannot exist if the 
 master does his best to employ com¬ 
 petent persons ; he cannot warrant 
 the competency of his servants.” 
 Lord Chancellor Cairns, Wilson v. 
 J^lernj, Luav Hep., 1 Scotch Appeal 
 Cases, 326. 
 
14 & 15 Yict. c. 92. 
 
 2G5 
 
 L. J., Q. B. 333 ; Mellors v. Shaw, 1 B. & S. 437 ; 30 L. J., 
 Q. B. 333; Walling v. Oastler, 40 L. J., Ex. 43j; and this 
 liability applies not merely to the neglect to fence, but to the 
 owner’s negligent use of machinery by the employment of 
 incompetent persons. (See per Cockburn, C. J., Grizzle v. 
 Frost, 3 F. & F. 622.) 
 
 But in this action, founded upon the common law liability, 
 as in any action maintainable upon the statutory liability, the 
 contributory negligence of the workman who sues affords a 
 good defence (e). 
 
 8 & 9 Yict. c. 77. 
 
 An Act to make further Regulations respecting the Tickets 
 of Work to be delivered to Persons employed in the 
 Manufacture of Hosiery in certain cases, 
 
 8 & 9 Yict. c. 128. 
 
 An Act to make further Regulations respecting the Tickets 
 of Work to he delivered to Silk Weavers in certain 
 cases, 
 
 [See these statutes inLovesy’s Law of Arbitrations between 
 Masters and Workmen.] 
 
 Section 7 of the 8 & 9 Yict. c. 128, is repealed by the Con¬ 
 spiracy and Protection of Property Act, 1875, s. 17 (see ante, 
 p. 205.) 
 
 14 & 15 Yict. c. 92. 
 
 An Act to consolidate and amend the Acts relating to 
 certain Offences and other Matters as to which Jus¬ 
 tices of the Peace exercise Summary Jurisdiction in 
 Ireland (/). 
 
 Sect. 16. “ The decision of certain disputes between em- 
 
 {e') The above summary of lia¬ 
 bilities (except note id), p. 263), is 
 taken nearly verbatim from Not- 
 cntVs Factory and Workshop Acts, 
 p. 69 et seq. I have not the 
 pleasure of knowing Mr. Notcutt, 
 but I hope, if this meets his 
 eye, he will pardon the liberty I 
 take in remarking that his work is 
 one of the very best handbooks of 
 collected statutes on a particular 
 subject that I have ever met with. 
 
 (/) See Conspiracy and Protec¬ 
 tion of Property Act, 1875, s. 17, 
 ante, p. 203, repealing sub-sect. 4 
 of sect. 16 of this act, and regu¬ 
 lating the enforcement of orders 
 for wages, &c. It may be ob¬ 
 served that the 14 & 15 Viet. c. 92, 
 has been partially repealed, viz, 
 sect. 18 (with a proviso), by 23 & 24 
 Viet. c. 119, s. 4; and sects. 2, 3, 
 4 and 5 by 24 & 25 Viet. c. 95. 
 
266 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 ployers aud the persons employed by them shall be subject to 
 
 the following provisions : n i . 
 
 1. It shall be lawful for the justices to hear and determine 
 
 any disputes concerning any sums which shall be due 
 for wages by any master to his apprentice, or by any 
 employer to any artificer, labourer, servant, or other 
 person employed by him to do any species of work or 
 labour whatsoever (whether he shall find materials for 
 the performance of the same or not, aud whether such 
 wages shall be due in respect to any day’s work or to 
 any labour done or performed by task, job, or contract); 
 or which shall be due by any person for the hire of any 
 horse, ass, mule, bullock, or other animal for draught, or 
 of any cart, dray, car, plough, harrow, or vehicle drawn 
 by any such animal for the purpose of any labouring- 
 work (and not being for the carriage of any passenger 
 or passengers), or for the hire of any boat for the pur¬ 
 pose of any labouring work (and not being for the 
 carriage of any passenger or passengers), and whether 
 such hire shall be by the day or by contract or other¬ 
 wise ; or which shall be due to any schoolmaster or. 
 teacher for the teaching of any child in any school or 
 other place, and whether the engagement shall be for a 
 payment by the day or for any other period, or in any 
 other manner (provided that the amount of the demand 
 for such wages, hire, or tuition, in any of such cases, 
 whether originally greater or not, shall not exceed ten 
 pounds); and to make such order as they shall see fit 
 for payment of such sums as shall appear to be justly 
 due to the complainant by his master or employer, or, 
 in case of any sum claimed for the teaching of any 
 child, by the parent or other person who shall have 
 engaged the complainant to teach such child: 
 
 2. Whenever it shall appear to the satisfaction of the jus¬ 
 
 tices that any schoolmaster, teacher, servant, artificer, 
 labourer, or other person so employed as aforesaid has 
 been or is likely to bo detained from his home or usual 
 place of residence, or has suffered or is likely to suffer 
 any additional loss by reason of the nonpayment of any 
 sum which such justices shall so adjudge to be due to 
 him, it shall be lawful for such justices to order that 
 there shall be paid to him by such master or employer, 
 not only the sum so duo to him, but also such further 
 sum as compensation, not exceeding the sum of forty 
 shillings for the time during which ho shall have been 
 so detained from his usual place of residence, or for the 
 loss suffered or likely to bo suffered, as such justices 
 shall think to be reasonable, having regard to the length 
 
24 & 25 Yict. c. 94. 
 
 267 
 
 of such detentioD, the diligence or remissness of either 
 party, the usual earnings of such schoolmaster, teacher, 
 servant, artificer, labourer, or person, and the sum which 
 within the time of such detention he did earn, or under 
 all the circumstances of the case might have earned; 
 
 3. In every case where any such master or employer shall 
 intrust his business to the management and superin¬ 
 tendence of any steward, agent, bailiff, foreman, or 
 manager, it shall be lawful for the justices to summon 
 such steward, agent, bailiff, foreman or manager to 
 appear at petty sessions, and to hear and determine the 
 matter of the complaint in such and the like manner as 
 complaints of the like nature against any master or em¬ 
 ployer, and to make an order for the payment by such 
 steward, agent, bailiff, foreman, or manager, to the com¬ 
 plainant, of such sum or compensation as shall be justly 
 due to him; and in case of refusal or nonpayment of any 
 such sum or compensation at such time as shall be di¬ 
 rected by such justices it shall be lawful for them to 
 issue a warrant to levy the same by distress and sale of 
 the goods of such master or employer: 
 
 5. Any servant or other person who shall hire or engage 
 with any master or other person under any false or 
 forged discharge or certificate of character, shall bo 
 liable to forfeit all the wages which shall be due to him 
 by such master or person at the time of his conviction, 
 and shall also be liable to a fine not exceeding five 
 pounds, and*in default of payment to be imprisoned for 
 a term not exceeding three months.” 
 
 24 & 25 Yict. c. 94. 
 
 An Act to consolidate and amend the Statute Law of 
 England and Ireland relating to Accessories to and 
 Abettors of Indictable Offences {gf 
 
 Abettors in Misdemeanors.'] —Sect. 8. “ Whosoever shall aid 
 abet, counsel, or procure the commission of any misdemeanor 
 whether the same he a misdemeanor at common law or by virtue 
 
 {g') Certain provisions of the 
 Criminal Law Consolidation Acts, 
 24 & 25 Viet. cc. 94 — 100, are 
 given here, and although some of 
 these have no special reference on 
 their face to employers or workmen, 
 
 they will have to be borne in mind, 
 and to be considered in conjunction 
 with offences under the Conspiraev 
 and Protection of Property Act, 
 
268 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 of any act passed or to be passed, shall be liable to be tried, 
 indicted and punished as a principal offender. 
 
 This provision does not extend the common law, which treats every 
 accessory to a misdemeanor as a principal. See 1 Hale, P. C. 613 ; 4 Bla. 
 Com. 36 ; R. v. Greenn'ood^ 2 Den. C. C. 453 ; S. C.y 21 L. J. (N. S.) 
 M. C. 127. 
 
 As to aiders, &c. in offences under the act, punishable on summary 
 conviction, see 24 & 25 Viet. c. 96, s. 99. See also 11 & 12 Viet. c. 43, s. 5. 
 
 24 & 25 ViCT. c. 96. 
 
 A?! Act to consolidate and amend the Statute Late of 
 Enrjland and Ireland relating to Larceny and other 
 similar Offences. 
 
 Bailees fraudulently converting Property guilty of Lar¬ 
 ceny.^ —Sect. 3. “ Whosoever, being a bailee of any chattel, 
 money or valuable security, shall fraudulently take or convert 
 the same to his own use or the use of any person other than 
 the owner thereof, although he shall not break bulk or other¬ 
 wise determine the bailment, shall be guilty of larceny, and 
 may be convicted thereof upon an indictment for larceny; but 
 this section shall not extend to any offence punishable on sum¬ 
 mary conviction.” 
 
 With some exceptions, this section was a re-enactment of sect. 4 of the 
 repealed Fraudulent Trustee Act, 20 & 21 Viet. c. 54. 
 
 At common law, where goods are delivered to another upon trust (as 
 w'here they are given to a carrier to carry), or where the goods are taken 
 with the owner’s consent (as where they are borrowed or hired, without 
 any fraud in the first instance), as the carrier and other persons have a 
 special property in the goods, as distinguished from the bare possession, 
 the subsequent conversion of the goods, while what is termed “ the con¬ 
 tract of bailment ” continues, does not amount at common law to a larceny, 
 but only to a breach of trust, the subject of an action. (See as illustrations, 
 Jteg. V. Gihhs, 24 L. J. (N. S.) M. C. 62 ; S. C. Dears. C. C. 445; Reg. v. 
 Thlrstle, 19 L. J. (N. S.) M. C. 66). Nevertheless, if the contract of bail¬ 
 ment bo first determined, then the subsequent fraudulent eonversion is a 
 larceny at common law, and the bailment is said to be determined by 
 “ breaking bulk,” or by some other wrongful act. Thus, if a carrier 
 opened a parcel or box entrusted to him he was said to break the bulk, and 
 this determined the bailment, and his subsequently fraudulently taking the 
 contents was larceny. See also Reg. v. Poyser, 20 L. J. (N. S.) M. C. 191. 
 This technical distinction is got rid of by the provision in the text. 
 
24 & 25 Yict. c. 96. 
 
 269 
 
 Mr. Greaves, Q.C., who drew the Criminal Law Consolidation Statutes, 
 says the proviso (that the section shall not extend to any offence punish¬ 
 able on summary conviction) “was introduced to prevent the clause 
 applying to the cases of persons employed in the silk, woollen, and other 
 manufactures, who dispose of goods entrusted to them, and are liable to be 
 summarily convicted under sundry statutes” (Edit, of Consolidation Acts). 
 
 Without the proviso, however, the section would not apply to servantSf 
 as the possession of a servant is in law the possession of the master. The 
 servant is not a bailee, and there is no difficulty in applying the ordinary 
 law of stealing to servants entrasted with the care of property, and who 
 purloin it. The sundry statutes, however, often include cases of persons 
 who are not strictly servants, but who undertake work, and who are, therefore, 
 “bailees” of the property entrusted to them, and it is to such cases that 
 Mr. Greaves’ observation of course applies. It is very important, there¬ 
 fore, that the proviso in sect. 3 should be borne in mind, and the statutes 
 given in this Appendix examined before proceeding to prosecute charges of 
 misappropriation of property by persons employed in manufactures. 
 
 Miners removing Ore with intent to defraiidJ] —Sect. 39. 
 ‘‘ Whosoever, being employed in or about any mine, shall take, 
 remove, or conceal any ore of any metal, or any lapis calami- 
 naris, manganese, mundick, or other mineral found or being in 
 such mine, with intent to defraud any proprietor of or any 
 adventurer in such mine, or any workman or miner employed 
 therein, shall be guilty of felony, and being convicted thereof 
 shall be liable, at the discretion of the court, to be imprisoned 
 for any term not exceeding two years, with or without hard 
 labour, and with or without solitary confinement.” 
 
 This provision was taken from the Stannaries Act, 2 & 3 Viet. c. 58, 
 s. 10 (that section being repealed and made general). 
 
 This offence is triable at quarter sessions. 
 
 Stealing Goods in process of Manufacture.']— 62 
 ‘‘Whosoever shall steal, to the value of ten shillings,* any 
 woollen, linen, hempen, or cotton yarn, or any goods or article 
 of silk, woollen, linen, cotton, alpaca, or mohair, or of any 
 one or more of those materials mixed with each other or 
 mixed with any other material, whilst laid, placed, or ex¬ 
 posed, during any stage, process, or progress of manufacture 
 in any building, field, or other place, shall be guilty of felony* 
 and being convicted thereof shall be liable, at the discretion 
 of the court, to be kept in penal servitude for any term not 
 exceeding fourteen years and not less than three years — or 
 to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding two years ’with 
 or without hard labour, and with or without solitary confine¬ 
 ment.” 
 
 This offence is triable at quarter sessions. 
 
270 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 Larceny hy Clerks or Servants?^ — Sect. 67. “Whosoever, 
 beinff a clerk or servant, or being employed for the purpose or 
 in the capacity of a clerk or servant, shall steal any chattel, 
 money or valuable security belonging to or in the possession 
 or power of his master or employer, shall be guilty of felony, 
 and being convicted thereof shall be liable, at the discretion of 
 the court, to be kept in penal servitude for auy term not ex¬ 
 ceeding fourteen years and not less than three years, —or to be 
 imprisoned for any term not exceeding two years, with or with¬ 
 out hard labour, and with or without solitary confinement, and, 
 if a male under the age of sixteen years, with or without 
 whipping.” 
 
 Under this section the property or money must have been in the master’s 
 possession. (Sec lleg. v. Wright^ 27 L, J., M. C. 65.) This provision does 
 not create any new offence, but only increases the punishment. See the 
 note to the next section. 
 
 This offence is triable at quarter sessions. 
 
 Embezzlement hy Clerks or Servants^] —Sect. 68. “ Whoso¬ 
 ever, being a clerk or servant, or being employed for the pur¬ 
 pose or in the capacity of a clerk or servant, shall fraudulently 
 embezzle any chattel, money or valuable security which shall {h) 
 be delivered to or received or taken into possession by him for 
 or in the name or on the account (e) of his master or employer, 
 or any part thereof, shall be deemed to have feloniously stolen 
 the same from his master or employer, although such chattel, 
 money or security was not received into the possession of such 
 master or employer otherwise than by the actual possession of 
 his clerk, servant, or other person so employed, and being con¬ 
 victed thereof shall be liable, at the discretion of the court, to 
 be kept in penal servitude for any term not exceeding fourteen 
 years and not less than three years,—or to be imprisoned for 
 any term not exceeding two years, with or without hard labour, 
 and with or without solitary confinement, and, if a male under 
 the age of sixteen years, with or without whipping.” 
 
 See also sect. 72 by which persons may be convicted of embezzlement on 
 indictment for larceny and the converse. 
 
 {h) The words “ by virtue of 
 such employment” occurred in the 
 repealed statute 7 & 8 Geo. 4, c. 29, 
 s. 47, and the embezzlement of 
 money by a servant not authorized 
 to receive the money was not within 
 the statute ; sec the cases on this 
 point collected, Archbold’s Pleading 
 and Evidence in Criminal Cases, 
 14th ed. pp. 382, 383. The omission 
 avoids this technical distinction ; 
 still it must be the master’s money 
 which is received by the servant. 
 
 R. V. Cullum, L. R., 2 C. C. R. 28; 
 42 L. J., M. C. 64. 
 
 (i) The receipt must be for or in 
 the name or on account of the 
 master (^Reg. v. Beaumonty Dears. 
 270 ; 23 L. .1., M. C. 64 ; Reg. v. 
 Harris, Dears. 344 ; 23 L. J., M. C. 
 110); but the receipt may be in the 
 name of one person, and yet on 
 account of another, who is the 
 master. See Reg. v. Thorpe, 1 
 Dears. & B. 562; 27 L. J. (N. S.) 
 M. C. 264. 
 
24 & 25 Yict. c. 97. 
 
 271 
 
 Although a servant, who entrusted by his master with goods fraudulently 
 appropriates them to his own use, is guilty of lareeny, for the possession 
 of the servant is in law the possesion of the master, yet where goods or 
 money of which the master has never had the possession are delivered by 
 a third person to the servant for the master’s use, this, by a refined distine- 
 tion, is not larceny, and therefore required a special enactment; recent 
 cases illustrate the distinction. A foreman employed to sell goods for his 
 master sold some and received the price, and concealed the transaction, and 
 made use of the money. He could not be convicted of stealing the goodSy 
 for the sale was a good sale as between the master and customer, and he 
 could not be convicted of stealing the money, for the master never had 
 the possession. His real offence was embezzling the money. (^Reg. v. 
 BettSy Bell 90; 28 L. J. (N. S.) M. C. 69.) On the other hand, where 
 goods duly purchased by a servant for his master were placed in the 
 master’s care, and the servant took them, it was held that the master’s 
 possession had commenced, and therefore the offence was stealing. Reg. 
 V. Reedy Dears, 168, 257; 23 L. J., M. C. 25; and see Reg. v. WattSy 
 2 Den. 15, 19 L. J., M. C. 193. 
 
 Although the evidence of embezzlement frequently consists, in part, of 
 proof that the accused has omitted to debit himself with the money 
 received, yet even if a clerk has charged himself in his books with the 
 receipt of the money, the fraudulent appropriation of such money is 
 embezzlement. Reg. v. CrueldeVy Bell 284; 30 L. J. (N. S.) M. C. 34; 
 R. V. Listevy Dears. & B. 119; 26 L. J., M. C. 26. 
 
 As to where {i. <?., the county) the offence of embezzling can be said to 
 have been committed, see Reg. v. Murdochy 2 Den. C. C. 298; 21 L. J. 
 (N. S.) M. C. 22, and cases there cited. 
 
 This offence is triable at quarter sessions. 
 
 By 31 & 32 Viet. c. 116, the summary jurisdiction given by 18 & 19 
 Viet. c. 126, in ordinary cases of larceny was extended to embezzlements 
 by clerks and servants. 
 
 24 & 25 ViCT. c. 97. 
 
 Act to consolidate and amend the Statute Law of 
 England and Ireland relating to Malicious Injuries to 
 Property. 
 
 Destroying Goods in Process of Manufacture, certain 
 Machinery, ^c.]—Sect. 14. “ Whosoever shall unlawfully and 
 maliciously cut, break, or destroy, or damage with intent to 
 destroy or to render useless, any goods or article of silk 
 woollen, linen, cotton, hair, mohair, or alpaca, or of any one or 
 more of those materials mixed with each other or mixed with 
 any other material, or any framework-knitted piece, stockin«»', 
 
272 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 hose, or lace, being in the loom or frame, or on any machine or 
 eno-ine, or on the rack or tenters, or in any stage, process, or 
 progress of manufacture, or shall unlawfully and maliciously 
 cut,*^break, or destroy, or damage with intent to destroy or to 
 render useless, any warp or shute of silk, woollen, linen, cotton, 
 hair, mohair, or alpaca, or of any one or more of those materials 
 mixed with each other or mixed with any other material, or 
 shall unlawfully and maliciously cut, break, or destroy, or 
 damage with intent to destroy or render useless, any loom, 
 frame, machine, engine, rack, tackle, tool, or implement, whether 
 fixed or moveable, prepared for or employed in carding, spin¬ 
 ning, throwing, weaving, fulling, shearing, or otherwise manu¬ 
 facturing or preparing any such goods or articles, or shall by 
 force enter into any house, shop, building, or place, with intent 
 to commit any of the offences in this section mentioned, shall 
 be guilty of felony, and being convicted thereof shall be liable, 
 at the discretion of the court, to be kept in penal servitude for 
 life or for any term not less than three years,—or to be im¬ 
 prisoned for any term not exceeding two years, with or without 
 hard labour, and with or without solitary confinement, and, 
 if a male under the age of sixteen years, with or without 
 whipping.” 
 
 Destroying Machines in other Manufactures, Threshing 
 Machmes, S^c.l — Sect. \^. “Whosoever shall unlawfully and 
 maliciously cut, break, or destroy, or damage with intent to 
 destroy or to render useless, any machine or engine, whether 
 fixed or moveable, used or intended to be used for sowing, 
 reaping, mowing, thrashing, ploughing, or draining, or for per¬ 
 forming any other agricultural operation, or any machine or 
 engine, or any tool or implement, whether fixed or moveable, 
 prepared for or employed in any manufacture whatsoever 
 (except the manufacture of silk, woollen, linen, cotton, hair, 
 mohair, or alpaca goods, or goods of any one or more of those 
 materials mixed with each other or mixed with any other 
 material, or any framework-knitted piece, stocking, hose, or 
 lace), shall be guilty of felony, and being convicted thereof 
 shall be liable, at the discretion of the court, to be kept in 
 penal servitude for any term not exceeding seven years, and 
 not less than three years, — or to be imprisoned for any term 
 not exceeding two years, with or without hard labour, and 
 with or without solitary confinement, and, if a male under the 
 age of sixteen years, with or without whipping.” 
 
 Sections 26 to 29 relate to malicious injuries to mines (setting fire to a 
 coal mine, attempting to set fire to a mine, conveying water into a mine, 
 obstructing air-way, damaging engines for working mines, &c.) 
 
 Persons committing Malicious Injuries not before provided 
 for exceeding the Amount of o/.]—i^ect. .51. “ Whosoever shall 
 
24 & 25 Yict. c. 97. 
 
 273 
 
 unlawfully and maliciously (k) commit any damage, injury, or 
 spoil to or upon any real or personal property whatsoever, eithei 
 of a public or private nature, for which no punishment is herein¬ 
 before provided, the damage, injury, or spoil being to an amount 
 exceeding five pounds, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and 
 being convicted thereof shall be liable, at the discretion or the 
 court, to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding two 
 with or without hard labour; and iu case any such offence shall 
 be committed between the hours of nine of the clock in the 
 evening and six of the clock in the next morning, shall be liable, 
 at the discretion of the court, to be kept in penal servitude for 
 any term not exceeding five years and not less than three, or 
 to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding two years, with or 
 without hard labour.” 
 
 This offence is triable at quarter sessions. The costs of prosecutions can 
 be allowed : sect. 77. 
 
 Persons committing Damage to any Property, in any Case 
 not previously provided for, may he committed or fined, and 
 compelled by a Justice to pay Compensation not exceeding 
 —Sect. 52. “Whosoever shall wilfully or maliciously (^) 
 commit any damage, injury, or spoil to or upon any real or per¬ 
 sonal property whatsoever, either of a public or private nature, 
 for which no punishment is hereinbefore provided, shall, on 
 conviction thereof before a justice of the peace, at the discretion 
 of the justice, either be committed to the common gaol or house 
 of correction, there to be imprisoned only, or to be imprisoned 
 and kept to hard labour for any term not exceeding two months, 
 or else shall forfeit and pay such sum of money not exceeding 
 five pounds as to the justice shall seem meet, and also such 
 further sum of money as shall appear to the justice to be a rea¬ 
 sonable compensation for the damage, injury, or spoil so com¬ 
 mitted, not exceeding the sum of five pounds; which last-men¬ 
 tioned sum of money shall, in the case of private property, be 
 paid to the party aggrieved ; and in the case of property of 
 a public nature, or wherein any public right is concerned, the 
 money shall be applied in the same manner as every penalty 
 imposed by a justice of the peace under this act; and if such 
 sums of money, together with costs (if ordered), shall not bo 
 paid either immediately after the conviction, or within sucli 
 period as the justice shall at the time of the conviction appoint, 
 the justice may commit the offender to the common gaol or 
 house of correction, there to be imprisoned only, or to be im¬ 
 prisoned and kept to hard labour as the justice shall think fit, 
 
 (^) “ Whether the offence shall in respect of which it shall be com¬ 
 be committed from malice conceived mitted or otherwise sect. 68. 
 against the owner of the property 
 
 D. 
 
 T 
 
274 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 for any term not exceeding two months, unless such sums and 
 costs be sooner paid: provided that nothing herein contained 
 shall extend to any case where the party acted under a fair and 
 reasonable supposition that he had a right to do the act com¬ 
 plained of, nor to any trespass, not being wilful and malicious, 
 committed in hunting, fishing, or in the pursuit of game, but 
 that every such trespass shall be punishable in the same manner 
 as if this act had not passed.” 
 
 See also the following section, infra. An appeal lies to the quarter 
 sessions against a conviction under this section, where the sum adjudged 
 to be paid exceeds 6^., or the imprisonment exceeds one month, or the con¬ 
 viction is before one justice only, (see s, 68,) or either party may appeal to 
 one of the superior courts if dissatisfied with the determination of the 
 justice, as being erroneous in point of law : 20 & 21 Viet. c. 43. 
 
 Preceding Section to extend to Trees.'\ —Sect. 53. ‘‘The pro¬ 
 visions in the last preceding section contained shall extend to 
 any person who shall wilfully or maliciously commit any injury 
 to any tree, sapling, shrub, or underwood, for which no punish¬ 
 ment is hereinbefore provided.” 
 
 See sect. 66, enabling the justice on summary conviction for a first offence 
 to discharge on making satisfaction to the party aggrieved. As to process^ 
 see sects. 61, 62, 64, 65. Aiders and abettors are punishable : sect. 63. 
 
 See the note ante^ p. 267; and also ante, p. 156, as to malicious breaches 
 of contract, under the Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 1875. 
 
 There is a wide distinction in these provisions of the act as to malicious 
 inj uries. 
 
 Sect. 52 uses the disjunctive—“ whosoever shall wilfully or maliciously 
 commit any damage ”—and contains a proviso that “ nothing herein con¬ 
 tained shall extend to any case where the party acted under a fair and rea¬ 
 sonable supposition that he had a right to do the act complained of,” a 
 proviso that, as has been observed, would be absurd if the act must be 
 malicious as well as wilful; but under sect. 51 the words are, unlawfully 
 and maliciously. 
 
 The Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 1875, uses the conjunc¬ 
 tive—wilfully and maliciously—and as it is diflficult to suppose that an 
 act maliciously done is not also done wilfully (although it seems that 
 there may be an absence of will as regards an injurious result although a 
 malicious mind in regard to an act resulting in damage, see The Queen v. 
 Pemhleton, ante, pp. 156,157—and The Queen v. Child, Law Rep., 1 C. C. 
 R. 307; 40 L. J., M. C. 127, note), it is obvious that so far as the Malicious 
 Injuries Act can be applied to the new law, sect. 51 must be looked to 
 rather than sect. 52. The distinction between the two sections is shown by 
 the following case :— 
 
 The defendant with several other persons, and without any notice to the 
 complainant, forcibly entered the garden of the latter and dug a small 
 
24 & 25 ViCT. C. 97. 275 
 
 ditch along its length, doing damage to the amount of 1^. Upon a sum¬ 
 mons under sect, 52, the defendant called a witness (the owner of property 
 in the vicinity) to prove that he gave directions for the ditch to be 
 cut because a ditch to carry the surface drainage of a road had existed 
 there at a former period; but it appeared the witness had submitted to 
 its being closed fifteen years before. The justices found that the 
 defendant did not act under a fair and reasonable supposition that he 
 had a right to do the act complained of, and that the defendant was 
 not acting bond fide in the assertion or exercise of any right or sup¬ 
 posed right. They also found as a fact that the old ditch had not ex¬ 
 tended for the whole length cut by the defendant, and they convicted him. 
 It was held that the justices had authority to convict, it not being neces¬ 
 sary that the act should be malicious. It was suflficient if there was an 
 absence of a fair and reasonable right, and the defendant could not be in a 
 better position than the person who employed him, even assuming that ho 
 was told that fifteen years ago there was part of a ditch which received the 
 surface drainage from the road on the complainant’s land ( White v. Feast^ 
 41 L. J., M. C. 81). Blackburn, J., in his judgment, said, “ It is not accu¬ 
 rate to say that the justices have, by the common law, no jurisdiction to 
 decide upon a question as to the right to property, because at common law 
 the justices had no jurisdiction to deal summarily with any question what¬ 
 ever. A summary jurisdiction was conferred upon them by statute, and 
 as it was supposed that they were not proper persons to decide upon ques¬ 
 tions as to the title to property, and particularly as to the title to land, the 
 rule was laid down that such questions must be left to stronger hands. 
 But it was decided as far back as the time of Lord Denman, that where it 
 appeared from the purview of the whole acts that it was not contemplated 
 that the justices should hold their hands, the ordinary rule did not apply. 
 Then it is urged that upon the general principle, actus non facit reuni 
 nisi mens sit rea^ the appellant is not liable. But this question depends 
 upon the purview of the particular act, and whether it is intended to pro¬ 
 tect property and to punish even innocent trespassers against it. The 
 words of this act are, ‘ whosoever shall wilf ully or maliciously commit 
 any damage to property ’ shall be fined. The proviso excepts cases where 
 the party acted under a fair and reasonable supposition that he had a right 
 to do the act complained of. If it had been intended that the act must be 
 malicious as well as wilful, the proviso would be absurd; but the words 
 being, wilful or malicious, it has a very sensible meaning. It must be re¬ 
 collected that injuries to property are often done by poor people, against 
 whom it would be useless to bring an action; so that it is highly desirable 
 where there is no reasonable claim of right, that the offender should be 
 dealt with by the magistrate. The legislature may be unwilling to allow 
 magistrates to try the title to the freehold of property, but quite contented 
 that they should award compensation for injury to it, whether the wrong¬ 
 doer acted bond fide or not, if he had no supposition that he was in the 
 right. It is for the magistrates to decide whether there was any such rea¬ 
 sonable supposition, and the ordinary limitation to their power is to some 
 T 2 
 
276 
 
 THE LABOUE LAWS. 
 
 extent superseded. This being so, were the magistrates right in saying 
 that the case did not come within the proviso? I am far from saying 
 that there may not be cases, such as where a labourer is ordered by his 
 employer to dig a ditch on the boundaries of his property, where the act, 
 though wrongful, might reasonably be supposed to be lawful. But hero 
 the facts are different. ... The appellant cannot be allowed to say, 
 < There was a ditch in the respondent’s land twenty years ago, and there¬ 
 fore I have a right to turn his garden into a sewer now.’ ” 
 
 24 & 25 ViCT. C. 100. 
 
 An Act to consolidate and amend the Statute Law of 
 
 England and Ireland relating to Offences against the 
 
 Person, 
 
 Not providing Apprentices or Servants with Food, ^c, 
 whereby Life endangered.^ — Sect. 26. “ Whosoever, being 
 legally liable, either as a master or mistress, to provide for any 
 apprentice or servant necessary food, clothing, or lodging, shall 
 wilfully and without lawful excuse refuse of neglect to provide 
 the same, or shall unlawfully and maliciously do or cause to be 
 done any bodily harm to any such apprentice or servant, so 
 that the life of such apprentice or servant shall be endangered, 
 or the health of such apprentice or servant shall have been or 
 shall be likely to be permanently injured, shall be guilty of a 
 misdemeanor, and being convicted thereof shall be liable, at 
 the discretion of the court, to be kept in penal servitude for the 
 term of three years, or to be imprisoned for any term not ex¬ 
 ceeding two years, with or without hard labour.” 
 
 Framed on the 14 & 15 Viet. c. 11, s. 1. See post, sect. 73, as to the 
 institution of prosecutions by guardians and overseers. 
 
 See also seet. 6 of the Conspiraey and Protection of Property Act, 1875, 
 ante, pp. 157, 194. 
 
 Section 26 of 24 & 25 Viet. c. 100, as originally drawn and as it passed 
 the Lords in 1860, included husband, parents, guardians, committees, and 
 nurses, in the penal consequences, and extended the protection to a wife, 
 child, ward, lunatic, idiot, or infant, but this extension of the original act 
 was rejected by the committee of the House of Commons, but a elause 
 was inserted by them as to the exposure of infants. As to the common 
 law offence of keeping children without sufficient food, and evidence, see 
 Reg. V. Chandler, Dears. C. C. 453; 24 L. J. (N. S.) M. C. 100. 
 
 This offence can be tried at quarter sessions. The costs of prosecution 
 can be allowed : sect. 77. 
 
 Assaults on Seamen, ^'C.~\ —Sect. 40. ‘‘ Whosoever shall un¬ 
 lawfully and with force hinder or prevent any seaman, keel- 
 
277 
 
 24 & 25 ViCT. C. 100. 
 
 man, or caster from working at or exercising his lawful trade, 
 business, or occupation, or shall beat or use any violence to any 
 such person with intent to hinder or prevent him from working 
 at or exercising the same, shall, on conviction thereof betore 
 two justices of the peace, be liable to be imprisoned and kept to 
 hard labour in the common gaol or house of correction for any 
 term not exceeding three months: provided that no person 
 who shall be punished for any such offence by reason of this 
 section shall be punished for the same offence by virtue of any 
 other law whatsoever.” 
 
 See also 33 Geo. 3, c. 67, as to the riotous assembling of keelmen and 
 others. 
 
 Either party may appeal to one of the superior courts of common law, if 
 dissatisfied with the determination of the justices (uuder sect. 40) as beiug 
 erroneous in point of law: 20 & 21 Viet. c. 43. 
 
 Guardians and Overseers may he required to prosecute in 
 certainCases of Offences against this Act.~\ —Sect. 73. “ Where 
 any complaint shall be made of any offence against section 
 twenty-six of this act(/), or of any bodily injury inflicted upon 
 any person under the age of sixteen years, for which the party 
 committing it is liable to be indicted, and the circumstances of 
 which offence amount, in point of law, to a felony, or an attempt 
 to commit a felony, or an assault with intent to commit a 
 felony, and two justices of the peace before whom such com¬ 
 plaint is heard shall certify under their hands that it is neces¬ 
 sary for the purposes of public justice that the prosecution 
 should be conducted by the guardians of the union or place, or, 
 where there are no guardians, by the overseers of the poor of 
 the place, in which the offence shall be charged to have been 
 committed, such guardians or overseers, as the case may be, 
 upon personal service of such certificate or a duplicate thereof 
 upon the clerk of such guardiaus or upon any one of such 
 overseers, shall conduct the prosecution, and shall pay the costs 
 reasonably and properly incurred by them therein (so far as 
 the same shall not be allowed to them under any order of any 
 court) out of the common fund of the union, or out of the funds 
 in the hands of the guardians or overseers, as the case may he; 
 and, where there is a board of guardians, the clerk or some 
 other ofiicer of the union or place, and, where there is no hoard 
 of guardians, one of the overseers of the poor may, if such 
 justices think it necessary for the purposes of public justice, be 
 bound over to prosecute.” 
 
 Framed on the 14 & 15 Viet. c. 11, s. 6, and extended to Ireland. See 
 also the nnrepealed provisions of that act with respect to the visiting of 
 young persons in workhouses. 
 
 (Z) See ante, p. 276. 
 
278 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 25 & 26 Yict. c. 50. 
 
 An Act to amend certain Provisions of the Acts of the 
 Twenty-fourth and Twenty-fifth Years of Her Majesty, 
 Chapters Ninety-six, Ninety-seven, Ninety-nine, and 
 One hundred, respectively, relating to Summary Juris¬ 
 diction in Ireland, 
 
 Penalty on Workmen making away with Goods {not ex¬ 
 ceeding 51. in Value) committed to his Care.]— Sect. 7. “Any 
 artificer, workman, journeyman, apprentice, servant, or other 
 person who shall unlawfully dispose of, or retain in his posses¬ 
 sion without the consent of the person by whom he shall be 
 hired, retained, or employed, any goods, wares, work, or mate¬ 
 rials committed to his care or charge (the value of such goods, 
 wares, work, or materials not exceeding the sum of five pounds), 
 shall pay to the party aggrieved such compensation as the jus¬ 
 tices shall think reasonable, and shall also be liable to a fine not 
 exceeding forty shillings, or to be imprisoned for a term not 
 exceeding one month.” 
 
 25 & 26 Yict. c. 101. 
 
 The General Police and Improvement {Scotland) 
 
 Act, 1862. 
 
 Sect. 271. “ For the further prevention of fraud the magis¬ 
 trates shall have and may exercise the powers and jurisdictions 
 conferred upon any justice or justices of the peace by the act 
 22 Geo. 2, c. 27, intituled [&c.] (w), and by the act 17 Geo. 3, 
 c. 56, intituled [&c.] {n) ; and the provisions of the said acts 
 shall apply to proceedings before the magistrates, and to acts 
 done by them in relation thereto, in the same manner as to pro¬ 
 ceedings before and acts done by any justice or justices of the 
 peace; and, upon an oath, or solemn aflftrmation, or declaration 
 being made before the magistrates, or any justice or justices of 
 the peace, that there is cause to suspect that any material pm’- 
 chased or received by any broker from any person or persons 
 were purloined or embezzled, the magistrates of burghs, or any 
 justice or justices of the peace, may grant warrant for bringing 
 the person or persons from whom the broker purchased or re¬ 
 ceived such materials before him or them; and, if such person 
 or persons shall not give a satisfactory account of how he, she, 
 or they came by such materials, such person or persons shall 
 be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor or offence, and shall be 
 
 tyi) See ante, p. 216. (n) See ante, p. 224. 
 
279 
 
 26 & 27 ViCT. c. 103. 
 
 punishable accordingly, m terms of the In 
 
 Lts, in the same manner as if such “om- 
 
 the possession of such person or persons; and it shall bo co ^ 
 potent to the magistrates or to any two justices of 1^. 
 Lntence such person or persons to pay any fine not e^ceedin 
 the amounts authorized by the said acts, or a ern 
 commit such person or persons to prison for any pe ‘O'! ex¬ 
 ceeding the periods authorized by the said acts ; and it shall not 
 be necessary before committing such person or persons to prison 
 to levy such fines by distress and sale, or to use any legal dili¬ 
 gence for recovery thereof.” 
 
 26 & 27 ViCT. C. 103. 
 
 An Act to amend the Law in certain Cases of Misappro- 
 priation by Servants of the Property of their Masters (o ). 
 
 Reciting that “ the ofience of taking corn or other food by a 
 servant from the possession of his master, contrary to his 
 orders, for the purpose of giving the same or of having the 
 same given to the horses or other animals of such master, is 
 by law a felony”(jo) ,* and that “it is desirable to alter the law 
 in this respect,” enacts,— 
 
 Servants taking their Master's Corn, ^c. without Autho- 
 rity, for the purpose of giving the same to their Master's 
 Horses, ^c., not guilty of Felony, but shall be liable to Im¬ 
 prisonment, ^c.]—Sect. 1. “If any servant shall, contrary to 
 the orders of his master, take from his possession any com, 
 pulse, roots, or other food, for the purpose of giving the same 
 or of having the same given to any horse or other animal 
 belonging to or in the possession of his master, the servant so 
 offending shall not by reason thereof be deemed guilty of or 
 be proceeded against for felony, but shall, on conviction of such 
 ofience before two justices of the peace, at their discretion. 
 
 (o) This act was due in part at 
 least to the protest of my late most 
 excellent friend, Mr. J. G. Philli- 
 more, Q.C., and Member of Parlia¬ 
 ment for Leominster, whose indig¬ 
 nation at all injustice and oppression 
 I remember with admiration, mixed 
 with regret that his fife did not 
 endure beyond its prime. 
 
 (jp) This was so determined by a 
 majority of the judges in The King 
 V. Morfit, R. & R. 307. It was 
 thought by some of the judges 
 forming the majority that the addi¬ 
 
 tional Quantity of food given by the 
 prisoners (who were servants in 
 husbandry) to the master’s horses, 
 would diminish the work of the men 
 who had to look after the horses, 
 and therefore the lucri causa to 
 give themselves ease was an ingre¬ 
 dient in the offence; but subsequent 
 cases established that the offence 
 was larceny, even if the intent of 
 obtaining a private benefit were 
 negatived. See The Queen Pri~ 
 vett, 1 Den. C. C. 193 : 2 C. & K. 
 114. 
 
280 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 either be iiiiprisoued, with or without hard labour, for any 
 term not exceeding three months, or else shall forfeit and pay 
 such penalty as shall appear to them to be meet, not exceeding 
 the sum of five pounds, and if such penalty shall not be paid, 
 either immediately after the conviction, or within such period 
 as the said justices shall at the time of the conviction appoint, 
 the servant so offending shall be imprisoned, with or without 
 hard labour, for any term not exceeding three months, unless 
 such penalty be sooner paid: provided always, that if upon the 
 hearing of the charge the said justices shall be of opinion that 
 the same is too trifling, or that there are circumstances in the 
 case which render it inexpedient to inflict any punishment, 
 they shall have power to dismiss the charge, without pro¬ 
 ceeding to a conviction: provided also, that if upon the trial 
 of any servant for feloniously taking from his master any corn, 
 pulse, roots, or other food consumable by horses or other 
 animals, such servant shall allege that he took the same under 
 such circumstances as would constitute an offence punishable 
 under this act, and thereof shall satisfy the jury charged with 
 his trial, then it shall be lawful for such jury to return a 
 verdict accordingly ; and thereupon the court before which 
 such trial shall take place shall proceed to award such punish¬ 
 ment against such servant as may be awarded by two justices 
 of the peace on the conviction of any person under the provi¬ 
 sions of this act: provided also, that in case of nonpayment of 
 any penalty to be imposed by the court on such servant, he 
 shall be imprisoned, with or without hard labour, for any term 
 not exceeding three months, as the court shall order, unless 
 such penalty be sooner paid.” 
 
 Sect. 2. Power to appeal against conviction. 
 
 Sect. 3. No such conviction or adjudication made on appeal 
 to be quashed for want of form, or be removed by certiorari, 
 and no warrant of commitment void by reason of defect. 
 
 Sect. 4. Summary proceedings may be under 11 & 12 Viet, 
 c. 43, unless repugnant to this act, &c. 
 
 Sect. 5. This act shall extend to England only. 
 
 Sect. 6. Commencement of act. 
 
 28 & 29 ViCT. c. 86. 
 
 An Act to amend the Law of Partnership. 
 
 Sect. 2. “No contract for the remuneration of a servant or 
 agent of any person engaged in any trade or undertaking by a 
 share of the profits of such trade or undertaking shall, of itself, 
 render such servant or agent responsible as a partner therein, 
 nor give him the rights of a partner.” 
 
32 & 33 ViCT. c. 71. 
 
 281 
 
 30 & 31 ViCT. c. 105. 
 
 An Act to establish equitable Councils of Conciliation to 
 adjust Differences between Masters and IVorkmen. 
 
 [See the act inLovesy’s Law of Arbitrations between Masters 
 and Workmen.] 
 
 30 & 31 ViCT. C. 130. 
 
 The Agricultural Gangs Act, 1867. 
 
 Although affecting employers and employed, it is unnecessary 
 to do more than give the title of the act. It has for its chief 
 object the promotion of the education of children in certain 
 agricultural districts. 
 
 32 & 33 ViCT. c. 71. 
 
 The Bankruptcy Act, 1869. 
 
 By sect. 32, one year’s parochial and local rates and taxes 
 and “all wages or salary of any clerk or servant in the employ¬ 
 ment of the bankrupt at the date of the order of adjudication, 
 not exceeding four months’ wages or salary and not exceeding 
 fifty pounds; all wages of any labourer or workman in the em¬ 
 ployment of the bankrupt at the date of the order of adjudi¬ 
 cation and not exceeding two months’ wages,” are to be paid in 
 priority to all other debts. “Between themselves such debts 
 shall rank equally and shall be paid in full, unless the property 
 of the bankrupt is insufficient to meet them, in which case they 
 shall abate in equal proportions between themselves.” 
 
 By sect. 33, “ Where at the time of the presentation of the 
 petition for adjudication any person is apprenticed ... to 
 the bankrupt the order of adjudication shall, if either the bank¬ 
 rupt or apprentice . . . give notice in writing to the 
 
 trustee to that effect, be a complete discharge of the indenture 
 of apprenticeship . . . ; and if any money has been paid 
 
 by or on behalf of such apprentice ... to the bankrupt 
 as a fee, the trustee may, on the application of the apprentice 
 ... or of some person on his behalf, pay such sum as such 
 trustee, subject to an appeal to the court, thinks reasonable, out 
 of the bankrupt’s property, to or for the use of the apprentice 
 . . . . regard being had to the amount paid by him or on 
 
282 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 his behalf and to the time during whieli he served with the 
 bankrupt under the indenture . . . before the commencement 
 of the bankruptcy and to the other circumstances of the case. 
 
 “Where it appears expedient to a trustee he may, on the 
 application of any apprentice ... to the bankrupt, or any 
 person acting on behalf of such apprentice . . . instead of 
 
 acting under the preceding provisions of this section, transfer 
 the indenture of apprenticeship ... to some other person.” 
 
 See 38 & 39 Viet. c. 26, as to wages of servants of bankrupts in Scotland. 
 
 33 & 34 ViCT. c. 30. 
 
 The Wages Attachment Abolition Act, 1870. 
 
 This act, reciting that much inconvenience had arisen by the 
 attachment of wages in the county courts, and that it was expe¬ 
 dient to prevent the attachment of wages to satisfy judgments 
 recovered in any court of record or inferior court, enacts that— 
 
 Sect. 1. No order for the attachment of the wages of any 
 servant, labourer, or workman shall be made by the judge of 
 any court of record or inferior court.” 
 
 By an act of the same session, 33 & 34 Viet. c. 63 (the 
 Wages Arrestment Limitation (Scotland) Act, 1870), the 
 liability of wages to “ arrestment ” for debt is limited. 
 
 34 & 35 ViCT. c. 31. 
 
 The Trade Union Act, 1871. 
 
 Sect. 2. “ The purposes of any trade union shall not, by 
 reason merely that they are in restraint of trade, be deemed to 
 be unlawful so as to render any member of such trade union 
 liable to criminal prosecution for conspiracy or otherwise. 
 
 Sect. 3. “ The purposes of any trade union shall not, by 
 reason merely that they are in restraint of trade, be unlawful 
 so as to render void or voidable any agreement or trust.” 
 
 The other provisions of the act affect the members of a union more than 
 the public. 
 
35 & 36 ViOT. C. 46. 
 
 283 
 
 35 & 36 ViCT. c. 46. 
 
 The Arhitration {Masters and IVorhmen) Act, 1872.^ 
 
 5 Geo 4 c. 96 (referred to ns the “principal act”): 
 And that it is expedient to make further provision for arbi¬ 
 tration between masters and workmen, enacts : ^ following 
 
 As to Agreements under this Act!\ Sect. 1. „,,,ip,. 
 
 provisions shall have effect with reference to agreements undei 
 
 this^acU ^ agreement under this act shall either designate some 
 board, council, persons or person as arbit^rators or 
 arbitrator, or define the time and inanner of appoint- 
 ment of arbitrators or of an arbitrator; and shall 
 designate, by name or by description of othce or 
 otherwise, some person to be, or some person or 
 persons (other than the arbitratoi’s or arbitrator) to 
 appoint an umpire in case of disagreement between 
 
 arbitrators: n u i 
 
 (2.) A master and a workman shall become mutually bound 
 by an agreement under this act (hereinafter refen'ed 
 to as “ the agreement”) upon the master or his agent 
 giving to the workman and the workman accepting a 
 printed copy of the agreement: 
 
 Provided that a workman may, within forty-eight 
 hours after the delivery to him of the agreement, give 
 notice to the master or his agent that he will not be 
 bound by the agreement, and thereupon the agree¬ 
 ment shall be of no effect as between such workman 
 
 and the master: 
 
 (3.) When a master and workman are bound by the agree¬ 
 ment they shall continue so bound during the con¬ 
 tinuance of any contract of employment and service 
 which is in force between them at the time of making 
 the agreement, or in contemplation of which the agree¬ 
 ment is made, and thereafter so long as they mutually 
 consent from time to time to continue to employ and 
 serve without having rescinded the agreement. More¬ 
 over, the agreement may provide that any number of 
 days’ notice, not exceeding six, of an intention on the 
 part of the master or workman to cease to employ or 
 be employed shall be required, and in that case the 
 parties to the agreement shall continue bound by it 
 respectively until the expiration of the required number 
 of days after such notice has been given by either of 
 the parties : 
 
 (4.) The agreement may provide that the parties to it shall, 
 during its continuance, be bound by any rules con- 
 
284 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 tained iu the agreement, or to be made by the arbi¬ 
 trators, arbitrator, or umpire as to the rate of wages 
 to be paid, or the hours or quantities of work to be 
 performed, or the conditions or regulations under 
 which work is to be done, and may specify penalties 
 to be enforced by the arbitrators, arbitrator, or umpire 
 for the breach of any such rule: 
 
 (5.) The agreement may also provide that in case any of the 
 following matters arise they shall be determined by the 
 arbitrators or arbitrator, viz.: 
 
 a. Any such disagreement or dispute as is men¬ 
 tioned in the second section of the principal 
 act; or 
 
 h. Any question, case, or matter to which the pro¬ 
 visions of the Master and Servant Act, 1867, 
 apply; 
 
 and thereupon in case any such matter arises between 
 the parties while they are bound by the agreement 
 the arbitrators, arbitrator, or umpire, shall have juris¬ 
 diction for the hearing and determination thereof and 
 upon their or his hearing and determining the same 
 no other proceeding shall be taken before any other 
 court or person for the same matter; but if the dis¬ 
 agreement or dispute is not so heard and determined 
 within twenty-one days from the time when it arose, 
 the jurisdiction of the arbitrators, arbitrator, or umpire 
 shall cease, unless the parties have, since the arising 
 of the disagreement or dispute, consented in writing 
 that it shall be exclusively determined by the arbi¬ 
 trators, arbitrator, or umpire: 
 
 A disagreement or dispute shall be deemed to arise 
 at the time of the act or omission to which it relates: 
 
 (6.) The arbitrators, arbitrator, or umpire may hear and de¬ 
 termine any matter referred to them in such manner 
 as they think fit, or as may be prescribed by the 
 agreement: 
 
 (7.) The agreement, and also any rules made by the arbitra¬ 
 tors, arbitrator, or umpire in pursuance of its provisions, 
 shall in all proceedings as well before them as in any 
 court be evidence of the terms of the contract of 
 employment and service between the parties bound by 
 the agreement: 
 
 (8.) The agreement shall be deemed to be an agreement 
 within the meaning of the thirteenth section of the 
 principal act for all the purposes of that act: 
 
 (9.) If the agreement provides for the production or exami¬ 
 nation of any books, documents, or accounts, subject 
 or not to any conditions as to the mode of their pro- 
 
35 & 36 ViCT. C. 76. 
 
 duction or examination, the arbitrators, arbitrator, or 
 umpire may require the production or examination 
 (subject to any such conditions) of any such books, 
 documents, or accounts in the possession or control ot 
 any person summoned as a witness, and who is bound 
 by the agreement, and the provisions of the principal 
 act, for compelling the attendance and submission of 
 witnesses, shall apply for enforcing such production 
 or examination.” 
 
 35 & 36 ViCT. c. 76. 
 
 An Act to consolidate and amend the Acts relating to the 
 
 Regulation of Coal Mines, and certain other Mines, 
 
 This act applies to mines of coal, mines of stratified iron¬ 
 stone, mines of shale, and mines of fire-clay. Besides a variety 
 of provisions relating to the management of coal mines, in¬ 
 cluding regulations for the employment of women, young per¬ 
 sons and children, and the responsibility of owners, agents, 
 managers, workmen, and the parents and guardians of children 
 and young persons, the act contains the following clauses re¬ 
 lating to “ wages 
 
 Prohibition of Payment of Wages at Public-houses, 
 
 —Sect. 16. “No wages shall be paid to any person employed in 
 or about any mine to which this act applies at or within any 
 public house, beer shop, or place for the sale of any spirits, 
 beer, wine, cyder, or other spirituous or fermented liquor, or 
 other house of entertainment, or any office, garden, or place be¬ 
 longing or contiguous thereto, or occupied therewith. 
 
 “ Every person who contravenes or fails to comply with or 
 permits any person to contravene or fail to comply with this 
 section shall be guilty of an offence against this act; and in the 
 event of any such contravention or non-compliance by any per¬ 
 son whomsoever, the owner, agent, and manager shall each be 
 guilty of an offence against this act, unless he prove that ho 
 had taken all reasonable means by publishing and to the best of 
 his power enforcing the provisions of this section to prevent 
 such contravention or non-compliance.” 
 
 As to Payment of Persons employed in Mines by Weight.! 
 —Sect. 17. “Where the amount of wages paid to any of the 
 persons employed in a mine to which this act applies depends 
 on the amount of mineral gotten by them, such persons shall 
 after the first day of August one thousand eight hundred and 
 seventy-three, unless the mine is exempted by a secretary of 
 
286 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 state, be paid according to the weight of the mineral gotten hy 
 them’, and such mineral shall be truly weighed accordingly. 
 
 “ Provided always, that nothing herein contained shall pre¬ 
 clude the owner, agent, or manager of the mine from agreeing 
 with the persons employed in such mine that deductions shall 
 be made in respect of stones or materials other than mineral 
 contracted to be gotten, which shall be sent out of the mine 
 with the mineral contracted to be gotten, or in respect of any 
 tubs, baskets, or hutches being improperly filled in those cases 
 where they are filled by the getter of the mineral or his drawer, 
 or by the person immediately employed by him, such deduc¬ 
 tions being determined by the banksman or weigher and check 
 weigher (if there be one), or in case of difference by a third 
 party to be mutually agreed on by the owner, agent, or manager 
 of the mine on the one hand, and the persons employed in the 
 mine on the other. 
 
 “ Where it is proved to the satisfaction of a secretary of state 
 that by reason of any exigencies existing in the case of any 
 mine or class of mines to which the foregoing provision in this 
 section applies, it is requisite or expedient that the persons em¬ 
 ployed in such mine or class of mines should not be paid by the 
 weight of the mineral gotten by them, or that the beginning of 
 such payment by weight should be postponed, such secretary 
 of state may, if he think fit, by order exempt such mine or class 
 of mines from the provisions of this section, either without con¬ 
 dition or during the time and upon the conditions specified in 
 the order, or postpone in such mine or class of mines the begin¬ 
 ning of such payment by weight, and may from time to time 
 revoke or alter any such order. 
 
 “ If any person contravenes or fails to comply with, or permits 
 any person to contravene or fail to comply with, this section, 
 he shall be guilty of an offence against this act; and in the 
 event of any contravention of or non-compliance with this 
 section by any person whomsoever, the owner, agent, and 
 manager shall each be guilty of an offence against this act, 
 unless he prove that he had taken all reasonable means by pub¬ 
 lishing and to the best of his power enforcing the provisions 
 of this section to prevent such contravention and non-compli¬ 
 ance.” 
 
 Appointment and Removal of Check Weigher on part of 
 Men!\ —Sect. 18. “ The persons who are employed in a mine to 
 which this act applies, and are paid according to the weight of 
 the mineral gotten by them, may, at their own cost, station a 
 person (in this act referred to as ‘‘a check weigher”) at the 
 place appointed for the weighing of such mineral, in order to 
 take an account of tlie weight thereof on behalf of the persons 
 by whom he is so stationed. The check weigher shall be one 
 of the persons employed either in the mine at which he is so 
 
35 & 36 ViCT. C. 76 . 
 
 287 
 
 stationed or in another mine belonging to the owner of that 
 mine. He shall have every facility afforded to him to take a 
 correct account of the weighing for the persons by whom he is 
 so stationed ; and if in any mine proper facilities are not anorded 
 to the check weigher as required by this section, the ownei, 
 agent, and manager of such mine shall each be guilty of an 
 offence against this act, unless he prove that he had taken all 
 reasonable means by enforcing to the best of his power the 
 provisions of this section to prevent such contravention or non- 
 compliance. 
 
 “ The check weigher shall not be authorized in any way to 
 impede or interrupt the working of the mine, or to interfere 
 with the weighing, but shall be authorized only to take such 
 account as aforesaid, and the absence of the check weigher shall 
 not be a reason for interrupting or delaying such weighing. 
 
 “ If the owner, agent, or manager of the mine desires the re¬ 
 moval of a check weigher on the ground that such check 
 weigher has impeded or interrupted the working of the mine, 
 or interfered with the weighing, or has otherwise misconducted 
 himself, he may complain to any court of summary jurisdiction, 
 w^ho, if of opinion that the owner, agent, or manager shows 
 sufficient prima facie ground for the removal of such check 
 weigher, shall call upon the check weigher to show cause 
 against his removal. On the hearing of the case the court 
 shall hear the parties, and, if they think that at the hearing 
 sufficient ground is shown by the owner, agent, or manager to 
 justify the removal of the check weigher, shall make a sum¬ 
 mary order for his removal, and the check weigher shall there¬ 
 upon be removed, but without prejudice to the stationing of 
 another check weigher in his place. 
 
 “ The court may in every case make such order as to the costs 
 of the proceedings as they think just. 
 
 “ If in pursuance of any order of exemption made by a secre- 
 tary of state, the persons employed in a mine to which this act 
 applies are paid by the measure or gauge of the material gotten 
 by them, the provisions of this section shall apply in like 
 manner as if the term ‘weighing’ included measuring and 
 gauging, and the terms relating to weighing shall be construed 
 accordingly.” 
 
 Application of Weights and Measures Act to Weights used 
 in Mines, ^c.]—Sect. 19. “ The Weights and Measures Act 
 or any act for the time being in force relating to weights and 
 measures, shall apply to the weights used in any mine to which 
 this act applies for determining the wages payable to any person 
 employed in such mine according to the weight of the mineral 
 gotten by such person, in like manner as it applies to weights 
 used for the sale of any article, and the inspector of weights 
 and measures for the district appointed under the said act shall 
 
288 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 accordingly from time to time, but without unnecessarily im¬ 
 peding or interrupting the working of the mine, inspect and 
 examme, in manner directed by the said act, the weighing 
 machines and weights used for mines to which this act applies, 
 or the measures or gauges used for such mines: provided that 
 nothing in this section shall prevent the use of the measures 
 and gauges ordinarily used in such mine. 
 
 “ The term ‘ Weights and Measures Act’ in this section 
 means— 
 
 (a.) As to Great Britain, the act of the session of the fifth 
 and sixth years of the reign of King William the 
 Fourth, chapter sixty-three, ‘ to repeal an act of the 
 fourth and fifth year of his present Majesty relating to 
 weights and measures, and to make other provisions 
 instead thereofand, 
 
 (b,) As to Ireland, the Weights and Measures (Ireland) 
 Amendment Act, 1862, as amended by the act of the 
 session of the thirtieth and thirty-first years of the 
 reign of her present Majesty, chapter ninety-four, ‘to 
 provide for the inspection of weights and measures, 
 and to regulate the law relating thereto in certain parts 
 of the police district of Dublin metropolis.’ ” 
 
 Sect. 51, which provides general rules to be observed, so far 
 as is reasonably practicable in every mine to which the act 
 applies, contains the following instructions:— 
 
 Sub-sect. 30. “ The persons employed in a mine may from 
 time to time appoint two of their number to inspect the mine at 
 their own cost, and the persons so appointed shall be allowed, 
 once at least in every month, accompanied, if the owner, agent, 
 or manager of the mine thinks fit, by himself or one or more 
 officers of the mine, to go to every part of the mine, and to 
 inspect the shafts, levels, planes, working places, return air¬ 
 ways, ventilating apparatus, old workings, and machinery, and 
 shall be afforded by the owner, agent, and manager, and all 
 persons in the mine, every facility for the purpose of such 
 inspection, and shall make a true report of the result of such 
 inspection, and such report shall be recorded in a book to be 
 kept at the mine for the purpose, and shall be signed by the 
 persons who made the same.” 
 
 Sub-sect. 31. “The books mentioned in this section, or a 
 copy thereof, shall be kept at the office at the mine, and any 
 inspector under this act, and any person employed in the mine, 
 may, at all reasonable times, inspect and take copies of and 
 extracts from any such books. 
 
 “Every person who contravenes or does not comply with 
 any of the general rules in this section shall be guilty of an 
 offence against this act; and in the event of any contravention 
 of or non-compliance with any of the said general rules in the 
 
35 & 36 ViCT. C. 76. 
 
 289 
 
 case of any mine to which this act applies, by any person whom¬ 
 soever, being proved, the o^vner, agent, and manager shall each 
 be guilty of an offence against this act, unless he proves that 
 he had taken all reasonable means, by publishing and to the 
 best of his power enforcing the said rules as regulations for the 
 working of the mine, to prevent such contravention or non- 
 compliance” {q). 
 
 With respect to Special Rules, the act provides :— 
 
 Special Jlules.]—Sect. 52. There shall be established in 
 every mine to which this act applies such rules (referred to in 
 this act as special rules) for the conduct and guidance of the 
 persons acting in the management of such mine or employed in 
 or about the same as, under the particular state and circum¬ 
 stances of such mine, may appear best calculated to prevent 
 dangerous accidents, and to provide for the safety and proper 
 discipline of the persons employed in or about the mine, and 
 such special rules, when established, shall be signed by the 
 inspector who is inspector of the district at the time such rules 
 are established, and shall be observed in and about every such 
 mine, in the same manner as if they were enacted in this act. 
 
 “If any person who is bound to observe the special rules 
 established for any mine acts in contravention of or fails to 
 comply with any of such special rules, he shall be guilty of an 
 offence against this act, and also the owner, agent, and manager 
 of such mine, unless he proves that he had taken all reasonable 
 means, by publishing and to the best of his power enforcing 
 the said rules as regulations for the working of the mine so as 
 to prevent such contravention or non-compliance, shall each bo 
 guilty of an offence against this act.” 
 
 Establishment of new Special Rules.^ —Sect. 53. “ The 
 owner, agent, or manager of every mine to which this act 
 
 {q) Nevertheless there must he a 
 mens rea to uphold a conviction 
 under this section. See Bicltenson 
 V, Fletcher^ 43 L. J., M. C. 25. 
 Upon corresponding provisions re¬ 
 specting general rules for ventila¬ 
 tion, in the repealed statute 23 & 24 
 Viet. c. 151, a question was raised 
 in Wilson v. Merry^ in the House 
 of Lords(Law Rep., 1 Scotch Appeal 
 Cases, 326) as to how far a violation 
 of the statutable obligation gave a 
 right of action against the mine 
 owner for injuries sustained, not¬ 
 withstanding the absence of such 
 personal negligence as would make 
 a master responsible to his servant 
 at common law; but the point was 
 not decided, the question not having 
 been raised in the court below. Lord 
 D. 
 
 Colonsay, however, said: “ I am 
 not disposed to pronounce any 
 opinion in reference to the effect of 
 that statute. There may possibly 
 be questions of considerable nicety 
 arising upon it. It is a public sta¬ 
 tute passed for the avowed purpose 
 of giving greater safety to workmen 
 in mines ; it imposes duties upon 
 the owners of mines, and a question 
 may perhaps be raised as to whether 
 workmen engaging in the service of 
 a mine owner may not be entitled to 
 rely upon the due performance of 
 such duties, as being implied in the 
 contract of service.” (See the ob¬ 
 servations ante, p. 263, in relation 
 to fencing machinery under the 
 Factory Acts.) 
 
 U 
 
290 
 
 THE LABOUK LAAVS. 
 
 applies shall frame and transmit to the inspector of the district, 
 for approval by a secretary of state, special rules for such mine 
 within three months after the commencement of this act, or 
 within three months after the commencement (if subsequent to 
 the commencement of this act) of any working for the purpose 
 of opening a new mine or of renewing the working of an old 
 mine. 
 
 “ The proposed special rules, together with a printed notice 
 specifying that any objection to such rules on the ground of 
 anything contained therein or omitted therefrom may be sent 
 by any of the persons employed in the mine to the inspector of 
 the district, at his address, stated in such notice, shall, during 
 not less than two weeks before such rules are transmitted to 
 the inspector, be posted up in like manner as is provided in this 
 act respecting the publication of special rules for the informa¬ 
 tion of persons employed in the mine, and a certificate that 
 such rules and notice have been so posted up shall be sent to 
 the inspector with the rules, signed by the person sending the 
 same. 
 
 “ If the rules are not objected to by the secretary of state 
 within forty days after their receipt by the inspector, they shall 
 be established.” 
 
 Publication of Special Rules,~\ —Sect. 57. “ For the purpose 
 of making known the special rules and the provisions of this 
 act to all persons employed in and about each mine to which 
 this act applies, an abstract of the act supplied, on the applica¬ 
 tion of the owner, agent, or manager of the mine, by the inspec¬ 
 tor of the district on behalf of a secretary of state, and an entire 
 copy of the special rules shall be published as follows:— 
 
 (1.) The owner, agent, or manager of such mine shall cause 
 such abstract and rules, with the name and address 
 of the inspector of the district, and the name of the 
 ownei’ or agent and of the manager appended thereto, 
 to be posted up in legible characters, in some conspi¬ 
 cuous place at or near the mine, where they may be 
 conveniently read by the persons employed; and so 
 often as the same become defaced, obliterated, or 
 destroyed, shall cause them to be renewed with all 
 reasonable despatch : 
 
 (2.) The owner, agent, or manager shall supply a printed 
 copy of the abstract and the special rules gratis to 
 each person employed in or about the mine who 
 applies for such copy at the office at which the per¬ 
 sons immediately employed by such owner, agent, or 
 manager are paid: 
 
 (3.) Every copy of the special rules shall be kept distinct 
 from any rules which depend only on the contract 
 between the employer and employed. 
 
35 & 36 ViCT. c. 77. 
 
 291 
 
 “In the event of any non-compliance with the provisions of 
 this section by any person whomsoever, the owner, agent, and 
 manager shall each be guilty of an offence against this act; but 
 the owner, agent, or manager of such mine shall not be deemed 
 guilty if he prove that he had taken all reasonable means, by 
 enforcing to the best of his power the observance of this sec¬ 
 tion, to prevent such non-compliance.” 
 
 Defacing Sect. 58. “ Every person who pulls 
 
 down, injures, or defaces any proposed special rules, notice, 
 abstract, or special rules when posted up in pursuance of I bo 
 provisions of this act with respect to special rules, or any 
 notice posted up in pursuance of the special rules, shall bo 
 guilty of an offence against this act.” 
 
 35 & 36 ViCT. c. 77. 
 
 An Act to consolidate and amend the Law relating to 
 Metalliferous Mines, 
 
 This act applies “to every mine of whatever description, 
 other than a mine to which the Coal Mines Regulation Act, 
 1872, applies.” 
 
 It contains the following clause relating to wages, nearly but 
 not in the precise terms of the corresponding section of the 
 Coal Mines Regulation Act: — 
 
 Prohibition of Payment of Wages at Public J/ouses^ <^c.] 
 — Sect. 9. “No wages shall be paid to any person employed in 
 or about any mine to which this act applies at or within any 
 public house, beer shop, or place for the sale of any spirits, 
 wine, beer, cyder, or other spirituous or fermented liejuor, or 
 other house of entertainment, or any office, garden, or place 
 belonging or contiguous thereto, or occupied therewith. 
 
 “ Every person who contravenes or fails to comply with, or 
 permits any person to contravene or fail to comply with, this 
 section shall be guilty of an offence against this act^ and in the 
 event of any such contravention or non-compliance in the case 
 of any mine by any person whomsoever, the owner and agent 
 of such mine shall each be guilty of an offence against this act, 
 unless he prove that he had taken all reasonable means by pub¬ 
 lishing, and to the best of his power enforcing, the provisions 
 of this section to prevent such contravention or non-com¬ 
 pliance.” 
 
 The act contains (sect. 23) general rules with a concludincr 
 paragraph corresponding with the terms of subsect. 30 of seer 
 51 of the Coal Mines Act, ante, p. 288. The act also contains 
 similar provisions respecting special rules. 
 
 This act was amended, as to annual returns, by 38 & 3q 
 Vict. c. 39. 7 j 
 
 U 2 
 
292 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 37 & 38 ViCT. c. 48. 
 
 The Hosiery Manufacture Wages Act, 1874 (?’). 
 
 Reciting that ‘‘ a custom has prevailed among the employers 
 of artificers in the hosiery manufacture of letting out frames 
 and machinery to the artificers employed by them, and it is 
 desirable to prohibit such letting of frames and machineiy, and 
 the stoppage of wages for frame rents and charges in the 
 hosiery manufacture and enacts as follows : 
 
 Wages to he paid without any Stoppages whatever — 
 Sect. 1. “In all contracts for wages the full and entire amount 
 of all wages the earnings of labour in the hosiery manufacture 
 shall be actually and positively made payable in net, in the 
 current coin of the realm, and not otherwise, without any de¬ 
 duction or stoppage of any description whatever, save and 
 except for bad and disputed workmanship.” 
 
 Contracts to stop Wages and for Frame Rents illegal.^ — 
 Sect. 2. “ All contracts to stop wages, and all contracts for frame 
 rents and charges, between employer and artificers, shall be 
 and are hereby declared to be illegal, null, and void.” 
 
 Penalty for bargaining to deduct and for deducting from 
 Wages.~\ —Sect. 3. “If any employer shall bargain to deduct, or 
 shall deduct, directly or indirectly, from the wages of any 
 artificer in his employ any part of such wages for frame rent 
 and standing or other charges, or shall refuse or neglect to pay 
 the same or any part thereof in the current coin of the realm, 
 he shall forfeit a sum of five pounds for every offence, to be 
 recovered by the said artificer or any other person suing for the 
 same in the county court in the district where the offence is 
 committed, with full costs of suit.” 
 
 Penalty for using Frame otherwise than for the purpose for 
 which same leiit.^ —Sect. 4. “ If any frame or machine which 
 shall have been entrusted to any artificer or other person by 
 his employer for the purpose of being used in the hosiery 
 manufacture for such employer, or in any process incident to 
 such manufacture, shall, whilst the same shall be so entrusted, 
 be worked, used, or employed without the consent in writing of 
 such employer or other person so entrusting such frame or 
 machine, in the manufacture of any goods or articles whatever 
 for any other person than the person by whom such frame or 
 machine shall have been so entrusted, then and in every such 
 case the artificer or other person to whom the same shall have 
 
 (r) See mite, p. 24G. The pe¬ 
 nalty in sect. .3 does not attach to 
 the deduction of fines for absence 
 without permission, according to 
 workshop regulations signed by the 
 artificer (who is paid by “ piece 
 
 work”). Wallis v. Thorp, 44 L. J., 
 Q. B. 137. It seems to have been 
 in consequence of this decision that 
 sect. 11 of 38 & 39 Viet. c. 90 
 {antCy p. 171) was introduced. 
 
38 & 39 ViCT. c. 17. 
 
 293 
 
 been so entrusted shall forfeit and pay the sum of ten shillhigs 
 for every day on any part of which any such frame or machmo 
 shall have been so worked, used, or employed, to be recoverable 
 by and for the benefit of the person who shall have so entrusted 
 the same, in the county court for the district where the offence 
 shall have been committed, with full costs of suit.” 
 
 No Action to he alloived in respect of any such Bargahi- 
 Sect. 5. “ No action, suit, or set-off between employer 
 and artificer shall be allowed for any deduction or stoppage of 
 wages, nor for any contract hereby declared illegal.” 
 
 Not to prevent the Recovery by Employer of any Debt due 
 to him fro?n Artifcer.^^Sect. 6. “ Nothing in this act con¬ 
 tained shall extend to prevent the recovery in the ordinary 
 course of law, by suit brought or commenced for the purpose, 
 of any debt due from the artificer to the employer.” 
 
 Definition of Sect. 7. “ Within the meaning and 
 
 for the purposes of this act, all workmen, labourers, and other 
 persons in any manner engaged in the performance of any 
 employment or operation, of Avhat nature soever, in or about 
 the hosiery manufacture, shall be and be deemed ‘artificers;’ 
 and, within the meaning and for the purposes aforesaid, all 
 masters, foremen, managers, clerks, contractors, sub-contractors, 
 middlemen, and other persons engaged in the hiring, employ¬ 
 ment, or superintendence of the labour of any such artificers 
 shall be and be deemed to be ‘employers;’ and, ■within the 
 meaning and for the purposes of this act, any money or other 
 thing had or contracted to be paid, delivered, or given as a 
 recompense, reward, or remuneration for any labour done or to 
 be done, whether within a certain time or to a certain amount, 
 or for a time or for an amount uncertain, shall be deemed and 
 taken to be the wages of such labour; and, within the meaning 
 and for the purposes aforesaid, any agreement, understanding, 
 device, contrivance, collusion, or arrangement whatsoever on 
 the subject of wages, whether written or oral, whether direct 
 or indirect, to which the employer and artificers are parties Gl¬ 
 are assenting, or by which they are mutually bound to each 
 other, or whereby either of them shall have endeavoured to 
 impose an obligation on the other of them, shall be and be 
 deemed a ‘ contract.’ ” 
 
 38 & 39 ViCT, c. 17. 
 
 An Act to amend the Law with respect to manufacturing, 
 keeping, selling, carrying and importing Gunpowder, 
 Nitro-Glycerine and other Explosive Substances, 
 
 This act, which takes effect from 1st January, 1876, contains 
 various provisions and general rules applicable to persons 
 
294 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 working’ in the manufactories, including dress, the descrip¬ 
 tion of *tools and implements, smoking, and preventing persons 
 under sixteen from being employed or entering any dangerous 
 building except in the presence and under the supervision of a 
 grown-up person. 
 
 Mutiny Acts. 
 
 The Annual Mutiny Acts contain clauses preventing persons 
 enlisting being taken for breaches of contract of service. 
 
 The Mutiny Act of the present year (1875—1876), 38 & 39 
 Viet. c. 7, enacts (sect. 40), that “any person attested for her 
 Majesty’s army, or serving on the permanent staff of the dis¬ 
 embodied militia or volunteers other than as a commissioned 
 officer, shall be liable to be taken out of her Majesty’s service 
 only by process or execution on account of any charge of felony 
 or of misdemeanor, or of any crime or offence other than the 
 misdemeanor of absenting himself from his service, or neg¬ 
 lecting to fulfil his contract, or otherwise misconducting himself 
 respecting the same, or the misdemeanor of refusing to comply 
 with an order of justices for the payment of money, or on 
 account of an original debt proved by affidavit of the plaintiff 
 or of some one on his behalf to amount to the value of thirty 
 pounds at the least . . . ; but no soldier or other person 
 
 as aforesaid shall be liable by any process whatever to appear 
 before any justice of the peace or other authority whatever, or 
 to be taken out of her Majesty’s service by any writ, summons, 
 warrant, order, judgment, execution, or any process whatsoever 
 issued by or by the authority of any court of law, or any 
 magistrate, justice or justices of the peace, or any other 
 authority whatsoever, for any original debt not amounting to 
 thirty pounds, or for the breach of any contract, covenant, 
 agreement, or other engagement whatever by parol or in 
 writing, or for having left or deserted his employer or master, 
 or his contract, work, or labour, or misconducting himself 
 respecting the same, except in the case of an apprentice, or of 
 an indentured labourer (5), as hereinafter described; and all 
 summonses, warrants, commitments, indictments, convictions, 
 judgments, and sentences on account of any of the matters for 
 which it is herein declared that a soldier or other person as 
 aforesaid is not liable to be taken out of her Majesty’s service 
 shall be utterly illegal, and null and void, to all intents and 
 purposes; and any judge of any such court may examine into 
 any complaint made by a soldier or by his superior officer, and 
 
 (.m) Indentured labourer refers to the eolonies. 
 
MUTINY ACTS. 
 
 2\)5 
 
 by warrant under liis hand discharge such soldier, without fee, 
 he being shown to have been arrested contrary to the intent of 
 this act, and shall award reasonable costs to such complainant, 
 who shall have for the recovery thereof the like remedy as 
 would have been applicable to the recovery of any costs which 
 might have been awarded against the complainant in any judg¬ 
 ment or execution as aforesaid, or a writ of habeas corpus ad 
 subjiciendum shall be awarded or issued, and the discharge of 
 any such soldier out of custody shall be ordered thereupon; 
 provided that any plaintiff, upon notice of the cause of action 
 first given in writing to any soldier, or left at his last quarters, 
 may proceed in any action or suit to judgment, and have exe¬ 
 cution other than against the body or military necessaries or 
 equipments of such soldier; provided also, that nothing herein 
 contained relating to the leaving or deserting a master or em¬ 
 ployer, or to the breach of any contract, agreement, or engage¬ 
 ment, shall apply to persons Avho shall be really and bona fide 
 apprentices, duly bound, under the age of twenty-one years, or 
 to indentured labourers, as hereinafter prescribed.” 
 
 The Mutiny Act contains the following further provisions 
 respecting apprentices:— 
 
 Sect. 57. “Any person duly bound as an apprentice in Great 
 Britain or Ireland, or as an indentured labourer in any of her 
 Majesty’s colonies or possessions abroad, wdio shall enlist as a 
 soldier in her Majesty’s army, and shall falsely state to the 
 magistrate before whom he shall be carried and attested that 
 he is not an apprentice or indentured labourer as aforesaid, 
 shall be deemed guilty of obtaining money under false pre¬ 
 tences, if in England or in Ireland, or in the colonies or pos¬ 
 sessions aforesaid, and of falsehood, fraud, and "svilful imposition, 
 if in Scotland, and shall after the expiration of his apprentice¬ 
 ship, or of his indenture as a labourer, w'hether he shall have 
 been so convicted and punished or not, be liable to serve as a 
 soldier in her Majesty’s army according to the terms of the 
 enlistment, and if on the expiration of his apprenticeship, or of 
 his indenture as a labourer, he shall not deliver himself up to 
 some officer authorized to receive recruits, such person may 
 be taken as a deserter from her Majesty’s army; and no 
 master shall be entitled to claim an apprentice or an indentured 
 labourer as aforesaid who shall enlist as a soldier in her 
 Majesty’s army, or shall be serving in the embodied militia, 
 unless he shall, within one calendar month after such appren¬ 
 tice or indentured labourer shall have left his service, go before 
 some justice, and take the oath mentioned in the schedule to 
 this act annexed, and shall produce the certificate of such 
 justice of his having taken such oath, which certificate such 
 justice is required to give in the form in the schedule to this 
 act annexed, and unless such apprentice shall have been bound, 
 
THE LABOUR LAAVS. 
 
 290 
 
 if in Englaiicl, for tbc full term of five years, not having been 
 above the age of fourteen when so bound, and, if in Ireland or 
 in the British Isles, for the full term of five years at the least, 
 not having been above the age of sixteen when so bound, and, 
 if in Scotland, for the full term at least of four years, by a 
 regular contract or indenture of apprenticeship, duly executed, 
 signed and tested, and binding on both parties by the law of 
 Scotland, prior to the period of enlistment, and unless such con¬ 
 tract or indenture in Scotland shall, within three months after 
 the commencement of the apprenticeship, and before the period 
 of enlistment, have been produced to a justice of the peace of 
 the county in Scotland wherein the parties reside, and there 
 shall have been indorsed thereon by such justice a certificate or 
 declaration signed by him specifying the date when and the 
 person by whom such contract or indenture was so produced, 
 which certificate or declaration such justice of the peace is 
 hereby required to indorse and sign, and unless such appren¬ 
 tice shall, when claimed by such master, be under twenty- 
 one years of age: provided always, that any master of an 
 apprentice indentured for the sea service, or of any indentured 
 labourer in her Majesty’s colonies or possessions abroad, shall 
 be entitled to claim and recover him in the form and manner 
 above directed, notwithstanding such apprentice or indentured 
 labourer may have been bound for a less term than five or four 
 years as aforesaid : provided also, that any master who shall 
 give up the indentures of his apprentice or of his labourer as 
 aforesaid within one month after the enlisting of such appren¬ 
 tice or indentured labourer shall be entitled to receive to his 
 own use so much of the bounty payable to such recruit as shall 
 not have been paid to such recruit before notice given of his 
 being an apprentice or an indentured labourer.” 
 
 Sect. 58. “ No apprentice or indentured labourer claimed by 
 his master as aforesaid shall be taken from any corps or recruit¬ 
 ing party, except under a warrant of a justice residing near, 
 and within whose jurisdiction such apprentice or indentured 
 labourer shall then happen to be, before whom he shall be car¬ 
 ried ; and such justice shall inquire into the matter upon oath, 
 which oath he is hereby empowered to administer, and shall 
 require the production and proof of the indenture, and that 
 notice of the said warrant has been given to the commanding 
 officer, and a copy thereof left with some officer or non-commis¬ 
 sioned officer of the party, and that such person so enlisted 
 declai’ed that he was no apprentice or indentured labourer; and 
 such justice, if required by such officer or non-commissioned 
 officer, shall commit the offender to the common gaol of the 
 county, division, or place for which such justice is acting, and 
 shall keep the indenture to be produced when required, and 
 shall bind over such person as he may think proper to give 
 
MUTINY ACTS. 
 
 297 
 
 evidence against the offender, wlio shall be tried at the next or 
 at the sessions immediately succeeding the next general or 
 quarter sessions of such county, division, or place, unless the 
 court shall for just cause put off the trial ; and the production 
 of the indenture, with the certificate of the justice that the same 
 was proved, shall be suflicient evidence of the said indenture; 
 and every such offender in Scotland may be tried by the judge 
 ordinary in the county or stewartry in such and the like manner 
 as any person may be tried in Scotland for any offence not in¬ 
 ferring a capital punishment : provided always, that any justice 
 not required as aforesaid to commit such apprentice or inden¬ 
 tured labourer may deliver him to his master.” 
 
 The provisions of the Marine Mutiny Act vary somewhat 
 from the above. 
 
 The act of the current year, 38 & 39 Viet. c. 8, enacts that:— 
 
 Sect. 54. ‘‘Any person enlisted into her Majesty’s Eoyal 
 Marine forces as a marine, or who has received marine enlist¬ 
 ment money, shall be liable to be taken out of her Majesty’s 
 service only by process or execution on account of any charge 
 of felony, or on account of misdemeanor, or of any crime or 
 offence other than the misdemeanor of refusing to comply with 
 an order of justices for the payment of money, or on account of 
 an original debt proved by affidavit of the plaintiff or of some 
 one on his behalf to amount to the value of thirty pounds at 
 the least over and above all costs of suit, such affidavit to be 
 sworn, without payment of any fee, before some judge of the 
 court out of which process or execution shall issue, or before 
 some person authorized to take affidavits in such court, of which 
 affidavit, when duly filed in such court, a memorandum shall, 
 without fee, be endorsed upon the back of such process, stating 
 the fact sworn to, and the day of filing such affidavit ; but no 
 marine or other person as aforesaid shall be liable by any pro¬ 
 cess whatever to appear before any justice of the peace or other 
 authority whatsoever, or to be taken out of her Majesty’s ser¬ 
 vice by any writ, summons, order, warrant, judgment, execu¬ 
 tion, on any process whatever issued by or by the authority of 
 any court of law, or any magistrate, justice or justices of the 
 peace, or any other authority whatsoever, for any original debt 
 not amounting to thirty pounds, or for the breach of any con¬ 
 tract, covenant, agreement, or other engagement whatever, by 
 parol or in writing, or for having left or deserted his employer 
 or master, or his contract, work, or labour; and all summonses, 
 warrants, commitments, indictments, convictions, judgments, 
 and sentences, on account of any of the matters for which it is 
 herein declared that a marine is not liable to be taken out of 
 her Majesty’s service, shall be utterly illegal, and null and void 
 to all intents and purposes ; and any judge of any such court 
 
298 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS. 
 
 may examine into any complaint made by a marine or by his 
 superior officer, and by warrant under his hand discharge such 
 marine, without fee, he being shown to have been arrested con¬ 
 trary to the intent of this act, and shall award reasonable costs 
 to such complainant, who shall have for the recovery thereof 
 the like remedy as would have been applicable to the recovery 
 of any costs which might have been awarded against the com¬ 
 plainant in any judgment or execution as aforesaid, or a writ of 
 habeas corpus ad subjiciendum shall be awarded or issued, and 
 the discharge of any such marine out of custody shall be ordered 
 thereupon ; provided that any plaintiff, upon notice of the cause 
 of action first given in writing to any marine or left at his last 
 quarters, may proceed in any action or suit to judgment, and 
 have execution other than against the body or marine necessa¬ 
 ries or equipments of such marine : provided also, that nothing 
 herein contained relating to the leaving or deserting a master 
 or employer, or to the breach of any contract, agreement, or 
 engagement, shall apply to persons who shall be really and 
 bona fide apprentices duly bound under the age of twenty-one 
 years as herein prescribed.” 
 
 As regards apprentices, the provisions of the Marine Mutiny 
 Act closely follow those of the Mutiny Act for the army. 
 
 38 & 39 Yict. c. 69. 
 
 An Act to consolidate and amend certain Laws relating 
 to the Militia of the United Kingdom, 
 
 This act contains the following ‘‘provision as to servants 
 enrolled.” 
 
 Enlistment of Servants not to vacate their Contracts with 
 their Masters unless the Militia he embodied^ —Sect. 78. 
 “ If any servant whatever hired by the year or otherwise he 
 enlisted as a militiaman by virtue of this act, such enlistment 
 shall not vacate or rescind the contract or alter the engagement 
 between such servant and his master or employer, unless the 
 militia of the county for which such servant is enlisted be 
 embodied under this act, or unless such person so enlisted leave 
 the service of his master or employer for the purpose of pre¬ 
 liminary training or training and exercise in pursuance of this 
 act, and do not return again to the same service at the end of 
 the period of preliminary training or training and exercise, or 
 as soon after as reasonably may be, but his master or employer 
 shall be entitled to an abatement from his wages in proportion 
 to the duration of his absence from his said service; and in 
 every such case where any dispute arises between such servant 
 
299 
 
 38 & 39 Yict. c. 69 (militia). 
 
 and his master or employer touching any money due to sucli 
 servant on account of service performed before bis departure 
 from service, by reason of the embodiment of the militia in 
 which he is enlisted, or touching any abatement to be made by, 
 such servant by reason of his absence for preliminary training 
 or training and exercise, and the sum in question does not 
 exceed the sum of twenty pounds, the same may be determined 
 as follows: — 
 
 In England or Ireland, any justice for the county or place 
 where such master or employer is resident may Iiear 
 and determine the dispute in a summary way, and make 
 such order for the payment of so much w^ages to such 
 servant as, having regard to the service he has per¬ 
 formed, or the duration of his absence from his service 
 (as the case may require) may to such justice seem just 
 and reasonable: 
 
 In Scotland, the sheriff of the county or any two or more 
 justices for the county or place where such master or 
 employer is resident may hear and determine the dispute 
 in a summary w\ay in like manner as if the sum claimed 
 were within the amount to which their jurisdiction 
 under the acts for the recovery of small debts re¬ 
 spectively for the time being extends, and grant w^arrant 
 for the recovery of the sum decerned for by poinding 
 and sale in common form 
 
 (t) It would be idle to attempt to clause, not only with regard to the 
 anticipate the numerous questions Employers and Workmen Act, 1875, 
 that may arise under this curious but apart from it. 
 
N 
 
 
 ■* ^ 
 
 
INDEX 
 
 A. 
 
 Abatement of Wages, former power as to, 6, 19. 
 advantages and disadvantages of, 11. 
 
 “apportionment,” substituted term in Employers and Workmen Act, 
 1875.. 165. 
 
 Abettors, in indictable misdemeanors and in offences punishable on 
 summary conviction may be proceeded against, 207, 268. 
 
 Absconding Apprentices. See Apprentice. 
 
 Absenting from Service, summons or warrant for, prior to 1867..5. 
 must have been wilful to constitute offence before 1867. .6. 
 no longer an offence, but a civil breach of contract, 80, 92. 
 
 Action, claim under Employers and Workmen Act, so called in Lord 
 Chancellor’s rules, 175. 
 particulars of cause of, required, 123, 175. 
 
 Adjournment, powers of courts of summary jurisdiction as to, 128. 
 where complainant does not appear, 131. 
 w'here defendant does not appear, 130. 
 in cases of variance between summons and evidence, 128. 
 
 Adjustment of Claims, by courts of summary jurisdiction, 131. 
 
 Admissibility of Parties as Witnesses, 99, 100. 
 
 See Witnesses. 
 
 Affidavit, proof of service of summons out of district by, 126. 
 
 Agents, power to summon, instead of master, before Act of 1867..4. 
 continued by that act, 83. 
 
 power no longer exists under Labour Laws 1875. .83. 
 effect of w’ant of power, 84. 
 
 in part met by extended power of service of summons, 84. 
 forcing, to alter mode of carrying on business, 32. 
 
 Aggravated Cases, of breach of contract, recommendation of committee 
 of House of Commons, 1866, as to dealing with, 15, 16. 
 provisions of Act of 1867 as to, 19, 20. 
 powers misconstrued and abused, 25. 
 
 illustrations of cases of, 21. 
 report of Royal Commission as to, 56 et seq. 
 
 difference of opinion among commissioners as to mode of dealing 
 with, 59, 60. 
 
 all agreed that some distinction between simple breaches 
 and aggravated cases should be kept up, 79, 93. 
 right of trial by jury for, recommended, 61. 
 action of legislature iu 1875 as to, 93, 94, 95. 
 
302 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Agreement, written, formerly required to enforce contract by summary 
 proceedings where service not entered on, no longer necessary, 5. 
 agreement for hire of labourer, artificer, &c. exempt from stamp, 117. 
 constituting conspiracy, 44. ^ ^ -d . 
 
 exclusion of certain agreements as to, by Conspiracy and Protection 
 of Property Act, 1875. .101, 192. 
 
 Aiders and Abettors in offences punishable on summary conviction or 
 on indictment, 267, 268. 
 
 Alderman of city of London, jurisdiction of, under Labour Laws, 1875.. 
 171, 198. 
 
 Annulling Contract, power of, in repealed Act of 1867. .19. 
 
 “ rescinding” substituted in Employers and Workmen Act, 1875.. 165. 
 
 Appeal to quarter sessions from conviction for aggravated offence under 
 former Act of 1867. .20. 
 
 under Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 1875. .163. 
 case for opinion of superior court under Employers and Workmen 
 Act, 146. 
 
 under Conspiracy, &c. Act, 163. 
 
 Appearance of Parties on hearing under Employers and Workmen 
 Act, 1875.. 129. 
 
 proceedings in default of appearance by defendant, 130. 
 where plaintiff does not appear, 131. 
 either party may appear by solicitor, 130, 131. 
 
 Apportionment of wages under Employers and Workmen Act, 1875.. 
 165. 
 
 under repealed Act of 1867 . • 19. 
 of fine under repealed Act of 1867.. 19. 
 
 Apprentices, summary remedy by, against master before Act of 1867. .5. 
 summary remedy against, by master before Act of 1867. .5. 
 application of powers of imprisonment under that act, 84. 
 satisfactory provisions of Act of 1875. .84. 
 procedure with regard to, 150. 
 
 may be apprehended on warrant for nonappearance, 130, 169. 
 confined to certain classes of apprentices, 150. 
 apprentices to sea service expressly excluded, 176. 
 doubtful effect of repeal of acts on ordinary contracts of ap¬ 
 prentices, 151, n. 
 
 order on, to perform bis duties, 151. 
 enforcement of order, 152. 
 imprisonment, 162. 
 
 parent or guardian may be summoned, 152. 
 order on, 153. 
 security by, 163. 
 
 transfer of indentures on bankruptcy of master, 282. 
 neglect of master to provide with necessaries, 276. 
 extension of law, 96, 96, 154, 194, 195. 
 combinations to force manufacturers to limit number of, formerly 
 unlawful, 36. 
 
 effect of enlistment in army or marines, 294, 298. 
 
 Arbitration of disputes between employers and workmen, 232, 247, 281, 
 283. 
 
 Army, effect of servant or apprentice enlisting in, 294. 
 
INDEX. 
 
 30;3 
 
 Arrest of wages in Scotland, 13, 14. 
 
 abolition of, in payment of fines recommended by committee of House 
 of Commons, 1866..16. 
 liability to, limited, 282. 
 
 See Warrants. 
 
 Artificers, legislation directed to, 3. 
 included in Act of 1867.. 18. 
 included in “workman” in Act of 1875. .110. 
 
 Assaults on Seamen, &c. 276. 
 
 Assessment of Compensation or Damages under repealed Act of 
 
 1867.. 19. 
 
 See Damages. 
 
 Association of Workmen, after act 5 Geo. 4, c. 95. .32, 33. 
 
 former legislation in respect of violence, &c., to coerce master or 
 workman to belong or not to belong to any, 40. 
 or to pay fine or penalty enforced by, 40. 
 present provisions affecting, 155, 158, 282. 
 
 Attachment of Wages prohibited in inferior courts, 282. 
 
 Attendance of Parties on hearing, 130,131. 
 
 Attendance of Witnesses, summons for, 126, 127. 
 
 Attorney, answet and defence by, provided for by Summary Jurisdiction 
 Act, 128. 
 
 appearance of complainant by, 131. 
 
 defendant may appear by, as process civil, personal attendance can¬ 
 not be enforced, 130. 
 
 costs of, to what amount may be ordered at discretion of court, 178. 
 Award of Damages under Employers and Workmen Act, 1875. .134. 
 
 B. 
 
 Bailees, fraudulent, punishment of, 268. 
 
 not to apply to cases punishable on summary conviction, 268. 
 Bankruptcy of master, payment of wages in the event of, 281. 
 transfer by trustee of indentures of apprenticeship, 282. 
 
 Bargemen, on Thames, recovery of wages by, 248. 
 
 Besetting house or place, molesting by, offence under repealed Criminal 
 Law Amendment Act, 1871..41. 
 
 substituted provision in Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 
 
 1875.. 155. 
 
 “Black Lists” of masters, alluded to in report of Royal Commission on 
 Labour Laws, 70. 
 
 Bona Fide Disputes, distinction between and wilful act, 6, n. 
 
 distinction no longer exists, except in case of certain malicious acts, 92. 
 See Wilful. 
 
 Bond, security by, for performance of contract under Act of 1867. .19. 
 undertaking substituted for by Employers and Workmen Act, 1875.. 
 168. 
 
 “Bondsman” for good conduct of apprentice, 167. 
 form of application for summons to, 189. 
 form of summons, 190. 
 order on, 167, 168. 
 form, 190. 
 
INDEX. 
 
 304 
 
 Breach of Contract. See Contract. 
 
 Breach of the Peace, law relating to, not affected by sect. 3 of Con¬ 
 spiracy and Protection of Property Act, 1875.. 192. 
 
 Business, violence, coercion, &c., to compel alteration in mode of carrying 
 on, offence against combination laws, 32, 36, 40. 
 present general provisions in relation to, 96, 192, 195, 
 
 C. 
 
 Calico Printer, designer for, an artificer, 115, n. 
 
 Capacity to contract essential to validity, 118. 
 
 married women, 118. 
 infants, 119. 
 
 Case for opinion of superior court,power of court of summary jurisdiction 
 to state, under Employers and Workmen Act, 1875. .146. 
 under Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 1875. .163. 
 
 Cause of Action, particulars of, to be given on entry of plaint, 123,175. 
 suggested forms of, 124. 
 
 Certificate for discharge of prisoner from custody under Debtors Act, 178. 
 form of, 183. 
 
 of character of servants, punishment for false, 231. 
 
 Chancellor. See Lord Chancellor, and Kules. 
 
 Character of servants, punishment for false, 231. 
 
 Children, violence or intimidation to, with view to unlawfully compel¬ 
 ling parent, 155. 
 
 Chimney Sweepers’ Acts, general scope and object of provisions in, 4. 
 City of London, constitution of court of summary jurisdiction in, 171,198. 
 Civil Action at common law for breaches of contract, 1, 105. 
 
 Civil Breaches of contract distinguished from criminal offences, 52, 59. 
 completely separated by legislation of 1875. .80. 
 
 Civil Jurisdiction, court of summary jurisdiction under Employers and 
 Workmen Act, 1875, deemed to be a court of civil jurisdiction, 107, 
 166. 
 
 Claim, “ dispute” treated as, by Chancellor’s rules, 121, 122. 
 
 Claims, power of courts of summary jurisdiction to adjust and set off, 131. 
 
 Clerk of the Court of Summary Jurisdiction, 
 entry of plaint by, 122, 123. 
 
 the clerk to the magistrates of the petty sessional division or district, 
 generally the clerk of the court, 122, 175. 
 clerk to keep book, 123, 175. 
 
 form of plaint book, 191. 
 to issue summons, 125. 
 
 power given to, in forms, to sign summonses authorized by magistrates, 
 125. 
 
 suggestion as to effect, 125, 126. 
 clerk’s fees, 191. 
 
 duties of, on commitments under Conspiracy and Protection of Property 
 Act, 162, 163. 
 
INDEX. 
 
 305 
 
 Clocks and Watches, existing legislation relating to employers and 
 employed in the manufacture of, 217. 
 
 Clothes, molestation by hiding, offence under repealed Criminal Law 
 Amendment Act, 1871. .41. 
 
 hiding, an offence under Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 
 1875.. 155. 
 
 Clothing, punishment of master for not providing servant or apprentice 
 with, 154, 276. 
 
 Coal, false stacking of, 231. 
 
 Coal Mines Act, general object of, 3, 4. 
 
 payment of wages not to be at public house, 285. 
 when amount of wages depends on amount of minerals gotten, payment 
 to be according to weight, 286. 
 provision for deductions, 286. 
 appointment of check weights, 286. 
 inspection of mine by persons employed, 288. 
 special rules, 289. 
 
 CoEECE, Coercing, Coercion, certain acts done with a view to coerce 
 another, forbidden by Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1871. .40. 
 acts in restraint of trade not punishable under act, unless done with 
 the object of coercing, 41. 
 
 objection by trades unions to interpretation of words, 42. 
 coercion by trades unions, 68. 
 
 word “coerce” abandoned in legislation of 1875. .96. 
 
 Collier, case of, where personal service inferred, 113, n. 
 implied agreement to find work, 118. 
 
 Colliers, fraudulent stacking by, 231. 
 
 Combination, general right of workmen to combine, 63, 65. 
 
 limits of right, 64, 72. 
 
 violence in, to coerce master or workman to belong or not to belong to 
 any, 40. 
 
 or to pay fine imposed by, 40. 
 law of conspiracy applied to trade, 44, 48. 
 combinations amounting to conspiracy described, 74, 75. 
 provision of Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 1875, as to, 192. 
 
 Combination Laws, series of statutes known as, 29, 30. 
 combination at common law, 28. 
 mistaken policy of, 30. 
 repeal of prior acts by 5 Geo. 4, c. 95. .31. 
 provisions of that act, 31, 32. 
 effect of act, 32, 33. 
 
 appointment of select committee of House of Commons on, 33. 
 report, 33. 
 
 act 6 Geo. 4, c. 129, result, 35. 
 
 provisions of that act, 35, 36. 
 growth of trade unions, 36. 
 outrages at Sheffield and Manchester, 36. 
 commission of 1867.. 37. 
 conflicting reports, 37. 
 
 acts of 1871 amending laws as to trade unions, and Criminal Law 
 Amendment Act, and results, 38, 39. 
 complaints of acts by trade unions, 42. 
 report of Royal Commission on Labour Laws as to, 63. 
 
 X 
 
 D. 
 
306 INDEX. 
 
 Combination ' LA .- w ^— coyitimied . ^ . 
 
 repeal of Criminal Law Amendment Act, and substituted provisions, 
 96. 
 
 Commission of 1867, to inquire on organization of trades unions, 37. 
 extract from, 65—67. 
 conflicting reports of, 37. 
 
 commission, appointment of, 1874, to inquire into working of Master 
 and Servant Act, 1867, Criminal Law Amendment Acts, and Con¬ 
 spiracy, 49. 
 
 proceedings of commission, 49. 
 report, 49—79. 
 
 as to Master and Servant Act, 1867.. 51. 
 
 Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1871. .62. 
 law of conspiracy, 73. 
 
 adoption of report in part by the government, 80. 
 deviations in bills and alterations before passing, examined, 80— 
 104. 
 
 Commitment. See Warrant of Commitment. 
 
 Committal for trial where defendant objects to summary jurisdiction 
 under Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 162. 
 
 Committee of House of Commons on master and servant law, appoint¬ 
 ment of, 1865.. 15. 
 report of 1866.. 15. 
 
 on combination laws at instance of Mr. Huskisson, 33. 
 
 Common Law, remedy for breaches of contract at, 1. 
 right to combine at, 28, 29. 
 
 6 Geo. 4, c. 129, declaratory of, as to offence, in opinion of Sir William 
 Erie, 36, n. 
 
 Compelling Performance of Contracts. See Performance. 
 
 Compelling Persons wrongfully, certain acts done with view to, 
 punishable, 155. 
 
 Compensation for breaches of contract, introduced as a remedy by Act 
 of 1867.. 19. 
 
 Competency of Parties as Witnesses, 100, 101. 
 
 distinction between masters and servants prior to 1867.. 10. 
 recommendation to committee of House of Commons on, 17, n. 
 report of committee as to, 16. 
 action of legislature in 1867.. 21. 
 
 suggested distinction between competency and compellability, 100, n. 
 great extension of law in Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 
 1875.. 100. 
 
 account of changes, 99, n. 
 comments on, 101. 
 
 parties competent under Employers and Workment Act, 1875, with¬ 
 out express provision, 127. 
 
 express provisions in Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 1875 
 ..160,197. 
 
 Commitment under Debtors Act, 1862, on judgment summons, 142. 
 rules as to, 177. 
 form of order, 182. 
 
 warrant of, for trial, on defendant’s objecting to jurisdiction, 162. 
 
INDEX. 
 
 307 
 
 Complaint, proceeding by, and summary, under Act of 1807.. 18. 
 
 no written complaint requisite under Employers and Workmen Act, 
 
 1875.. 123. 
 
 entry in plaint book constitutes complaint to satisfy Summary Juris¬ 
 diction Act, 123, n. 
 
 Conciliation, Councils of, to adjust differences between masters and 
 workmen, 281. 
 
 Concurrent Jurisdiction of two ordinary justices and of stipendiary 
 magistrates under Act of 18G7 taken away by Labour Laws of 1875 
 
 ..108. 
 
 of county courts and courts of summary jurisdiction under Employers 
 and Workmen Act, 1875..81. 
 
 Conspiracy, law of, in relation to employer and employed previous to 
 1875-44. 
 
 definition of conspiracy, 44. 
 three classes, 46. 
 
 reports of commissioners on Criminal Law, 44. 
 
 New York Criminal Code commissioners, 44. 
 
 Statute of New York, 48. 
 
 application of law to employer and employed, 44, 45. 
 objections to law, 45. 
 
 provision in Trade Union Act, 1871..282, 
 report of Royal Commission (1874—5) on, 49, 73. 
 how offence dealt with in legislation of 1875.. 101, 192. 
 
 Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 1875 ..192. 
 
 progress of the bill through parliament and review of the provisions 
 and amendments introduced, 80, 92—103. 
 procedure under the act, 154—163. 
 
 Constable, process served by, as officers of courts of summary jurisdic¬ 
 tion, 126, 175, 176. 
 
 “Contract” in Employers and Workmen Act, 1875. 
 term used in aid of definition of workman, 170. 
 workman who has entered into a “ contract of service,” or a “ contract 
 personally to execute any work or labour,” 111, 170. 
 need not be to serve or work exclusively for one employer, 113. 
 need not subsist at time proceedings taken, 114. 
 
 Contract of Service, definition of, in Act of 1867. .18. 
 cases as to, under former law, 113, 115 in note. 
 
 Contracts, remedy for breaches of contracts of service at common law, 1. 
 early legislation respecting, 1, 2. 
 what classes of, within pre^nt inquiry, 2, 3. 
 of persons employed by State not included, 3. 
 enforcement of, for manual services on public grounds, 3, 4. 
 state of legislation for enforcement of, immediately before Act of 
 
 1867.. 4. 
 
 distinction between wrongful and wilful breaches of, 6, 16, n. 
 when written necessary, 5. 
 discharge from, 5. 
 not an effectual remedy, 10, 11. 
 suggestion as to compelling performance of, 16, n. 
 recommendation of committee of House of Commons as to, 15. 
 provisions of Act of 1867 as to, 19. 
 
 interference with, forbidden by Combination Act, 5 Geo. 4, c. 95.. 
 31,32. ’ 
 
 X 2 
 
308 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Contracts— co)itinyed. 
 
 report of Royal Commission as to mode of dealing with breaches of, 52. 
 simple breach recommended to be divested of all character of 
 criminality, 55. 
 
 power to order performance of, recommended, 88. 
 suggestion that written should be required, disapproved of, 61, 62. 
 contracts of service and contracts to execute work or labour within 
 Employers and Workmen Act, 1875..Ill, 170. 
 service need not have been entered on or work performed, 116. 
 must be a valid contract in law, 116. 
 
 and in writing if required by Statute of Frauds, 116. 
 mutuality of, 117,118. 
 capacity to contract, 118. 
 married women, 118. 
 infants, 118. 
 
 Convictions, distinction between, and “orders,” on admissibility of parties 
 as witnesses, 10. 
 
 Corn, appropriation of, by servants to feed horses, formerly a felony, 3. 
 summary punishment substituted, 279. 
 
 Costs, power to order, prior to Act of 1867. .4. 
 power uuder Act of 1867.. 19. 
 under Employers and Workmen Act, 1875.. 133. 
 provisions of Summary Jurisdiction Act applied to, 133. 
 
 Lord Chancellor empowered to make rules as to, 133, 169, 170. 
 on dismissal of complaint, 133. 
 enforcement of, 133. 
 to complainant, 133. 
 of solicitor, 134, 178. 
 
 to defendant where plaintiff does not appear, 131, 176. 
 of enforcing orders, 178. 
 
 to be paid in first instance by party seeking assistance of court, 178. 
 schedule of, 191. 
 
 of prosecution under Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 1875, 
 not allowed, 99, 162. 
 
 avoidance of costs of summary conviction by objecting to jurisdiction, 
 103, n. 
 
 Cotton Manufacture, existing legislation relating to employers and 
 workmen in, 209, 211, 215, 221, 224, 249, 250. 
 
 Councils of Conciliation, to adjust differences between masters and 
 workmen, 281. 
 
 Counsel, answer and defence by, expressly secured by Summary Juris¬ 
 diction Act, 128. 
 
 appearance of complainant by, 131. 
 
 Counterfeit Certificate, of servants’ characters, punishment for, 231. 
 
 County Courts, suggested transfer of jurisdiction from justices to, con¬ 
 sidered, 60. 
 objections to, 60. 
 
 enlarged powers given to, by Emplovers and Workmen Act, 1875.. 
 105, 164. 
 
 courts of summary jurisdiction have powers of, conferred by that act.. 
 
INDEX. 
 
 309 
 
 Courts of Petty Sessions, made public by Jervis’ Acts, for offences 
 punishable on summary conviction, 10. 
 constituted courts of summary jurisdiction under Labour Laws, 1875.. 
 107, 159. 
 
 See Courts of Summary Jurisdiction. 
 
 Courts of Summary Jurisdiction, established by legislation of 1875.. 
 105. 
 
 under Employers and Workmen Act, 1875. .105. 
 under Conspiracy and Protection of l?roperty Act, 1875.. 159. 
 constitution of courts, 107. 
 in city of London, 107. 
 in metropolitan police court division, 107. 
 in city, town, &c. where stipendiary magistrate appointed, 107. 
 elsewhere, 108. 
 petty sessional division, 109. 
 
 civil jurisdiction of, as to persons and things under Employers and 
 Workmen Act, 110. 
 apprentices, 150. 
 
 rules for carrying jurisdiction into effect, 109. 
 process of conrts, 122. 
 proceedings in, on hearing cases, 127. 
 courts open to the public, 128. 
 enforcement of orders of, 140. 
 
 criminal jurisdiction nnder Conspiracy and Protection of I’roperty 
 Act, 159. 
 
 description of offences, 154. 
 
 objection by defendants to jurisdiction, 161. 
 
 appeal, 163. 
 
 Crime, legislation for prevention of, beyond scope of ordinary labour 
 laws, 3. 
 
 question of how far character of criminality attaches to offences by 
 workmen, considered by Labour Laws Commission, 53 ct seq. 
 
 Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1871, 39, n. 
 provisions of, 40. 
 
 distaste of workmen and trade unions for, 28, 42. 
 approval of, by employers, 43. 
 import of Royal Commission on, 1874-5 . .49, 62. 
 objections to, by trade unions stated, 62, 72. 
 objections reported to be of a very shadowy and unsubstantial 
 character, 69. 
 
 government bills of 1875 left act unrepcaled, 96. 
 eventually repealed, 96, 200, 201. 
 substituted provisions, 96, 101, 155, 195. 
 
 Cross, Mr., Secretary of State, introduction of Labour Laws, 1875, into 
 House of Commons, by, 80. 
 
 D. 
 
 Damages, for breach of contract at common law, 1 . 
 assessment of, under Act of 1867.. 19. 
 award of, under Employers and Workmen Act, 1875. . 134. 
 adjustment and set-off of, 134. 
 whether liquidated or unliquidated, 131. 
 legal principles respecting, 134. 
 
310 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 DK'iilkG^ii—continned. 
 
 must be direct consequence of breach, 134. 
 illustrations, 135. 
 
 measure of damages on dismissal of servant, 13G. 
 distinction between liquidated, or penalty, 139. 
 
 Debtors Act, 1869, provisions of, as to commitment under, applied to 
 orders for money by court of summary jurisdiction, 81, 142. 
 prescribed rules under, 143, 177. 
 
 Defects, in summons, in substance or form, provided for, 128. 
 
 Defendant, service of summons on, 126. 
 appearance of, on heariug, 129. 
 
 no warrant to issue for non-appearance under Employers and Work¬ 
 men Act, 1875. .130. 
 procedure in his absence, 130. 
 
 objection by, to jurisdiction under Conspiracy and Protection of Pro¬ 
 perty Act, 161. 
 
 See further. Procedure. 
 
 competent witnesses in cases of orders under Jervis’ Acts, 10. 
 
 under Master and Servant Act, 1867. .21. 
 
 under Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 1875. .100. 
 
 See Competency of Parties as Witnesses. 
 
 Discharge from contract, impracticable in general as a remedy, 10, 11. 
 from custody under an order of commitment, rules as to, 177, 178. 
 form of certiticate for, 183. 
 
 Dismissal of servants for misconduct, right of, not interfered with, 21. 
 measures of damages recoverable for dismissal, 136. 
 violence or threats, &c. to coerce masters to dismiss workmen, 40. 
 of complaints, 129. 
 
 wdiere complainant does not appear, 131. 
 costs on, 131, 133. 
 
 “Disputes” between employer and workman, jurisdiction confined to, 
 under Employers and Workmen Act, 1875.. 121. 
 meaning of word, 121. 
 should be read as “ claim,” 121. 
 power of the court as to, on hearing, 131. 
 
 Disraeli, Mr., his observations on the Labour Laws of 1875. .103, 104. 
 
 Distress, warrant of, against goods, under order for payment of money, 
 140. 
 
 forms, 184, 185. 
 
 former enforcement of order for wages by, 4, 5. 
 imprisonment of master in default of, 4, 5. 
 
 enforcement of fine by, recommendation of committee of House of 
 Commons as to. 15. 
 
 enforcement of order for payment of money by, under repealed 
 Act of 1867..20. 
 
 District, in w hich to enter plaint and issue summons, 122, 175. 
 observations on rules, 123. 
 service of summons out of, 122, 175, 176. 
 
 Divisional Courts of Petty Sessions constitute courts of summary 
 jurisdiction under Employer and Workmen Act, 1875. .109. 
 not courts of record, 109. 
 
INDEX. 
 
 311 
 
 Domestic Servants, only incidentally referred to in this work, 2, 3. 
 legislation generally excluded, 4. 
 
 and still excludes under Employers and Workmen Act, 1875.. 
 
 111 . 
 
 but not excluded from Conspiracy and Protection of Property 
 Act, 1875..97, 158. 
 
 Truck Act does not extend to, 240. 
 
 Duties, enforcement of, by apprentice, 151. 
 
 Dyers, journeymen, frauds by, 224. 
 
 E. 
 
 Education, legislation affecting employer and employed, to promote and 
 enforce, 3, 281. 
 
 Effect of Orders of court of summary jurisdiction, 145. 
 on subsisting contract, 147. 
 on proceedings in other courts, 149. 
 
 Elcho, Lord, his Master and Serv.ant Act, 15, 18. 
 
 chairman of select committee of House of Commons, 15. 
 bill introduced by, 18. 
 
 See Master and Servant Act, 1867. 
 
 Embezzlement, crime of, 270. 
 
 [^See also various statutes in the Appendixyiip. 209—232, as to the 
 making away with work and materials.'] 
 
 “Employer,” meaning of, in Employers and Workmen Act, 187.‘>, 
 governed by “ workmen” and contract,” 110. 
 agent or representative of, cannot be sued for wages, 83. 
 
 “Employers and Workmen” substituted for “masters and servants” 
 in legislation of 1875 ..110, 164. 
 law of conspiracy in relation to, 44. 
 
 Employers and Workmen Act, 1875.. 164. 
 
 bill brought into House of Commons by the Government, 80. 
 review of the provisions and alterations in progress of bill through 
 parliament, 80—92. 
 procedure under act, 105 — 153. 
 
 Lord Chancellor’s rules under act, 175. 
 
 Employment, coercion by violence, threats or intimidation, &c. to qnitor 
 not accept, 40. 
 
 Enforcement of Contracts, former legislation respecting, 1. 
 under Act of 1867 . . 86. 
 report of Royal Commission as to, 87, 88. 
 recommendation not fully acted on by legislation of 1875.. 91. 
 
 See Performance and Specific Performance. 
 
 Enforcement of Orders, under Employers and Workmen Act, 1875.. 
 140. 
 
 of orders for payment of money, 140. 
 
 as ordinary debts, 140. 
 
 of undertaking for performance, 144. 
 
 of order for performance of duties by apprentice, 152. 
 
 Enforcement of Work by former legislation, 1. 
 of price of work, 1. 
 
312 INDEX. 
 
 Entry of Plaint, under Employers and Workmen Act, 1876.. 122. 
 
 rule as to, 175. 
 
 Erle, Sir William, his statement of common law as to trade combi¬ 
 nations, 28, 29. 
 
 opinion of, as to operation of 6 Geo. 4, c. 120. .36, n. 
 
 Evidence. See also Witness. 
 
 committee of House of Commons declined to recommend departure 
 from existing rules of, 16. 
 
 minutes of, on Royal Commission on Labour Laws, referred topassioi. 
 
 on master and servant law committee, 2 ^^ssim. 
 
 Exclusive Jurisdiction, county courts and courts of summary jurisdic¬ 
 tion practically exclusive under Employers and Workmen Act, 1875.. 
 105, n. 
 
 of police and stipendiary magistrates under Labour Laws of 1875.. 
 107, 108. 
 
 Execution against goods and chattels to enforce orders of court of sum¬ 
 mary junsdiction, 140. 
 
 exception of wearing apparel, bedding and tools, 140. 
 
 form of warrant of distress for payment by plaintiff, 184. 
 for payment by defendant, 185. 
 costs of, 191. 
 
 Explosive Substances, provisions as to workmen engaged in manu¬ 
 facturing, 294. 
 
 E. 
 
 Factories, labour in, 260. 
 
 Factory Acts, illustrations of legislation affecting labour contracts on 
 public grounds, .3, 4. 
 
 provisions of, as to fencing machinery, 261. 
 
 question as to whether claims for damages for not properly fencing 
 constitute disputes under Employers and Workmen Act, 1875.. 260. 
 cases of claims under Factory Acts, 263, 264, 265. 
 power of deduction of fines from young persons within Factory Acts, 
 limited, 171. 
 
 Fees of clerk of court of summary jurisdiction, 191. 
 
 Felony, felonious act excludes civil remed}^ until prosecution, 121. 
 
 Fencing Machinery, legislative provisions respecting, 261. 
 general object of, 4. 
 cases decided in relation to, 261—265. 
 
 Fine, no power to inflict before Act of 1867, recommendation of committee 
 of House of Commons. 1866, as to, 15, 16. 
 provisions of Act of 1867 as to, 19. 
 
 mode of applying that act by, in metropolitan police district, 2.3. 
 objection by workmen to, power to fine given by Master and Servant 
 Act, 1867, considered, 52. 
 
 no power to fine under Employers and Workmen Act, 1875.. 131. 
 power to, instead of imprisonment for offences substituted for Criminal 
 Law Amendment Act, 97. 
 
 coercion to master or workman to pay fine or penalty imposed by 
 association or combination, 40. 
 
IXDEX. 
 
 313 
 
 Fines, deduction of, from wages, 246. 
 effect of Truck Acc as to, 246. 
 
 subsequent legislation as to hosiery trade docs not prohibit 6topi)agc, 
 293. 
 
 provision as to, in Employers and Workmen Act, 1875, in the case of 
 children, young persons and women in factories, 171. 
 
 Flax Manufacture, existing legislation relating to employers and 
 employed in, 215, 221, 224, 250. 
 
 Following Person from place to place with view to coercion, offence 
 under Criminal Law Amendment Act, 41. 
 substituted provision in Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 
 1875..155. 
 
 Food, punishment of master not providing servant or apprentice with, 96, 
 154, 276. 
 
 misappropriation of, by servant, to feed master’s horses or other 
 animals, 278. 
 
 Force, provisions of combination laws against, ,32, 35, 36. 
 
 Force and Effect of Orders of court of summary jurisdiction under 
 Employers and Workmen Act, 1875.. 145. 
 
 Foreman, a servant, 115, 116, n. 
 
 former power to summon for wages, 4. 
 power gone, 83. 
 
 using force to, to compel alteration in mode of carrying on business, 32. 
 
 Form, defects in (or in substance) in summons, not a ground of objection, 
 
 Forms of procedure under Employers and Workmen Act, 1875, attached 
 to rules, 179—191. 
 
 Fraudulent misappropriation of articles and materials of manufacture, 
 legislation respecting, 3, n. Sec Appendix. 
 
 Frauds, Statute of, must be complied with in contract between empb yeis 
 and workmen, 116. 
 
 Fulfilment of Contract. See Performance. 
 
 Fur Manufacture, existing legislation relating to employers and em¬ 
 ployed in, 215, 221, 224. 
 
 Fustian ^Manufacture, existing legislation relating to employers and 
 workmen in, 209, 211, 215, 221, 224. 
 
 G. 
 
 Gas, wilful and malicious breach of contract with authority or comi)any 
 having duty to supply, 154, 193. 
 authority or company to post up provision of act as to, 157. 
 
 Gases, deleterious, legislation to prevent, noticed, 3. 
 
314 INDEX. 
 
 Goods, execution against, under order for payment of money, 140. See 
 Execution. 
 
 payment of wages in goods, prohibited by Truck Act, 233. 
 
 stealing, in process of manufacture, 269. 
 
 penalty on workman in Ireland making away with, 278. 
 
 Gunpowder, provisions as to workmen in manufacture of, 294. 
 
 II. 
 
 Handicraftsman, included in “Workman,” 111. 
 
 “ Hand-workers,” expression used by Mr. Eupert Kettle to define class 
 of persons to whom legislation between employer and employed 
 extends. 111, n. 
 
 Hard Labour, power to impose taken away by Act of 1867 except for 
 aggravated cases, 20. 
 
 Hats, existing legislation relating to employers and employed in the 
 manufacture of, 221, 223, 224. 
 
 Health, legislation enforcing duties on the ground of, 3. 
 
 Hearing of “disputes” under Employers and Workmen Act, 1875, pro¬ 
 ceedings on, 127. 
 parties competent witnesses, 127. 
 appearance by attorneys and counsel, 128. 
 court open to the public, 128. 
 adjournment, 128. 
 defects and variances, 128. 
 proceedings where both parties appear, 129. 
 where defendant does not appear, 130. 
 where the plaintiff does not appear, 131. 
 orders of the court, 131. 
 
 of charges under Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 1875.. 
 160, 161. 
 
 where defendant objects to summary jurisdiction, 161, 162. 
 
 Hempen Manufacture, existing legislation relating to employers and 
 workmen in, 211, 216, 221, 224, 247, 249. 
 
 Hiding Tools, molesting by, offence under repealed Criminal Law Amend¬ 
 ment Act, 1871. .41. 
 
 an offence under Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 1875.. 
 155. 
 
 Hiring and Service, varieties of contract of, 2. 
 combinations to prevent, unlawful, 35. 
 
 Hosiery Manufacture, existing legislation relating to employers and 
 employed in, 229, 250, 265. 
 
 payment of wages in, without deduction (Hosiery Manufacture (Wages) 
 Act, 1874).. 293. 
 
 House, watching or besetting, molesting by, offence of, 165. 
 offence under previous Act of 1871. .41. 
 
IXDEX. 
 
 31.5 
 
 House of Commons, select committee of, on master and servant in 18G5. . 
 16. 
 
 re-appointed in 18G6.. 15. 
 report, 15. 
 
 select committee of, on Combination Laws, 33. 
 report, 33. 
 
 Husband and Wife made competent witnesses by Act of 1887. .21. 
 admissibility further extended by legislation of 1875..99, 100. 
 
 See Witnesses. 
 
 Husbandry, servants in, within scope of legislation, 3. 
 
 power to summon master for wages before Act of 1867.. 4. 
 expressly included in definition of “workmen” in Employers and 
 Workmen Act, 1875. . 1 10. 
 
 Truck Act does not extend to, 240. 
 female servant may be, 115, n. 
 
 case commented on, id. 
 
 Agricultural Gangs Act. See 281. 
 
 Huskisson, 5^1r., motion for committee on Combination Laws, 33. 
 
 I. 
 
 Illtreatment of apprentice, remedy against master for, before Act of 
 1867.. 5. 
 
 term used in repealed Act of 1867. . 18. 
 
 See Apprentice a/iel Master. 
 
 Imprisonment, power of, before Act of 1867. .4, 
 
 masters liable to, for nonpayment of wages ordered by mngis* 
 trate, 4. 
 
 servants, direct liability of, to, 6. 
 apprentices, liability of, to, 5. 
 
 supposed inequality of the law respecting, prior to 1867..7. 
 
 question examined, 6— 10. 
 effect of, general abolition of, for debt, 9. 
 
 recommendation of committee of House of Commons ns to, in default 
 of payment of fine, 15. 
 as to direct, in aggravated cases, 15, 16. 
 provisions of Act of 1867 as to, 20, 21. 
 
 object of act to get rid of direct iinprisonmcnt for simple breaches, 22. 
 defect of act as to, 22. 
 
 abuse of power as to, 25. 
 
 in the case of apprentices, 84. 
 
 report of Royal Commission on Labour Laws as to power of, 52—60. 
 to enforce performance, objections to, considered, 88, 90. 
 
 under Employers and Workmen Act, 1875, imprisonment con¬ 
 fined to enforce pavment of money orders, under Debttjrs Act, 
 142, 169. 
 
 and limited imprisonment of apprentice for disobeying order for 
 performance of duty, 167. 
 procedure for that purpose, 177. 
 for limited period on proof of means, 144. 
 
 Imprisonment uuder Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 1875 
 ..193—195. 
 
INDEX. 
 
 316 
 
 1875.. 161, 162. 
 
 INEQUALITY OP LAW as regards master and servant, supposed former, 7. 
 question discussed, 7—10. 
 popular view as to, in Scotland, 13, n. 
 obLrvations of Iloyal Commission as to, 52, 56 et seq. 
 
 Infants, contracts by, 119. 
 
 ^'^'^'^contraetrofservfcc beneficial, therefore generally binding, 120. 
 illustrations, 120. 
 exceptions, 120. 
 
 Information, on oath, foundation of warrant of arrest, 5. 
 power to issue before Act of 1867. .5. 
 
 under repealed Act of 1867.. 18. i. a a 
 
 for offences under Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 
 
 1875..160. 
 
 Injury to person or property, subject matter of complaint under Act of 
 
 1867.. 18. 
 
 constituted aggravated case, 21. 
 
 Instalments, court of summary jurisdiction may order payment of 
 money by, 132, 169. 
 
 and on judgment summons under Debtors Act, 143. 
 
 Intimidation, punishment for, by 5 Geo. 4, c. 95. .3L 
 by 6 Geo. 4, c. 129..3o. 
 
 complaints of vagueness and uncertainty of term^40, 42. 
 term nsed in Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1871..40. 
 
 offenc^of^^ifdor Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 1875.. 
 155. 
 
 Ireland, application of Labour Laws, 1875, to, with modifications, 173, 
 174, 207, 208.^ 
 
 former jurisdiction of justices in, 11. 
 
 provisions of the Summary Jurisdiction Act of, relating to disputes 
 between employers and employed, 265—267. ^ ^ , 
 
 summary jurisdiction in, for unlawful disposal of work by workmen, 
 servants and apprentices, 278. 
 
 Iron Manufacture, existing legislation relating to employers and 
 workmen in, 209, 211, 215, 221, 224. 
 
 Ironstone, false stacking of ironstone and iron ore, 231. See also Coal 
 Mines Act and Metalliferous ^Iines. 
 
 J. 
 
 Jervis’ Act, 11 & 12 Viet. c. 43, applied to Labour Laws, 1875. .170,198. 
 effect of, on 4 Geo. 4, c. 34..6, 7. 
 made courts public, 10. 
 
 “ Journeyman,” included in “workman,” 110. 
 
 Judgment, order for plaintiff or defendant by court of summarv juiis- 
 diction, so termed by rules, 146, 176. 
 forms of judgment for plaintiff and defendant, 180. 
 
INDEX, 
 
 317 
 
 Judgment Summons, enforcement by, of orders of court of summary 
 jurisdiction for payment of money, 142, 169. 
 provisions of Debtors’ Act applied to, 142. 
 prescribed rules respecting, 177. 
 form of, 181. 
 
 service of, must be personal, 177. 
 
 hearing of, 177. 
 
 proof of means to pay, 144. 
 
 Jurisdiction of County Courts under Employers and Workmen Act, 
 
 1875.. 105, 106, 164. 
 
 Jurisdiction of Justices immediately before Act of 1867. .4. 
 in Ireland, 11. 
 in Scotland, 12. 
 
 recommendation of committee of House of Commons, 1866, ns to, 15. 
 jurisdiction of a single justice taken away by Act of 1867..22. 
 observations in Report of Royal Commission on Labour Laws on, 
 60, 61. 
 
 under Labour Laws of 1875, must for hearing and determining cases 
 be in appointed petty sessions, 108, 109. 
 excluded in city of London police court divisions of the metropolis, 
 and in places where stipendiary magistrates appointed, 107, 108, 
 159. See Courts of Summary Jurisdiction. 
 
 Jurisdiction of Lord Mayor and Aldermen in the City of 
 London under Labour Laws, 1875.. 107, 171, 198. 
 
 Jurisdiction of Metropolitan Police Magistrates under Labour 
 Laws, 1875.. 107, 171, 198, 199. 
 
 Jurisdiction of Stipendiary Magistrates under Labour Laws, 
 
 1875.. 107, 171, 199. 
 
 Jurisdiction of Summary Courts under Labour Laws of 1875.. 171, 
 198. 
 
 under Employers and Workmen Act, 105, 107. 
 as to amount of claim in disputes, lOG. 
 persons and things, 110. 
 employers, 110. 
 workmen, 110. 
 contract, 110. 
 apprentices, 150. 
 subject matter, 121. 
 
 under Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 159. 
 as to offences, 154. 
 punishment, 159. 
 
 power of defendants to object to jurisdiction, 161. 
 jurisdiction must be chosen in warrant of commitment, 162. 
 
 Lord Chancellor’s rules for carrying into effect the jurisdiction 
 given by Employers and Workmen Act, 1875.. 175. 
 
 Jury, trial by, recommendation of Labour Laws Commission as to, in 
 aggravated cases, 61. 
 
 carried out by Labour Laws of 1875. .98, 99. 
 
 defendant charged with offences under Conspiracy and Protection of 
 Property Act, securing trial by jury by objecting to summary 
 jurisdiction, 161. 
 
 probable use and effect of power, 103, n. 
 
318 INDEX. 
 
 Justices of the Peace, summary remedy before, for breaches of con¬ 
 tract from early period, 1. 
 
 jurisdiction of, immediately before Act of 1867. .4—6. 
 in Ireland, 11. 
 in Scotland, 12. 
 
 sheriffs substitutes ex oficio, 13. 
 effect of Act of 1867 on jurisdiction of, 22. 
 exclusion of justices interested in trade, 72. 
 jurisdiction of, under Labour Laws, 1875.. 171, 198. 
 
 L. 
 
 Labour, contracts for, 2. 
 subject of work, 3. 
 
 Labour Laws, history of, 1, 29. 
 
 impolicy of former combination laws, 30. 
 
 report of Royal Commission on, 49. See Commission. 
 
 critical review of the legislation of 1875. .80. 
 
 Employers and Workmen Act, 164. 
 procedure under, 105, 
 
 Chancellor’s rules under, 175. 
 conspiracy and protection of property, 192. 
 unrepealed statutes relating to employers and workmen, 209. 
 
 Labourers, statutory legislation included, 3. 
 included in Act of 1867. .18. 
 in Labour Laws, 1875.. 110. 170. 
 
 interference of Combination Laws with rights of, 29, 30. 
 
 Larceny, various provisions indirectly affecting workmen, relating to, 
 268, 271. 
 
 Larceny by Servant, provisions respecting, 270. 
 
 I^EATHER Manufacture, existing legislation relating to employers and 
 workmen in, 211, 215, 221, 224. 
 
 Legislation respecting labour contracts, account of, from early period, 1. 
 various objects of, 3, 4. See Appendix of Statutes. 
 
 Lichfield, Earl of. Bill of 1867 under care of, in House of Lords, 18. 
 
 Limitation of Jurisdiction, of justices in amount of wages, before 
 Act of 1867. .4. 
 in apprenticeship cases, 5. 
 in cases of parish apprentices, 6. 
 in Ireland, 11. 
 
 under Act of 1867 limited hy acts in schedule, 18. 
 of fine under Act of 1867.. 19. 
 
 of courts of summary jurisdiction under Labour Laws, 1875: 
 in “ disputes,” 106. 
 in apprenticeship cases, 150. 
 in amount of fine for offences, 159. 
 
 Linen Manufacture, existing legislation respecting employers and 
 workmen in, 209, 211, 215, 221, 224, 247, 249, 250, 
 
INDEX. 
 
 319 
 
 Liquidated Damages, distinction between and penalty, 139. 
 liquidated and unliquidated may be adjusted and set off, 131. 
 
 Lodging, neglect of master to provide, for servant or apprentice, 154, 276. 
 
 London, constitution of courts of summary jurisdiction in city of, 171, 
 198. 
 
 Lord Chancellor’s, The, power to make rules under Employers and 
 ■\Vorkmen Act, 1875.. 109, 168, 169. 
 rules issued under this power, 175, 178. 
 forms attached to rules, 179. 
 schedule of costs, 191. 
 
 Lord Mayor of London, jurisdiction of, under Labour Laws, 1875. . 171, 
 198. 
 
 M. 
 
 Machinery, legislative provisions respecting fencing, 261. 
 general object of legislation, 4. 
 
 Magistrate. Justices, Police Magistrate, Stipendiary 
 Magistrate. 
 
 Malicious Acts by Workmen, forbidden by repealed combination 
 laws, 32. 
 
 recommendation of Royal Commission that injury to person or 
 property other than injury flowing simply from breach of contract 
 should be left to ordinary law, 59, 93. 
 le^slation of 1875 makes the maliciously breaking of contract a crimo 
 in certain cases, 93, 94. 
 meaning of “maliciously,” 94, 155, 274. 
 
 Malicious Injuries to Property generally, 271—276. 
 destroying goods in process of manufacture, 271. 
 destroying machinery, 272. 
 
 malicious injuries to property above 6/. not otherwise provided for, 
 272. 
 
 wilful or malicious damage not otherwise provided for, 273. 
 
 “ Maliciously.” See Malicious Injuries and Acts, supra. 
 
 Managers, power to summon for wages, 4. 
 power gone, 83. 
 
 ^Manchester, Trade Union Outrages Act, 36, 66. 
 
 Manual Labour, person engaged in, included in “ workman ” in Act of 
 1875..Ill, 112, n. 
 
 Manual Services, statutes enforcing performance of, on public grounds, 
 3, 4. 
 
 Manufacture, combinations to regulate mode of carrying on, unlawful, 
 under act 5 Geo. 4, c. 95. .32. 
 and under 6 Geo. 4, c. 129. .36. 
 stealing goods in the process of, 269. 
 
 Manufacturers, legislation directed to, 3. 
 
 combination to force, to alter mode of carrying on business, 32, 36. 
 
320 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 ISIARINES, enlistment in, effect of, on contracts of service, and apprentice¬ 
 ship, 297, 298. 
 
 Married Women, incapacity of, to contract for personal services, 118. 
 not affected by Man'ied Women’s Property Act, 119. 
 
 See also Wives. 
 
 Master, former, right of servant to summon for wages, 4. 
 warrant against, on default of appearance, 5. 
 
 offences by and against under Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1871. .40. 
 substitution of “employer” for “master” in legislation of 1875.. 
 164, 192. 
 
 former power of workman to sue agents, managers, and foremen for 
 wages taken away, 83. 
 
 of apprentice, proceedings by and against, under Employers and 
 Workmen Act, 1876. .84, 85, 150. 
 
 neglect of, to provide necessaries for servant or apprentice, punish¬ 
 ment for, 96, 154, 276. 
 
 civil liability of master to servant for negligence, 263, and note, 
 for not fcnciug machinery, 261. 
 
 Master and Servant, enforcement of duties between at common law, 
 1, 105. 
 
 summary remedy by statute, 1, 105. 
 varieties of service, 2. 
 
 popular objections to former state of law of, 7. 
 objections considered, 7— 10. 
 
 law of, reported by committee of House of Commons to be objection¬ 
 able, 15. 
 
 history of Act of 1867. . 15. See ^Master and Servant Act, 1867. 
 law of conspiracy in relation to, 44. 
 
 Master and Servant Act, 1867. .15. 
 history of, 15. 
 provisions of, 18—22. 
 law previous to, 4. 
 object of act, 18. 
 effect of act, 18—22. 
 defects, 22. 
 
 abuse of power conferred by, 25. 
 report of Royal Commission on, 49, 51. 
 repeal of, 201. 
 
 Materials op Manufacture, fraudulent misappropriation of, statutes 
 respecting, 3, n. 
 
 Measure of Damages for breaches of contract of service, 135—139. 
 
 Medical Aid, punishment of master for neglecting to provide servant or 
 apprentice with, when legally liable, 95, 154. 
 
 Menial Servant excluded from Employers and Workmen Act, 1876.. 
 
 111 . 
 
 but not excluded from Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 
 1876.. 97, 168. 
 
 Metalliferous Mines Act, general object of, 3, 4. 
 wages not to be paid at public-house, 291. 
 inspection of mine on behalf of workmen, 291. 
 special rules in mines, 291. 
 
INDEX. 
 
 321 
 
 Metropolitan Police Magistrates, their mode of applying Act of 
 
 1867.. 23, 26. 
 
 jurisdiction of, under Labour Laws of 1875.. 171, 198. 
 jurisdiction as to recovery of wages on the river Thames under Police 
 Courts Act. .248. 
 
 Militia, enlistment of servants in, 298. 
 
 Miners within scope of legislation, 3. 
 
 “ miner ” included in “ workman ” in Act of 1875. . 111. 
 fraudulent removal of ore by, 269. 
 
 false stacking of ironstone, 231. See Coal Mines and Metal¬ 
 liferous Mines. 
 
 Mines, false stacking of coal, ironstone and iron ore, 231. 
 
 See Coalmines and Metalliferous Mines. 
 
 ;Minor. See Infant. 
 
 Misconduct OF Servants, summons or warrant for, be fore Act of 1867. .5. 
 of apprentices, 5. 
 
 term included in Act of 1867.. 18. 
 
 Misdemeanor of Servants, summons or warrant for, before act of 
 
 1867.. 5. 
 
 of apprentices, 6. 
 
 term included in Act of 1867. . 18. 
 
 Misusage, term used in Act of 1867. . 18. 
 
 Mohair Manufacture, existing legislation relating to employers and 
 employed in, 215, 221, 224, 250. 
 
 Molestation, forbidden by act 6 Geo. 4, c. 129.. 35. 
 
 complaints of vagueness and uncertainty of term, 40, 42. 
 
 certain acts of, defined by Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1871. .41. 
 
 by “ picketing,” 67. 
 
 words “ molest ” and “ coerce ” got rid of by legislation of 1875. .90. 
 
 Money, orders for payment of, how enforceable, 140. 
 
 Municipal Authority, definition of, 199. 
 in Scotland, 206. 
 in Ireland, 208. 
 
 Mutiny Acts, provisions as to servants and apprentices enlisting in army 
 or marines, 294—298. 
 
 Mutuality of Contract essential to validity, 117. 
 contracts held sufficient, 117. 
 contracts held insufficient for want of, 118. 
 
 N. 
 
 Necessaries, contract for, by infant, 119. 
 
 criminal liability of master for not supplying to servant or apprentice, 
 154, 194, 276. 
 
 New York Criminal Code Commissioners, report of, on conspiracy, 44. 
 act of, as to indictable conspiracies in trade or commerce, 48. 
 
 D. Y 
 
322 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Notice of set-off or counter-claim unnecessary, 127, 176. 
 Nuisances, enforcing contracts to prevent, 3. 
 
 O. 
 
 Oath, witnesses examined on, or declaration, 127. 
 
 Objection by defendant to trial by court of summary jurisdiction, 161. 
 ought to be taken promptly, 161. 
 but circumstances to be considered, 161. 
 
 to summons for defects in substance or form not to avail, 128. 
 
 Obstruction, under Combination Act, 6 Geo. 4, c. 129, unlawful, 35. 
 objections to term as vague and uncertain, 40. 
 
 certain acts of, defined by Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1871. .41. 
 
 Offence by servant, what constituted, prior to Act of 1867. .6. 
 
 distinction between offence and simple breach recognized by Act of 
 1867.. 18, 19. 
 
 distinction considered by Royal Commission on Labour Laws, 
 62-60. 
 
 action of the legislature thereon, 80, 93, 94. 
 
 offences under Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 1875, 
 enumerated, 154, 155. 
 
 Order for performance of contract. See Performance. 
 
 Orders, distinction between, and convictions under Jervis’s Act, 10. 
 effect of, on admissibility of parties as witnesses, 10. 
 procedure by means of, introduced by Act of 1867. .19. 
 
 Orders of Courts of Summary Jurisdiction under the Em¬ 
 ployers AND Workmen Act, 1875. 
 general power of the court as to, 131. 
 security for performance, 132. 
 orders for costs, 133. 
 award of damages, 135. 
 enforcement of orders, 140. 
 
 for payment of money, 140. 
 execution against goods, 140. 
 judgment summons, 142. 
 if undertaken for payment of money, 144. 
 force and effect of orders, 145. 
 on a subsisting contract, 147. 
 on proceedings in other courts, 149. 
 orders as to apprentices, 151. 
 
 enforcement of, 152. 
 forms of orders, 180 — 190. 
 
 Ore, fraudulent removal of, by miners, 269. 
 fraudulent stacking of, 231. 
 
 P. 
 
 I arent of Apprentice, power to summon and make order against, if 
 party to indentures, 153. & > 
 
INDEX. 
 
 323 
 
 Parish Apprentices, former jurisdiction in case of, 6. 
 present jurisdiction, 150, 151. 
 
 Parol Contracts, in general sufficient, 61, 62. 
 but governed by Statute of Frauds, 116. 
 
 Particulars of Cause of Action under Employers and Workmen 
 Act, 1875.. 123. 
 required by rules, 175. 
 forms of particulars, 124, 125. 
 
 Parties, examination of, as witnesses, 16. See Witness. 
 
 appearance of, on hearing, under Employers and Workmen Act, 1875 .. 
 129. 
 
 power to summon and make orders on parties to indentures of appren¬ 
 ticeship, 153. 
 
 Partnership, share of profits by servant does not of itself constitute, 280. 
 
 Peace, binding over to keep, for threats or intimidation, under Crimiual 
 Law Amendment Act, 40. 
 
 “ Penalty,” damages liquidated, or distinction between, 139. 
 
 Performance of Contract, the thing desired by employer, and not 
 damages, 24, n. 
 
 the public a great interest in, 76. 
 
 suggestion to Committee of House of Commons as to orders to return 
 to work, 16, n. 
 
 and as to security for performance, ih. 
 recommendation of committee as to, 15. 
 provisions of Act of 1867 as to, 19, 20. 
 application of power, 23, 24. 
 
 imprisonment for non-compliance with order for, 20. 
 essential to power to order, 54. 
 
 power to order recommended by report of Commission on Labour 
 Laws, 91. 
 
 imperfect legislation of 1875 as to, 91. 
 consent of both parties to order requisite, 132. 
 probable effect of, 102, note (r). 
 form of undertaking for performance, 186. 
 
 Persistently following Person from Place to Place, with a 
 view to compelling course of action, an offence under Conspiracy 
 and Protection of Property Act, 1875. . 155. 
 
 Person, injuries to, subject of complaint under Act of 1867.. 18. 
 constituted aggravated case, 21. 
 
 Personal Execution of Work, contract for, by workman, within 
 Employers and Workmen Act, 1875. .111. 
 cases of, referred to, 113, n. 
 
 Personal Safety, one object of legislation affecting employed, 4. 
 Personal Service of judgment summons, 177. 
 
 Persons, jurisdiction as to, under Employers and Workmen Act, 1875.. 
 
 110 . 
 
 employer, 110. 
 workman, 110, 111. 
 apprentices, 150. 
 
 Y 2 
 
324 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Persuasion, as distinguished from intimidation, 72. 
 
 Petty Sessions, courts of, made public by Jervis’s Acts in cases of 
 summary conviction, 10. . 
 
 divisional petty sessions constitute courts of summary jurisaic 
 under Employers and Workmen Act, 1875. .109. 
 
 Picketing,” offence of, defined, 66. . . ,-r a i 
 
 objections by workmen to construction of Criminal Law Amenclment 
 Act, 1871, as to, 42. . ^ ^ x 
 
 employers, on the other hand, attributed cessation of offence to 
 act, 4.3. 
 
 extract from Report of Trades Unions Commission on, 66, 67. 
 observations of Royal Commission on Labour Laws on, 69. 
 objection to word, removed, or intended to be removed, by legislation 
 of 1875.. 96. 
 
 but still an offence if watching exceeds certain limits, 96. 
 
 Pickets. See Picketing. 
 
 Place for holding courts of summary jurisdiction, 107, 109. 
 
 Place, &c., watching or besetting place of residence, work or business, 
 155. 
 
 Plaint to be entered in writing, in book, under Employers and Workmen 
 Act, 1875.. 122. 
 rule respecting, 175. 
 clerk to keep book, 125, 175. 
 fee on entry of plaint, 123, 191. 
 
 Plaint Book, form of, 191. 
 
 Police Courts of police court division in the metropolitan police district, 
 107, 171, 198. 
 
 of stipendiary magistrates, 107, 171, 199. 
 
 Police Magistrates, jurisdiction of, exclusive, 108. 
 
 formerly concurrent, as regards stipendiary magistrates, 108. 
 of Metropolis, Act of 1867, how enforced by, 23, 26. 
 
 See Metropolitan Police Magistrates. 
 
 Potter, within Truck Act, 240. 
 
 case of, held within former law of master and servant, 113, n. 
 
 Premium, on apprenticeship, power of court of summary jurisdiction to 
 order repayment of whole or part, 167. 
 
 Price of Work and Labour, regulation of, by former legislation, 1,29. 
 
 Prison, committal to, on judgment summons, 142, 144. 
 
 Procedure, recommendation of committee of House of Commons, 1866, 
 as to, 15. 
 
 by orders of justices under Act of 1867. .19. 
 
 Procedure under the Employers and Workmen Act, 1875.. 105. 
 (1) The tribunal for hearing and determining disputes, 105. 
 county courts and courts of summary jurisdiction, 105. 
 
 limitation in amount, 106. 
 constitution of courts of summary jurisdiction, 107. 
 rules for carrying jurisdiction into effect, 109. 
 
IJNDEX. 
 
 325 
 
 Procedure under the Employers and Workmen Act, lS75—con- 
 timied. 
 
 (2) Jurisdiction as to persons and things, 110. 
 
 employers, 110. 
 workmen, 110, 111. 
 contract, 111. 
 validity of contract, 116. 
 mutuality of contracts, 117. 
 contracts held to have sufficient mutuality, 117. 
 contracts held void for want of mutuality, 118. 
 capacity to contract, 11 8, 
 married women, 118. 
 infants, 119. 
 
 the subject-matter of jurisdiction, 121. 
 
 (3) Process of the courts of summary jurisdiction preliminary to the 
 
 hearing, 122. 
 entry of the plaint, 122. 
 particulars of cause of action, 123. 
 
 forms, 124. 
 plaint book, 125. 
 summons, 125. 
 sernce of the summons, 126. 
 attendance of witnesses, 126. 
 notice of set-off not required, 127, 
 
 (4) Proceedings on the hearing, 127. 
 
 attorneys and counsel, 128. 
 court open to the public, 128. 
 adjournment, 128. 
 
 defects in substance or form, and variances between summons 
 and evidence, 128. 
 
 proceedings when both parties appear, 129. 
 proceedings where the defendant does not appear, 130. 
 proceedings where the plaintiff docs not apjxjar, 131. 
 
 (5) Orders of the court of summary jurisdiction, 131. 
 
 general powers of the court in making an order, 131. 
 security for performance, 132. 
 costs, i33. 
 
 (6) The award of damages, 134. 
 
 liquidated damages or penalty, 139. 
 
 (7) The enforcement of orders, 140. 
 
 orders for payment of money, 140, 
 execution against goods and chattels, 140. 
 judgment summons, 142. 
 
 enforcement of undertaking for performance, 144. 
 
 (8) Force and effect of orders, 145. 
 
 case for opinion of superior court, 146. 
 effect of order on a subsisting contract, 147. 
 effect of order on proceedings in other courts, 149. 
 
 (9) Apprentices, 150. 
 
 enforcement of order for performance of duties, 152. 
 procedure against parent or other person party to the indenture, 
 152. 
 
 Procedure under the Conspiracy and Protection of Property 
 Act, 1875.. 154. 
 
 (1) Offences under the act, 154. 
 
 wilful and malicious breach of contract of service with gas or 
 water corppany, 154. 
 
326 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Peoceduee undee the Conspieacy and Peotection of Peopeett 
 Act, \%15—continued. 
 
 (1) Offences under the act— . , /i 
 
 ^ ^ wilful and malicious breach of contract of service endangering 
 life or serious bodily injury, or exposing valuable property to 
 destruction or injury, 154. , • j ^ i 
 
 master of servant or apprentice neglecting to provide rood 
 whereby health seriously or permanently injured, 154. 
 using violence or intimidation, or molestation to compel another 
 to do or abstain from doing any act, 155. 
 
 (2) The tribunal and mode of deciding cases, 159. 
 
 court of summary jurisdiction, 159. 
 legal proceedings, IGO. 
 competency of witnesses, 160. 
 
 objection by defendant to court of summary jurisdiction, 161. 
 appeal, 163. 
 
 case for opinion of a superior court, 163. 
 
 Peocess, of courts of summary jurisdiction under Employers and Work¬ 
 men Act, 1875.. 122. 
 summons, 125. 
 form of, 179. 
 service of, 126. 
 summons for witness, 126. 
 
 form of, 179. 
 orders, 133. 
 
 forms of judgment, 180. 
 security for performance, 132. 
 
 form of undertaking, 186. 
 execution against goods, 140. 
 
 forms of warrants of distress, 184, 185. 
 judgment summons, 142. 
 rules respecting, 177. 
 f(»rm of, 181. 
 
 order of commitment, 143, 144. 
 
 form of order, 182. 
 order of discharge from custody, 178. 
 
 form of certificate for discharge, 183. 
 in apprentice cases, 150—153. 
 
 forms, 187— 190. 
 case for superior court, 146. 
 
 of courts of summary jurisdiction under Conspiracy and Protection of 
 Property Act, 1875. .160. 
 information, 160. 
 
 summons or warrant thereon, 160. 
 examination and committal for trial on objection to jurisdiction, 
 161, 162. 
 appeal, 163. 
 case, 163. 
 
 Peopeety, injury to, subject of complaint under Act of 1867.. 18. 
 constituted aggravated case, 21. 
 
 punishment for spoiling or injury to, under repealed Combination Act 
 5 Geo. 4, c. 95..32. 
 
 wilful and malicious breaches of contract exposing property to injury, 
 punishable under Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 1875 
 
 ..154. 
 
 hiding or depriving or hindering the use of, 156, 
 
INDEX. 
 
 :V27 
 
 Prosecution by indictment of offences under Conspiracy and Proteefiion 
 of Property Act, 1876, on defendant’s objection to summary juiis- 
 diction, 161. 
 
 costs of, not allowed, 162. 
 
 Public Grounds, enforcement of contracts for manual services on, 3, 4. 
 
 Public-houses, prevention of payment of miners’ wages at, 285, 291. 
 
 grounds of prohibition, 4. 
 
 Punishment for offences as distinguished from civil remedy for simple 
 breaches of contract, 6, 7. 
 
 prior to 1867 no summary remedy for simple breach, 6. 
 
 distinction introduced by Act of 1867.. 20. 
 
 object of act to get rid of direct imprisonment for simple breaches, 22. 
 
 Q. 
 
 Quarrymen, within scope of legislation, 3. 
 
 Quarter Sessions, trial of offences at, by jury, recommendation of com¬ 
 missioners as to, 61. 
 
 committal to, of defendant objecting to summary jurisdiction, 162. 
 appeal to, under Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 1875 
 •. 163. 
 
 under former Act of 1867. .20. 
 
 R. 
 
 Recognizance for performance of contracts, suggestion to committee of 
 House of Commons as to, 16, n. 
 provision in Act of 1867 as to, 19. 
 
 Record, divisional petty sessions not courts of, 109. 
 
 Reply, by complainant, not allowed by Summary Jurisdiction Act, 129. 
 
 Report of Committee of House of Commons on Master and Servant 
 Act, 1866.. 15. 
 
 of Committee on Combination Laws, 33. 
 
 of Commission on Trades Unions, 37. 
 
 of Commission (1874) on Labour Laws, 49. 
 
 of Criminal Law Commissioners on Conspiracy, cited, 44, 45. 
 
 of New York Criminal Code Commissioners, cited, 44, n. 
 
 Rescinding Contract, power of county court and court of summary 
 jurisdiction as to, 165. 
 
 the like, by courts of summary jurisdiction, of instruments of ap¬ 
 prenticeship, 167. 
 
 Riot, law relating to, not affected by sect. 3 of Conspiracy and Protection 
 of Property Act, 1876.. 192. 
 
 Royal Commission on Labour Laws, Report of, 49. 
 
INDEX. 
 
 328 
 
 RULES ("of the Lord Chancellor) for 9a>-ryi"g i”*” 
 
 given to courts of summary jurisdiction b} ttie 
 Workmen Act, 1875.. 175. 
 authority for making them, 1^9, 168, 16J. 
 cannot enlarge the jurisdiction given by statute, liU. 
 schedule of forms, 179. 
 schedule of eosts, 191. 
 
 the jurisdiction 
 Employers and 
 
 S. 
 
 Scotland, application of Labour Laws, 1875, to, with modifications, 172, 
 
 jurisdiction of justices in, prior to Act of 1867.. 12. 
 
 process in, stated in popular language, 14. 
 
 application of former acts to, 12, n. 
 
 absence of stipendiary magistrates in, effect of, 13. 
 
 new tribunal for cases in, introduced by repealed Act of 1867. .22. 
 
 search in, for goods purchased or received by broker, 278. 
 
 determination in, of disputes as to servants enlisting in militia, 299. 
 
 arrestment of wages in, 13, 14, 16. 
 
 alteration of, by Act of 1867. .21, 22. 
 subsequent limitation, 282. 
 
 Seamen, excluded from Employers and Workmen Act, 1875. .111. 
 
 Seamen, Keelmen, &c., assaults on, &c. to prevent from working, 276, 
 277. 
 
 Employers and Workmen Act, 1875, does not extend to seamen, 172. 
 
 Seamen’s Union, combination, described, 33. 
 
 Security for performance of contract, 132. 
 first suggestion as to, 16, n. 
 
 recommendation of Committee of House of Commons as to, 15, 86. 
 provisions of the Act of 1867 as to, 19. 
 
 security not an essential part of principle of ordering performance, 91. 
 legislation of 1875 as to, 91, 132. 
 form of security, 186. 
 
 enforcement of, 144. 
 on behalf of apprentice, 153. 
 enforcement of, 153. 
 
 Sedition, law relating to, not affected by Conspiracy and Protection of 
 Property Act, 1875.. 192. 
 
 Servant, enforcement of contracts by and against, under early laws, 1, 2. 
 various classes of, 2. 
 domestic, 2. 
 
 clerks employed in trade or business, 2. 
 
 no legislation for these classes, 3. 
 labourers and manufacturers, 3. 
 legislation directed to them, 3. 
 
 domestic, excluded from special legislation on labour laws, 4. 
 in husbandry, former power of, to summon master for wages, 4. 
 former power of master to summon for absenting or misconduct, 5. 
 what classes of, within Aet of 1867.. 18. 
 
 dismissal of, for misconduet, power of, not interfered with, 21. 
 combinations to limit number or description of, 36. 
 
INDEX. 
 
 329 
 
 Servant - continned. 
 
 offences by and against, under Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1871.. 
 40, 41. 
 
 term “workman” used instead of “servant” in Employers and Work¬ 
 men Act, 1875.. 164. 
 
 “domestic” or “ menial servant” excluded from that act, 170. 
 
 but not excluded from criminal breaches of contract under Con¬ 
 spiracy and Protection of Property Act, 1875..97, 158. 
 
 false character of servants, punishment, 231. 
 
 punishment of master for not providing servant with necessaries, 154, 
 194, 276. 
 
 civil liability of master to servant for negligence, 263. 
 for not fencing machinery, 261, 265. 
 
 share of profits by servant does not of itself constitute i)artncr8hi(», 
 280. 
 
 effect of enlistment in army, marines or militia, 294, 299. 
 
 See also Husbandry, Servant in. 
 
 Service of Summons, under Employers and Workmen Act, 1875.. 
 126. 
 
 out of district, 126. 
 
 Set-off, from wages under Truck Act, 234. 
 under Hosiery Act, 1874. .292. 
 
 notice of, unnecessary, 127, 176. 
 
 of claims, power of court of summary jurisdiction as to, 131. 
 
 Sheffield, mode in which Act of 1867 applied at, 23, 26. 
 
 outrages at, 36, 66. 
 
 Sheriff, in Scotland, recommendation of Committee of House of Com¬ 
 mons, 1866, as to jurisdiction of, 15. 
 
 Sheriff Court, Scotland, equivalent of “ county court ” in Employers 
 and Workmen Act, 1875.. 105, n. 
 
 small debt court of, in Scotland, equivalent to court of Hummnry 
 jurisdiction, 108, 172. 
 
 Shoemakers, existing legislation relating to employers and employed in 
 trade of, 210. 
 
 Signature, to contract, necessary before 1875 if serviec not entered on, 
 6, 116, n. 
 
 not requisite now, 116, n. 
 
 unless required by Statute of Frauds, 116. 
 
 to summons under Employers and Workmen Act, 1875.. 125, 126. 
 
 Silk Manufacture, existing legislation relating to employers and 
 employed in, 215, 221, 224, 249, 250, 265. 
 
 Small Debt Sheriff’s Court IN Scotland, 14. 
 
 expression “court of summary jurisdiction” means in Scotland, 172. 
 
 Smoke, provisions on public grounds to prevent, 3. 
 
 Solicitor, costs of employment of, in discretion of court of summary 
 jurisdiction, to limited amount, 178. See Attorney. 
 
330 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Specific Performance, suggested extension of rules of courts of equity 
 as to, 90, n. 
 
 imprisonment to compel, allowed by law, 8. 
 
 ^6*^ Performance. 
 
 application of power given by Act of 1867 to order performance, 24, n. 
 inquiry of Royal Commission on Labour Laws as to application ot, to 
 labour contracts, 53. 
 recommended by report, 88. 
 imprisonment essential to enforce order, 54. 
 objections to, considered, 88—91. 
 halting legislation of 1875 respecting, 91. 
 
 Stamp Duty, agreements for hire of any labourer, artificer, manufacturer, 
 &c. exempt from, 117. 
 
 [Note.—No express exemption of written undertaking by way 
 of security for performance of contract.] 
 
 State, contracts and duties of persons employed in service of, not investi¬ 
 gated, 3. 
 
 Statutes atfecting employers and employed, various objects of, 3, 4. 
 repeal of various, by legislation of 1875. .200—205. 
 
 Appendix of, unrepealed, 209. 
 
 Stipendiary Magistrates, effect of absence of, in Scotland, 13. 
 
 recommendation of committee of House of Commons, 1866, as to, 15. 
 
 of Roj'al Commission on Labour Laws (1874-5 >, 61. 
 exclusive jurisdiction of, under Acts of 1875.. 108, 171, 198. 
 deputies included, 108, n. 
 
 Subject-matter of Jurisdiction under Employers and Workmen 
 Act, 1875.. 121. 
 
 Subsisting Claims, power of court of summary jurisdiction to adjust 
 and set off, 131. 
 
 effect of order on subsisting contract, 147. 
 
 Summary Conviction under Conspiracy and Protection of Property 
 Act, 1875.. 159. 
 
 incompetency of defendants as witnesses in cases of, 10, 16. 
 
 Summary Jurisdiction. See Courts of Summary Jurisdiction. 
 
 Summary Jurisdiction Act, 11 & 12 Viet. c. 43, so termed and applied 
 under Labour Laws of 1875.. 170, 198. 
 application in Scotland, 173, 206. 
 application in Ireland, 174, 208. 
 
 Summary Procedure, necessity of, for dealing with breaches of contract, 
 60. 
 
 existed from early period, 1. 
 
 Summons under Employers and Workmen Act, 1875.. 125, 175. 
 
 application for, 122. 
 form of, 179. 
 
 prepared and issued by clerk, 125. 
 
 rule respecting district where to be issued, 175. 
 
 must be within jurisdiction of justices forming court of summary 
 jurisdiction, 123. 
 
 direction as to signature of clerk, 125. 
 particulars annexed form part of, 125. 
 defects in, for substance or form, not to prevail, 128. 
 
INDEX. 
 
 331 
 
 Summons under Employers and Workmen Act, l^lb—contlnved. 
 clerk’s fee for, 123, 191. 
 service of, 126. 
 
 out of the district, 126. 
 
 summons for witness, 126. See Judgment Summons. 
 
 Summons to master for wages prior to Act of 1867..4. 
 to servant, 6, 6. 
 warrant in default of, 6. 
 
 procedure by, recommended by Committee of House of Commons, 
 1866.. 15. 
 
 adopted by legislature in Act of 1867..24. 
 
 the only process under Employers and Workmen Act, in the first 
 instance, 1875.. 125, 175. 
 
 Superior Court, control by, of court of summary jurisdiction, 146. 
 concurrent jurisdiction of, in one sense, 105, n. 
 practically excluded from cases of employer and employed, 105. 
 case for opinion of, 146. 
 
 Sureties for performance of contracts, 1 . 
 
 suggestion to Committee of House of Common.s, as to, 16, n. 
 provision of Act of 1867 as to, 19. 
 
 T. 
 
 Tailor, journeyman, within former act, 113, n. 
 
 Tailors’ Association, proceedings of, 36, 37. 
 
 London, strike of, in 1867. .67. 
 
 Thames, recovery of wages for labour on, 248. 
 
 Things, jurisdiction as to, under Employers and Workmen Act, 1875.. 110. 
 
 Threats, provision respecting, in Combination Act, 5 Geo. 4, c. 95. .32. 
 
 in 6 Geo. 4, c. 129. .35. 
 
 in Criminal Law Amendment Act,1871.. 10. 
 
 Tools, spoiling or destroying, punishment for, by Combination Act, o Geo 4 
 c. 95...32. 
 
 molestation by hiding, &c., ofEence under Criminal Law Amendment 
 Act, 1871.. 41. 
 
 Trade, combinations to force alterations in mode of carrying on, unlawful 
 32, 36. 
 
 Trade Unions, existence of after 5 Geo. 4, c. 95.. 32, 33. 
 organization of, described, 33. 
 forcing persons to join, forbidden, 32, 35, 36. 
 outrages at Sheffield and Manchester, 36. 
 commission of 1867 to inquire into organization of, 37. 
 act to amend the law as to, 37, 38, 282. 
 provisions of, 38, 39. 
 convictions under, 39. 
 
 right of men to combine. See Combinations. 
 limitation of indictable conspiracies contained in the Trade Union Act 
 1871.. 282. ’ 
 
332 INDEX. 
 
 Tribunal for enforcing contracts, early legislation respecting, 1. 
 alteration in, effected by Act of 1867. .22. 
 recommendation of royal commission as to, 60, Cl. 
 tribunal under Employers and Workmen Act, 1875. .105. 
 county court, 105. 
 court of summary jurisdiction, 105. 
 constitution of court, 107. 
 rules for carrying jurisdiction into effect, 109. 
 tribunal under Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 1875. .159. 
 
 Truck Act, 1 & 2 Will. 4, c. 37. .233. 
 cases decided in relation to, 242—247. 
 persons to whom the statute Jipplies, 243. 
 illegal payments, 245. 
 deductions from wages, 246. 
 of forfeitures, 171, 172. 
 
 law extended in the hosiery manufacture, 292. 
 contracts void by, cannot be enforced, 116, 117. 
 act in pari materia with Master and Servant Acts, 114, n. 
 
 U. 
 
 Ultra Vires, doctrine of, applied to the Lord Chancellor’s rules, 110. 
 
 Undertaking for performance of contract, 165, 168. 
 may be in writing or oral, 168. 
 form of, 186. 
 enforcement of, 144, 145. 
 
 Unions, Trade. See Trade Unions. 
 
 United States, law of, as to trade conspiracies, 44, 48. 
 
 Unlawful Assemblies, law as to, not affected by Act of 1875.. 192. 
 
 Unliquidated Damages, power of Act of 1867, extended to, 21. 
 
 power of courts of summary jurisdiction under Employers and Work¬ 
 men Act, 1875, to adjust and set off, 131. 
 
 V. 
 
 Validity of Contract, contract of service or to personally execute 
 work, must be valid in law to allow of its being enforced, 116. 
 
 Variance between summons and evidence, effect of, 128. 
 
 Violence, certain acts of, prohibited by combination laws, 32, 35, 40. 
 using, with view to unlawful control of freedom of action, an offence 
 under Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 155. 
 
 W. 
 
 Wages, recovery of, before justice of the peace from an early period, 1. 
 enforcement of work at king’s, 2, n. 
 legislation respecting immediately before Act of 1867.. 4. 
 limitation of amount, 4. 
 abatement of, 5, 11. 
 
INDEX. 
 
 333 
 
 Wkq'ES— continued. 
 
 legislation respecting immediately before Act of 18G7 — continued. 
 in case of apprentices, 5. 
 jurisdiction as to, in Ireland, 11. 
 in Scotland, 12. 
 
 power to abate under Act of 1867.. 19. 
 apportionment of, under Act of 1867.. 19. 
 notion that no remedy for, under Act of 1867. .2.3, n. 
 a misapprehension, id. 
 
 power of recovery, and adjustment and set-off under Employers and 
 Workmen Act, 1875.. 131. 
 deductions from, under Truck Act, 246, 292. 
 recovery of, by bargemen and watermen on Thames, 248. 
 payment of, on bankruptcy, 281. 
 
 former power to sue agents, managers, and foremen for, taken a wav, 
 83. 
 
 combination to r.aise, unlawful by former combination laws, 29, 30,31. 
 power of married women and infants to contract for, 119. 
 attachment of, by inferior courts, abolished in England, 282. 
 arrestment of, in Scotland, 13, 14. 
 dissatisfaction caused, 13. 
 
 recommendation of Committee of House of Commons, 1866, as 
 to, 16. 
 
 limitation of, by act of parliament, 282. 
 of colliers and miners not to be paid at public-house, 285, 291. 
 
 to be paid by weight when dependent on amount of mineral 
 gptten, 285. 
 
 various provisions as to weights, 286, 289. 
 in hosiery manufacture to be paid without deductions, 292. 
 fines for absence may be stopped, 293. 
 
 but only to amount of damage sustained, 171, 172. 
 
 Warrant for Apprehension of master, on default of appearance to 
 summons before repealed Act of 1867. .4. 
 of servant in first instance, 5, 6. 
 
 formerly arrest of servant in first instance more common in Scotland 
 than in Ireland, 12. 
 
 not to issue on default of appearance of defendant, under Employers 
 and Workmen Act, 1875.. 130. 
 except in the case of an apprentice, id. 
 may issue on information for offence under Conspiracy and Protection 
 of Property Act, 1875.. 160. 
 but summons generally advisable, 160. 
 copy of warrant should accompany depositions in case of commitment 
 for trial after objection to jurisdiction, 163. 
 
 Warrant of Commitment, for trial on objection by defendant to 
 jurisdiction, 162. 
 must be carefully framed, 162. 
 order of commitment on judgment summons, 177. 
 form, 182. 
 
 of apprentice for disobeying order to perform duties, form of, 188. 
 
 Warrant of Distress, form of, for payment of money by plaintiff, 184. 
 for payment of money by defendant, 185. 
 
 Warrant to cite, in Scotland, procedure by, recommended by Com¬ 
 mittee of House of Commons, 1866. .15. 
 
 Watches. See Clocks. 
 
334 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Watching house or place, molestation by, offence of, under repea e 
 Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1871..41. Xoi 
 
 substituted provision in Conspiracy and Protection o± Property aci, 
 1875.. 155. 
 
 Water, wilful and malicious breach of contract with authority or com¬ 
 pany having duty to supply, 154, 19.3. 
 authority or company to post up provision of act at works, 157. 
 
 Watermen on Thames, recovery of wages by, 248. 
 Wife, violence or intimidation to, 155. See Wives. 
 
 AVilful breach of contract necessary to constitute offence in servant prior 
 to 1867..6, 92. 
 
 case in which doctrine of mala fides applied, 6, n. 
 distinction between, and wrongful, 16, n. 
 effect of Act of 1867 on rule, 92. 
 
 latitude of remedy gave magistrates power to draw distinction 
 between wilful and bond fide disputes, 92. 
 all distinction removed under Employers and Workmen Act, 92. 
 but wdlful and malicious acts with grave actual or probable 
 results punishable under Conspiracy and Protection of Property 
 Act, 93, 94, 154, 155. 
 
 Wilful and Malicious Breaches of Contract punishable under 
 Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 1875.. 154. 
 
 “ Wilfully and Maliciously,” meaning of, as applied to breaches of 
 contract, 94, 155, 274. 
 
 Witness, attendance of, under Employers and Workmen Act, 1875.. 126. 
 summons for, 127. 
 form, 179. 
 fee on, 191. 
 
 examination of, on oath, 127. 
 
 Witnesses, admissibility of parties as, 99, n. 
 
 former distinction as to competency of masters and servants, 10. 
 ground of distinction, 10. 
 
 suggestion as to admissibility of defendants, 17, n. 
 no alteration recommended by committee, 16. 
 
 but carried out by Act of 1867. 21. 
 further extended by legislation of 1875. .99, 100. 
 no provision necessary under Employers and AYorkmen Act, 1875 
 ..127. 
 
 extension by Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 197. 
 on the trial of indictments, 100, 197. 
 
 Wives of defendants competent witnesses, 197. 
 
 observations on effect of extension of power, 99, 101. 
 
 See Witnesses. 
 
 Woollen manufacture, existing legislation respecting employers and 
 workmen in, 209, 210, 211, 213, 215, 219, 221, 222, 224, 249, 250. 
 
 Work, enforcement of, by former legislation, 1. 
 
 unlawful combinations to force departure from, 32, 40. 
 
INDEX. 
 
 335 
 
 Work and Materials, combination to force return of, before finished, 
 32, 40. 
 
 unlawful disposal of, by workman or apprentice in Ireland, 278. 
 
 ISee special provisions in England in the acts given in the 
 Appendix.] 
 
 Workmen, summary legislation applied to, 3. 
 included in Act of 1867.. 18. 
 
 violence, threats, or intimidation to, with a view to coerce, oflPcnce 
 under Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1871. .40. 
 right of, to combine, 63, 66. 
 
 limits of right as regards means used to attain ends, 64, 79. 
 individual right of, as against unions, 64. 
 former power of, to sue agents, managers and foremen, 83. 
 power no longer exists, 83. 
 
 “Workmen,” definition of, in Employers and Workmen Act, 1875.. 110, 
 170. 
 
 “handworkers,” expression used by Mr. Rupert Kettle, 111, n. 
 
 Worsted Manufacture, existing legislation relating to employers and 
 employed in the, 222, 250. 
 
 Writing, contract in. See Written Contract. 
 
 Written Complaint before justice not necessary under Employers nn<l 
 Workmen Act, 1876.. 123. 
 
 Written Contract, necessary before 1875 to enforce where service not 
 entered upon, 5. 
 not now essential, 116, n. 
 
 suggestion that contracts of service should be in writing disapproved 
 of by royal commission, 61, 62. 
 
 “ Wrongful Breach,” distinction between, and wilful or guilty act, 6, 
 
 THE END. 
 
LONDON: 
 
 PRINTED BY C. ROWORTH AND SONS, 
 NEWTON STREET, HIGH HOLBORN. 
 
o- 
 
 •o 
 
 a 
 
 Catalogue 
 
 OF 
 
 LAW WOEKS 
 
 PUBLISHED BY 
 
 MESSES. BUTTEEAVOETH, 
 
 Hall) Boofvscllcrs anli ^uilis1)ers 
 
 TO THE QUEEN’S MOST EXCELLENT MAJESTY 
 
 AND TO 
 
 H.R.H. THE PRINCE OF WALES. 
 
 “ Now for the Laws of England {if I shall speak my opinion of them 
 “ without partiality either to my profession or country), for the matter and 
 “ nature of them, I hold them wise, just and moderate laws: they give to God, 
 “ they give to Cessar, they give to the subject what appertaineth. It is true 
 “ they are as mixt as our language, compounded of British, Saxon, Danish, 
 “ Norman customs. And surely as our language is thereby so much the richer, 
 so our laws are likewise by that mixture the more complete .^*— Lord Bacon. 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 7, FLEET STREET, E.C. 
 1876. 
 
 
o 
 
 o 
 
 Jnirex to Catalogue, 
 
 Accounts, page 
 
 Solicitors'. Coombs .. 
 
 32 
 
 Law of. Pulling ... 
 
 45 
 
 Actions at Law. 
 
 
 Browne . 
 
 40 
 
 Kerr . 
 
 22 
 
 Lush . 
 
 IS 
 
 Williams . 
 
 3S 
 
 Administration Bonds. 
 
 
 Chadwick . 
 
 32 
 
 Admiralty, 
 
 
 Practice. Coote 
 
 13 
 
 PrizeLaw. Lushington 14 
 
 Advowsons. 
 
 
 Mirehouse . 
 
 47 
 
 Agricultural Holdings. 
 
 Bund. 7 
 
 Aliens. Cutler. 35 
 
 Arbitrations. Redman 39 
 Arbitratibns (Masters 
 and AYorkmcn). 
 
 Lovesy.39 
 
 Articled Clerk. 
 
 Examination Journal 42 
 Handy Boole. Mosely 20 
 Student's Guide. 
 
 Benham 31 
 
 Attacbment, 
 
 Foreign. Brandon ... 28 
 
 Average, General. 
 
 Crump ... . 
 
 31 
 
 Awards. Redman ... 
 
 39 
 
 Banking. Grant 
 
 13 
 
 Keyser 
 
 46 
 
 Bankruptcy. 
 
 Bulley & Bund 
 
 32 
 
 CQunty Courts. Davis 
 
 9 
 
 Indcip. Linklater ... 
 
 45 
 
 Robson . 
 
 18 
 
 Bar. Pearce . 
 
 43 
 
 Smith .’ 
 
 38 
 
 Bar Examination 
 
 Journal . 
 
 43 
 
 Barbados, LaAv of 
 
 44 
 
 Belligerents. 
 
 Hamel. 
 
 4 4 
 
 Phillimore . 
 
 24 
 
 Bills of Exchaime. 
 
 Grant . 
 
 13 
 
 Bills of Sale. Hunt. , 
 
 30 
 
 Blackstone. Stephen’s 
 
 5 
 
 Blockade. Deane 
 
 45 
 
 Bookkeeping, Solicitoi-s'. ^ 
 
 Coombs . 
 
 32 ! 
 
 PACE 
 
 Boundaries. Hunt ... i."> 
 Brokers.' Keyser ... 40 
 
 Burgesses’ IManual. 
 
 Caches .22 
 
 Canal Traffic. Powell... 39 
 Carriers, 
 
 Inland. Powell ... 39 
 Railway. Slielford ... 30 
 
 Chamber Practice, 
 
 Common Laiv. 
 
 Parkinson.37 
 
 Chancery Practice. 
 
 Goldsmith .21 
 
 Hunter.1.5 
 
 Drafting. Lewis ... 21 
 
 Channel Islands. 
 
 Bowditch .45 
 
 Le Cras .45 
 
 Charitable Trusts. 
 
 Tudor.23 
 
 Chart of Descents. 
 
 Fearne.46 
 
 Hindu, of Inheritance 46 
 
 Church Building. 
 
 Tiower. 34,47 
 
 Church Scats. lieales 3,47 
 
 Circumstantial Evi¬ 
 dence. Wills.33 
 
 Civil Law. 
 
 Tomkins and Jencken 23 
 Civil Service Exam. 
 (Indian). Cutler ... 44 
 
 Code, English Law. 
 
 Blaxland .40 
 
 Collieries. Bainhridge.. 12 
 
 Commentaries. 
 
 Phillimore’s, Interna¬ 
 tional .24 
 
 Stephen’s Blaekstone’s 5 
 
 Commercial, 
 
 Forms. Crahb ... 25 
 
 Law. Chitty.40 
 
 Treaties. Hertslet ... 33 
 
 Common Porm Practice. 
 Coote . 7 
 
 Common Law, 
 
 At Chambers. 
 
 Parkinson.37 
 
 Costs. 
 
 Gray. ... 44 
 
 Pleading. 
 
 Chitty, jun.27 
 
 Greening .45 
 
 Williams .3S 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Common Law— eun. 
 
 Practice. 
 
 Dixon . 
 
 , IS 
 
 Kerr . 
 
 . 22 
 
 Lush . 
 
 . 18 
 
 Companies, shelford . 
 
 . 12 
 
 Compensation, 
 
 Law of. 
 
 Ingram . 
 
 . r.5 
 
 Shelford 
 
 . 30 
 
 Consolidation Acts. 
 
 Sheiford . 30 
 
 Criminal. Davis ... 3!> 
 
 Conspiracy. 
 
 Davis ... ... ... 0 
 
 Law of. Wright ... 30 
 
 Constitution. May ... li 
 Stephen 5 
 
 Constitutional History. 
 
 Fulton.10 
 
 Contentious Business. 
 
 Tristram .34 
 
 Contentious Prabate 
 Practice. 
 
 Tristram . 34 
 
 Contraband of A\'ar. 
 
 Moseley . 45 
 
 Contracts, 
 
 Specific Performance. 
 
 Fry . 
 
 , 36 
 
 Pothier . 
 
 46 
 
 Contributories. 
 
 Collier. 
 
 10 
 
 Conveyancing, 
 
 
 Introduction to. 
 
 
 Lewis . 
 
 21 
 
 Practice. 
 
 Barry . 
 
 , 20 
 
 Rouse . 
 
 16 
 
 Smith . 
 
 38 
 
 Tudor . 
 
 22 
 
 Forms. 
 
 Barry . 
 
 20 
 
 Christie . 
 
 25 
 
 Crabb . 
 
 25 
 
 Kelly . 
 
 11 
 
 Rou^e . 
 
 16 
 
 Shelford . 
 
 25 
 
 Convictions (Summarv), 
 
 Synopsis of. Oke ... 
 
 29 
 
 Forms. Oke. 
 
 29 
 
 Co-operative Societies. 
 
 Brabrook . 
 
 16 
 
 Copyholds, 
 
 Enfranchisement. Rouse 26 
 
 Law of. Scriven 
 
 28 
 
 Coroner. Baker 
 
 45 
 
 Corporations, 
 
 Municipal. Gaches ... 
 
 22 
 
 In General. Grant ... 
 
 27 
 
 .o 
 
■o 
 
 ©• 
 
 INDEX TO CATALOGUE. , 3 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Costs, 
 
 Law of. Gray ... 44 
 
 County Courts. 
 
 Davis . 9 
 
 Rules and Acts, 1875. 
 
 Davis .9 
 
 Equity and Bankruyicy. 
 Davis ... ... 9 ' 
 
 Criminal Law. 
 
 Davis.39 \ 
 
 Oke . 29 I 
 
 Curates. Field.47 j 
 
 Deeds. Tudor.22 | 
 
 Descents. Fearne ... 46 j 
 
 Dictionary, Law. ' 
 
 Mozley & "Whiteley 5, 48 
 
 Digest, , 
 
 House Lords Cases. 
 
 Clark .20 
 
 Patent Cases. ' 
 
 Higgins . 8 ’ 
 
 Discovery of Evidence. 
 
 Hare .21 
 
 Divorce. 
 
 Practice. Browning .. 28 
 
 Domestic Servants. 
 
 Baylis.8 
 
 Drafting, Equity. 
 
 Lewis.21 
 
 Draftsman (The) 
 
 Kelly.11 
 
 Drainage. 
 
 Woolrych .27 
 
 Wilson .44 
 
 Easements. Latham ... 34 
 
 Ecclesiastical, 
 
 Practice. Coote.47 
 
 Judgments. 
 
 Burder V. Heath ...47 
 Gorham v.Bp.of Exeter 47 
 Hebbertv. Purchas ... 47 
 Long V. Bp. Cape Town 47 
 Martin v. Mackonochie 47 
 Westerton V.Liddell ... 47 
 Election, 
 
 Law. Davis.28 
 
 Elementary Law. 
 
 Francillon .44 
 
 Mosely 26 
 
 Enfranchisement, Copy- 
 holds. Rouse ... 26 
 England, 
 
 Laws of. Blackstone... 5 
 Stephen ,. 5 
 English Bar. Pearce ... 43 
 Smith ... 38 
 
 English Law. 
 
 Blaxland .46 
 
 Equity, 
 
 Doctrine and Practice of. 
 
 Goldsmith.21 
 
 Draftsman. Lewis ... 21 
 Equity andLaw. Chute 23 
 ' Pleader. Drewry ... 34 
 Prevalence of. Trower 13 
 Suit in. Hunter ... 15 
 See Chancery. 
 
 PAGE j 
 
 Evidence, 
 
 Circumstantial. Wills 33 
 County Court. Davis 9 I 
 Indian. Field ... 41 
 Law of. Powell ... 6 i 
 Wills. Wigram ... 40 | 
 
 Examinations. 
 
 Preliminary. / 
 
 Benham ... 34, 43 
 
 Journals ... 42,43 
 
 Intermediate and Final. 
 Mosely ... 26, 42 1 
 
 Fences. Hunt.15 I 
 
 FishericSj5G7V/m«. Bund 17 ! 
 
 Oke.48 I 
 
 Foreign Attachment. 
 Brandon .28 
 
 Foreshores, 
 
 Hunt.15 
 
 Williams r. Nichol- ^ 
 
 son.44 I 
 
 Forms, 
 
 Conveyancing.Barry .. 20 
 Crabb .. 25 
 Rouse 16 
 County Courts. Davis 9 
 Magisterial. Oke ... 29 
 Probate. Chadwick 32 
 
 Frauds. Hunt.36 
 
 Friendly Societies. 
 
 Brabrook .16 
 
 Gains’ Roman Law ... 38 
 Game Laws, oke ... 4S 
 Gaming. Edwards ... 46 
 Gas Companies Acts., so 
 
 Gavelkind. 
 
 Robinson .46 
 
 General Average. 
 
 Crump. 31 
 
 Guarantees. De Colyar 14 
 
 Health, Public. 
 
 Glen . 37, 48 
 
 Highways. Glen 37,48 
 
 History, Constitutional. 
 Fulton.10 
 
 House of Lords, 
 
 Practice. May ... 11 
 Digested Index to Cases. 
 
 Clark .20 
 
 Idiots. Phillips.18 
 
 Income Tax Laws. 
 
 Dowell.40 
 
 Indian Civil Service 
 Exam. Cutler ... 44 
 Indian Evidence. Field 41 
 Indian Penal Code. 
 
 Cutler and Griffin ... 41 
 
 Indian Statute Law. 
 
 Field .41 
 
 Industrial & Provident 
 Societies. Brabrook 16 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Inheritance, Indian 
 
 Chart of. Field ... 
 
 46 
 
 Inns, Law of. Oke ... 
 
 29 
 
 Institutes of Public and 
 
 Private Law. 
 
 
 Nasmith . 
 
 14 
 
 Insurance, Marine. 
 
 
 Crump. 
 
 31 
 
 Intermediate Exami¬ 
 
 
 nation, 
 
 
 Guide. Bedford 
 
 19 
 
 Journal . 
 
 
 International Law. 
 
 
 Hamel. 
 
 44 
 
 Hertslet . 
 
 33 
 
 Phillimore . 
 
 24 
 
 Jersey (Law of). 
 
 
 Bowditch . 
 
 45 
 
 Le Cras . 
 
 45 
 
 Joint Stock. 
 
 
 Banks. Grant 
 
 15 
 
 Companies. Shelford 
 
 12 
 
 J udicature Acts. 
 
 
 Baxter. 
 
 27 
 
 Bedford . 
 
 19 
 
 Chute. 
 
 23 
 
 Rogers. 
 
 17 
 
 Webb. 
 
 22 
 
 J urisprudcnce. 
 
 
 FormofLaw. Holland 37 
 Webb. 6 
 
 Justice of Peace. Oke 29 
 
 Labour Laws. Davis... 6 
 Landlord and Tenant. 
 
 Fawcett ;.13 
 
 Laiv Dictionary. 
 
 Mozley & Whiteley ... 5 
 Law and Equity, chute 23 
 Law Exam. Journal 42 
 Law Pamphlets. 44 , 4 . 1 , 
 
 46, 47 
 
 Law Studies. Mosely... 26 
 
 Smith ... 38 
 
 Stephen’s Blackstone .5 
 Leading Cases, 
 
 Real Property. Tudor 22 
 
 Leases. Crabb. 25 
 
 Rouse.16 
 
 Legacy Duties. Shelford 26 
 
 Libel. Starkie.48 
 
 Licensing Laws. Oke... 29 
 Life Assurance. 
 
 Blayney .46 
 
 Lord Mayor’s Court. 
 
 Brandon .28 
 
 Lords, House o/. Cases. 
 
 Clark.. ... 20 
 
 Lunacy. Phillips ... 18 
 jMagistcrial Law, 
 
 x\cts. Davis.39 
 
 Practice. Oke ... 29 
 Forms. Oke.29 
 
 © 
 
 B 2 
 
 •O 
 
INDEX TO CATALOGUE. 
 
 iMarine Insurance. 
 
 Crump.31 
 
 Maritime Warfare. 
 
 Deane. 4^) 
 
 Hamel.4 1 
 
 ^Master and Servant. 
 
 Baylis.8 
 
 Davis. 0 
 
 Master and Workmen. 
 
 Lovesy.39 
 
 jMatrimonial Causes. 
 
 Browning .28 
 
 ^Mercantile Aceounts. 
 
 Pulling .45 
 
 Mereantile Law. 
 
 Chilly.4() 
 
 Accounts. Pulling ... 45 
 Military Law. 
 
 Dwyer.4G 
 
 Mines and Minerals. 
 
 Bainbridge .12 
 
 Mortgages. Fisher ... 48 
 Rouse ... 1C 
 Municipal Law. 
 
 Caches.22 
 
 Grant.27 
 
 Naturalization. Cutler 35 
 Naval Prize. 
 
 Lushington .34 
 
 Negligcnee. Saunders .. 35 
 Neutrals. Phillimore... 24 
 Ortolan’s Roman Law 15 
 
 Pamphlets, Law. 44, 45, 
 46, 47 
 
 ParliamentaiT. 
 
 Clifford & Stephens ... 41 
 
 Davis.28 , 
 
 May .11 
 
 Parsonages. Trower... 34 
 Partnership. Dixon ... 17 
 Patent Cases. 
 
 Higgins . 8 
 
 Patents. Norman ... 44 
 Peerage Claims, Gardner. 
 
 Le Marchant.44 
 
 Petty Sessions, oice... 29 
 Pews. Ileales ...^ 37,47 
 
 Pleading, 
 
 Common Law. 
 
 Chilly, Jun. ... 27 
 
 Greening .45 
 
 Williams ... ... 38 
 
 Equity. Drewry ... 34 
 Lewis ... 21 
 
 Poor Law Orders ... 32 
 Preeedents, 
 
 Conveyancing. Crabb 25 
 Rouse 16 
 MovUjaeje. Fisher ... 48 
 rieading., Chitty ... 27 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Preliminary Examina¬ 
 tion Guide and Jour¬ 
 nal . 34, 43 
 
 Prineipal and Surety. 
 
 De Colyar .14 
 
 Piiority. 
 
 Fisher.48 
 
 Private Bills. 
 
 Cliftbrd & Stephens ... 19 
 May .11 
 
 Private Law (English). 
 
 Nasmith .14 
 
 Privilege, Parliamentary. 
 
 May .*11 
 
 Privy Council Practice. 
 
 Admiralty. Coote ... 18 
 
 Prize Law. Lushington 34 
 Probate, 
 
 Common Form. Coote 7 
 Contentious. Tristram 34 
 Forms. Chadwick ... 32 
 Duties. Shelford ... 26 
 
 Property Tax Laws. 
 
 Dowell.40 
 
 Provident Societies. 
 
 Brabrook 
 
 16 
 
 Publie Health. Glen... 37 
 
 Publie Law (English). 
 Nasmith .14 
 
 Railways. Shelford ... 30 
 Compensation. Ingram 35 
 Carriers. Powell ... 39 
 
 Real Property. 
 
 Seaborne .20 
 
 Tudor.22 
 
 Chart. Fearne ... 46 
 
 Referees’ Court Practice. 
 Clifford & Stephens... 41 
 
 Registration. Davis ... 28 
 
 Religion. Churchy State 47 
 
 Ritual. Bay ford ... 47 
 Bullock ... 47 
 
 Hamel.47 
 
 Phillimore ... 47 
 
 Roman LaAV. 
 
 Gaius.38 
 
 Ortolan .15 
 
 Tomkins .38 
 
 Tomkins and Jencken 23 
 
 Salmon Fisheries. 
 
 Law of. Bund ... 17 
 
 Savings Banks. Grant 13 
 Schools. Trower ... 34 
 Sea Shore. Hunt ... 15 
 Servants. Law of. Baylis 8 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Settlements, 
 
 Voluntary. Rouse ... 16 
 Sewers. Woolrych ... 27 
 
 Sheriff. Sewell.46 
 
 Short Hand. Gurney... 45 
 Slander. Starkie ..48 
 
 Solicitors’ Bookkeeping. 
 
 Coombs .32 
 
 Specific Performance. 
 
 Fry .36 
 
 Stamp Laws. Dowell... 40 
 
 Standing Orders. May 11 
 
 Stock Exchange. Grant 13 
 Keyser 46 
 
 Students’ Examination 
 Guide. Benham ... 34 
 Mozley ... 26 
 
 Succession Duty. 
 
 Shelford .26 
 
 Summary Convictions. 
 
 Oke “.29 
 
 Suit in Equity. Hunter 15 
 
 Surety, IX'incipal and. 
 
 De Colyar .14 
 
 Tenancies, Agricultural 
 
 Bund. 
 
 Tenant, Landlord and. 
 Fawcett .13 
 
 Time Table. Bedford.. 19 
 Tithes. Schomberg ... 46 
 
 TownConncillors Manual 
 Gaches .22 
 
 Torts. Late of. Underhill 11 
 TradesUnions. Brabrook 16 
 Treaties, iiertslet .. 3S 
 
 Trusts, Charitable. 
 
 Tudor.23 
 
 Turnpike Luavs. oke 30 
 
 Vendors & Purchasers. 
 Seaborne .20 
 
 Wagers. Edwards ... 46 
 Water Companies Acts 36 
 AVaters. Hunt. 15 
 
 AATlls. Coote . 7 
 
 Crabb .25 
 
 Rouse .16 
 
 Tudor.22 
 
 Wigram.40 
 
 AArinding-up. Collier... 10 
 Grant ... 13 
 Shelford 12 
 
 AATndoAvLights. Latham34 
 AA^rongs. Underhill ... 11 
 
f 
 
 LAW WORKS PUBLISHED BY MESSRS. BUTTERWORTH. 5 
 
 O 
 
 Stephen’s Blackstone’s Commentaries.—Seventh Edition. 
 
 4 vols. 8VO., 4Z. 4j?. cloth. 
 
 MR. SER.7EANT STEPHEN’S NEW COMMENTARIES 
 ON THE LAWS OF ENGLAND, partly founded on Blackstone. The 
 Seventh Edition. By James Stephen, Esq., LL.D., Judge of County 
 Courts; late Professor of English Law at King’s College, London, and 
 formerly Recorder of Poole. 
 
 From the Lmv Journal. 
 
 “We entertained no doubt in 1868 that the 
 approbation accorded theretofore to the lather 
 ■would not be withheld from the son, whose 
 name had already been connected with the 
 Work, and whose eminence as a lawyer was 
 an absolute guarantee that no falling off would 
 be detected in knowledge, accuracy, diction 
 er method. The event has shown that this 
 expectation was well founded, and we cordially 
 welcome the Seventh Edition of this noble and 
 famous Work. 
 
 “It is unnecessary for us on this occasion 
 TO repeat the eulogy which six years ago we 
 bestowed, not without just reason, on the 
 ■Commentaries as they then appeared. It has 
 been remarked that Stephen’s Commentaries 
 enjoy the special merit of being an educa¬ 
 tional work, not merely a legal text book. 
 Their scope is so wide that every man, no 
 matter what his position, profession, trade or 
 employment, can scarcely fail to find in them 
 matter of special interest to himself, besides 
 the yast fund of general information upon 
 -which every Englishman of intelligence may 
 draw with advantage.” 
 
 From the SoUcUoFs Journal. 
 
 “A Work which has reached a Seventh 
 Edition needs no other testimony to its use¬ 
 fulness. And when a law book of the size 
 and costliness of these ‘ Commentaries’ passes 
 through many editions, it must be taken as 
 •established that it supplies a need felt in all 
 branches of the profession, and probably to 
 some extent, also, outside the profession. It 
 is difficult indeed to name a law book of more 
 general utility than the one before us. It is 
 (as regards the greater part) not too technical 
 for the lay reader, and not too full of detail for 
 the law student, while it is an accurate and 
 (considering its design) a singularly complete 
 guide to the practitioner. This result is due 
 in no small degree to the mode in which the 
 successive editions have been revised, the 
 alterations in the law being concisely em- 
 /bodied, and carefully inter^woven with the pre¬ 
 vious material, forming a refreshing contrast 
 to the lamentable spectacle presented by cer¬ 
 tain works into which successive learned 
 editors have pitchforked headnotes of cases, 
 thereby rendering each edition more uncon¬ 
 
 nected and confusing than its predecessor. 
 As the result of our examination we may say 
 that the new law has, in general, been accu¬ 
 rately and tersely stated, and^ its relation to 
 the old law carefully pointed out.” 
 
 From the Law 'i'imes. 
 
 “ We have in this Work an old and valued 
 friend. For years we have had the last, the 
 Sixth Edition, upon our shelves, and we can 
 state as a fact that when ouiT’text books on 
 particular branches of the Law have failed us, 
 we have always found that Stephen’s Commen¬ 
 taries have supplied us with the key to what 
 w'e sought, if not the actual thing we required. 
 We think that these Commentaries establish 
 one important proposition, that to be of 
 thorough practical utility a treatise on English 
 Law cannot be reduced within a small compass. 
 The subject is one w'hich must be dealt with 
 comprehensively, and an abridgment, except 
 merely for the purposes of elementary study, 
 is a decided blunder. 
 
 “Of the scope of the Commentaries ■we need 
 say nothing. To all who profess acquaintance 
 With the English Law their plan and execution 
 must be thoroughly familiar. 'The learned 
 Author has made one conspicuous alteration, 
 confining ‘Civil Injuries’ within the compass 
 of one volume, and commencing the last 
 volume with ‘ Crimes,’—and in that volume 
 he has placed a Table of Statutes. In every 
 respect the Work is improved, and the present 
 writer can say, from practical experience, that 
 for the Student and the Practitioner there is 
 no better Work published than ‘ Stephen’s 
 Commentaries.’” 
 
 From the Law Examination Journal. 
 
 “ What Bacon’s works are to philosophy, 
 Blackstone’s Commentaries and Stephen’s 
 Commentaries, founded on Blackstone, are 
 to the study of English Law. For a general 
 survey of the entire field of English Law, or, 
 at least, for a comparative survey of different 
 branches of law, Stephen’s Commentaries are 
 unrivalled; and we may observe that these 
 Commentai*ies should not be used merely as a 
 book of reference, they should be carefully 
 studied.” 
 
 Mozley and Whiteley’s Concise Law Dictionary. 
 
 In 1 vol. 8vo., cloth. 
 
 A CONCISE LAW DICTIONARY", contaiiiing Short ami 
 Simple Detinitioiis of tlic Terms used in the Law. By IIerbeii'P 
 Newman Mozley, 31.A., Fellow of King’s College, Camliridge, and of 
 Lincoln’s Inn, Esq., and George Crispe Wiiiteley, M.A. Cantab., of the 
 Middle Temple, Esq., Barristers at Law. 
 
 This icorh, which has been for some time in preparation, pturposes to give short andsimple explana 
 tions of the technical terms and phrases used in the Law, including both those found in the older 
 legal works and those of more modern and every day occurrence; the object beiru) to produce a 
 book which shall be^isefid, not only to Law Students and to members of both branches of the 
 Legal Profession, but also to Magistrates and the general public. •' 
 
 
 o 
 
O' 
 
 ■o 
 
 6 LAW WORKS PUBLISHED BY 
 
 Davis’s Labour Laws of 1875. 
 
 8VO., 126*. cloth. 
 
 THE LABOUR LAWS OF 1875, with Introduction and Notes. 
 By J. E. Davis, of the Middle Temple, E.sq., Barrister at Law, and late 
 Police Magistrate for Sheffield. 
 
 “ This is a class of book which is very much 
 wanted, and should receive every encourage¬ 
 ment. Mr. Davis says that his object has 
 been to combine a popular comment with a 
 strictly practical treatise. In this he has 
 completely succeeded. The book is in every 
 respect careful and thoughtful, it gives the 
 best reading of the law which we have, and 
 furnishes in extenao all the Acts of Parliament 
 relating to the subject.”— Laiv Times. 
 
 “Mr. Davis’s book is not a reprint of the 
 acts with a few notes, but an original and 
 complete treatise, and it will be appreciated 
 by those who are concerned in the working of 
 the labour laws.”— Laic JonrnaL 
 
 “ ‘The Labour Laws ’ are the subject of a 
 treatise by Mr. J. E. Davis which magistrates 
 and practitioners will find useful.”— Daihj 
 jVeics. 
 
 “ A good book on this subject should fulfil 
 two distinct functions by no means easy to 
 combine. It should afford a clear and un- 
 technical explanation of the law for the benefit 
 of the magistrates who will have to administer, 
 and it should also contain a careful and accu¬ 
 rate commentary on the law for the benefit of 
 
 lawyers. Mr. Davis has, in our opinion, 
 successfully fulfilled both these requisites. 
 Mr. Davis may be congratulated upon having 
 produced a book which will probably become 
 the standard w^ork on this important subject.” 
 — Solicitors'' Journal. 
 
 “ Perhaps no one is so well qualified for the 
 task as Mr. Davis. The work will undoubtedly 
 increase the reputation of the author, and may 
 be regarded as essential to all who have to 
 administer the law.”— Capital and Labour. 
 
 “ The work intended to be, and no doubt 
 will become a text-book for the profession and 
 for those who w'ill have to administer the 
 law.”— Beehive. 
 
 “ The best exposition that we know of, of the 
 Labour Laws of the country.”— Echo. 
 
 “ A new and important work on the Labour 
 Law's. Mr. Davis ’special knowledge of these 
 statutes eminently fits him for the work.”— 
 Sheffield Daily Independent. 
 
 “ We can only assure our readers that we 
 conscientiously estimate the work as one upon 
 the possession of which they will congratulate 
 themselves.”— Irish Law Times. 
 
 Powell on Evidence. 4th Edition. By Cutler & Griffin. 
 
 Post 8VO., 185. cloth. 
 
 POWELL’S PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICE OF THE LAW 
 OF EVIDENCE. Fourth Edition. By J. Cutler, B.A., Professor of 
 English Law and Jurisprudence, and Professor of Indian Jurisprudence 
 at King’s College, London; and E. F. Griffin, B.A., Barristers at La'sv. 
 
 This edition contains the alterations necessary to adapt it to the practice under the Judicature 
 Acts, as well as other material additions. 
 
 “ The plan adopted is, we think, an admirable 
 one for a concise, handy book on the subject. 
 Such maxims as, that hearsay is inadmissible, 
 are given at the head of the chapter in large 
 type, and then follow the explanation and ap¬ 
 plication of the general rule. As the book is 
 primarily for the use of students intending to 
 go to India, the references to Indian law are 
 numerous; but as the Indian law of evidence 
 very closely follows our own the book is useful 
 to all students, and even where there is a 
 divergence between the tw'o systems it is gene¬ 
 rally instructive to trace it. The Indian code 
 of evidence given at the end of the book de¬ 
 serves to be read by every student, w'hether 
 going to India or not. The few rules of the 
 English law of evidence which are purely 
 statutory are also given verbatim, including 
 the two orders of the Judicature Act, 1875, 
 which appear to be correctly appreciated. The 
 present form of Powell on Evidence is a handy, 
 well-printed and carefully prepared edition of 
 a book of deserved reputation and authority.” 
 —Law Journal. 
 
 “ The editors of this work put forward ‘ no 
 claim to that exhaustiveness which other 
 works dealing with the law of evidence aim 
 at.’ Their desire, on the contrary, is to 
 ‘ adhere to the principle ’ of their author ‘ of 
 not overloading the book with cases.’ We 
 heartily approve the principlewhich, how¬ 
 ever, is somewhat diflicult of application. We 
 must add, however, that in most instances 
 the cases are tersely abstracted, and the 
 convenience of the reader is consulted by 
 
 references to more than one set of reports. 
 The plan of the book is to give pretty fre¬ 
 quently, and, as far as we can discover, in 
 almost every chapter, a ‘rule’ of general 
 application, and then to group the cases round 
 it. These rules or axioms are printed in a dis¬ 
 tinctive type. The work has been pruned and 
 remodelled by the light of the Judicature Acts. 
 The authors give in an appendix the Indian 
 Evidence Acts, with some Indian decisions 
 thereupon, and occasionally notice these acts 
 in the text. On the whole we think this is a 
 good edition of a good book. It brings down 
 the cases to the latest date, and is constructed 
 upon a model which w'e should like to see 
 more generally adopted.”—*Sio7iW?o/'s’ Journal. 
 
 “We have received the fourth edition of 
 ‘ Powell’s Principles and Practice of the Law 
 of Evidence,’ by Cutler and Griffin. We are 
 informed in the preface that the results of the 
 Judicature Acts as regards evidence have been 
 duly noted, whilst the 'work itself has been 
 rendered more comprehensive. It is an ex¬ 
 cellent summary of principles.”— Laic Time.'<. 
 
 “ There is hardly any branch of the law' of 
 greater interest and importance, not only to 
 the profession,but to the public at large, than 
 the law' of evidence. On this branch of the 
 law, moreover, as well as on many others, 
 important changes have been effected of recent 
 years. Wc are, therefore, all the more inclined 
 to welcome the appearance of the Fourth Edi¬ 
 tion of this valuable work.”—Z om’ Examina¬ 
 tion Journal. 
 
MESSRS. BUTTERWORTH, 7, FLEET STREET, E.C. 
 
 •O 
 
 7 
 
 Coote’s Probate Practice.—Seventh Edition. 
 
 Ill 1 vol., 8vo., 25s. cloth. 
 
 THE COMMON FORM PR ACTICE OF 
 i-^F JUSTICE IN CRANTING PROBATES 
 M'lONS. By Henry Charles Coote, F.S.A., hitc 
 Commons, Aiitlior of‘‘.Tlic Practice of the Ecclesiastical Courts, 
 
 >cventli Edition. 
 
 “The profession ivill be glad to welcome 
 tlie publication of this most valuable work. 
 Wlien the monopoly which the proctors and 
 advocates enjoyed in Doctors’ Commons was 
 -abolished, and the practice in probates and 
 letters of administration was thrown open to 
 the general prolession, the uninitiated derived 
 greater benefit and instruction from this book 
 than from any other which was published for 
 their guidance. It has become an acknow'- 
 ledged necessity in the library of every prac¬ 
 titioner. Since the publication of the last edi¬ 
 tion, new rules have been promulgated for 
 the Court of Probate, other regulations have 
 been made by acts of parliament and an order 
 in council, and the practice of the Court has 
 in some respects been altered and settled. 
 These changes have been attended to. A 
 more useful book than this we do not know', 
 and we need not say more than that in this 
 
 THE HIGH court 
 
 AM) ADMINISTRA- 
 Pructor ill Doctors’ 
 ” &c., &c. 
 
 edition the authors have done all in their 
 pow'er to increase its utility and secure its 
 c ompleteness.”— L(ffo Mcujatiiie and Ilevit'W. 
 
 “ A fifth edition in so short a time is a suc¬ 
 cess that few law books can boast, and it is 
 well deserved. Mr. Coote as a proctor pos¬ 
 sesses that intimate acquaintance with the 
 minutiae of practice which experience only 
 can supply. Having noticed its successive 
 editions as they appeared, it remains only to 
 say that it brings down the statutes and cases 
 to the present time.”— Iaiw Times on the 5th Ed. 
 
 “ We must not omit to praise the complete 
 character of the Appendix, w'hich, occupying 
 more than half the whole work, presents us 
 with the statutes, the orders in council, rules 
 and fees, tables of costs and forms, and leaves 
 nothing to be desired by the proctor or solicitor 
 either in the routine of common form or in the 
 stages of suits .”—Law Journal on the 5th Ed. 
 
 Bund’s Agricultural Holdings Act, 1875. 
 
 Demy 12mo., 5s. doth. 
 
 THE LAW OF COMPENSATION FOR UNEXHAUSTED 
 
 AGRICULTURAL IMPROVEMENTS, as ameiukMl by tlic Agricultural 
 Holdings (England) Act, 1875. By J. W. Willls Bund, ]M.A., of 
 Lincoln’s Inn, Barrister at Law, Author of “The Law relating to Salmon 
 Fisheries in England and Wales,” &c. 
 
 “It w’ill be found very serviceable to all 
 those who have to administer the Agricultural 
 Holdings Act of last session, and by all prac¬ 
 tically interested in it, whether as landlords, 
 tenants or valuers .”—Daily News. 
 
 “ It is the act of parliament so simplified and 
 explained that the summary'here given cannot 
 be otherwise than a boon to landlords and 
 tenants. A more complete volume never came 
 under our notice.”— Worcester Herald. 
 
 “Mr. Bund has placed the agricultural 
 world under a debt of obligation by the oppor¬ 
 tune publication of a commentary on the law' 
 of compensation for unexhausted improve¬ 
 ments. The work is designed for popular 
 use; it is intended to show' in what position 
 recent legislation has placed both landlords 
 and tenants, and this end it effectually at¬ 
 tains.”— Derrows’ Worcester Journal. 
 
 “This is a simple and useful summary of 
 the provisions of the present statutes on this 
 subject, with orders and forms for practical 
 application.”— Standard. 
 
 “It contains clear statements and explana¬ 
 tions which will enable any farmer or land- 
 ' owner to understand precisely what are the 
 conditions at present existing as to compensa¬ 
 tion for improvements bylaw and by custom 
 of the country .”—Chamber of Agriculture 
 Journal.” 
 
 “ Mr. Bund’s book is a useful work for land 
 agents, and is especially interesting when 
 
 treating of the customs in various loc Jities.” 
 —Estates tiazette. 
 
 *■ The book is, on the w hole, a very useful 
 one, its author having wisely kept it clear of 
 needless technicalities, as he intends it not for 
 lawyers but for laymen, that is, for land- 
 owners, farmers, land stewards and the like. 
 All who have any interest in landed property 
 may read it to advantage .”—Land and Water. 
 
 “We hope that this little book may realize 
 the anticipations of its author, and be of ser¬ 
 vice to the classes for whose use it has been 
 specially designed .”—The Field. 
 
 “Mr. Willis Bund has compressed into a 
 simple and convenient form, the information 
 needful for undei-standing the bearing of the 
 Agricultural Holdings Act on the law' of com¬ 
 pensation for unexhausted improvements.”— 
 Saturday Review. 
 
 “ Mr. Bund has made plain to all ordinary 
 understandings the whole bearing, interpreta¬ 
 tion and effect of the new law'. All w'ho are 
 interested, on either side,’ should become 
 possessed of this most lucid and valuable 
 treatise.”— Ho/’cester Chronicle. 
 
 “ This is a popular exposition of the Agri¬ 
 cultural Holdings Act of last session, and will 
 be valuable to those ititerested in this im¬ 
 portant matter. We may congratulate lilr. 
 Bund on having laid the law down very clearly 
 to the lay —Cardeners' Chronicle. 
 
 © 
 
O' 
 
 8 LAW WORKS PUBLISHED BY 
 
 Higgins’s Digest of Patent Cases. 
 
 8vo., 215. cloth. 
 
 A DIGEST of the REPORTED CASES relating to the Law 
 avid Practice of LETTERS PATENT for INVENTIONS, decided from 
 the passing of tlie Statute of Monopolies to the present time, lly 
 
 Clement Higgins, JI.A, F.C.S., of 
 
 “ Mr. Higgins.tells us in his preface that no 
 opinion is expressed upon the cases digested, 
 and no attempt is made to reconcile conflict¬ 
 ing decisions. Such an attempt would have 
 failed, and have been out of place in a digest. 
 Mr. Higgins’s work will be useful as a work 
 of reference. Upwards of 700 cases are 
 digested: and, besides a table of contents, 
 there is a full index to the subject matter; 
 and that index, which greatly enhances the 
 value of the book, must have cost the author 
 much time, labour and thought.” — Law 
 Journal. 
 
 ‘“This is essentially,’says Mr. Higgins in 
 his preface, ‘ a book of reference.’ It remains 
 to be added whether the compilation is reliable 
 and exhaustive. It is only fair to say that 
 w'e think it is; and we will add, that the 
 arrangement of subject matter (chronological 
 under each heading, the date, and double or 
 even treble references being appended to every 
 decision), and the neat and carefully executed 
 index (which is decidedly above the average) 
 are such,as no reader of ‘ essentially a book of 
 reference’ could quarrel with.”—5oZici7ors’ 
 Journal. 
 
 “ On the whole Mr. Higgins’s work ha,s been 
 well accomplished. It has ably fulfilled its 
 object by supplying a reliable and authentic 
 summary of the reputed patent law cases de¬ 
 cided in English courts of law and equity, 
 while presenting a complete history of legal 
 doctrine on the points of law and practice 
 relating to its subject .”—Irish Law Times. 
 
 “ Mr. Higgins has, with wonderful and 
 accurate research, produced a work which is 
 much needed, since we have no collection of 
 patent cases which does not terminate years 
 ago. There is not any branch of the law in 
 which analysis is so likely to prove the safe 
 mode of exposition as the patent law. The 
 work is well arranged, and gives brief, though 
 comprehensive, statements of the various 
 cases decided. We consider, too, if an inventor 
 furnishes himself with this Digest and a little 
 treatise on the law of patents, he will be able 
 
 the Inner Teiriple, Barrister at Law. 
 
 to be as much his own patent lawyer as it is 
 safe to be .”—Scientific and Literary Review. 
 
 “ Mr. Higgins’s object has been to supply a re¬ 
 liable and exhaustive summary of the reported 
 patent cases decided in English courts of law 
 and equity, and this object he appears to 
 have attained.j The classification is excellent, 
 being, as Mr. Higgins very truly remarks, 
 that w hich naturally suggests itself from the 
 jiractical working of patent law rights. The 
 lucid style in which Mr. Higgins has written 
 his Digest will not fail to recommend it to 
 all who may consult his book; and the very 
 copious index, together with the table of cases, 
 will render the work especially valuable to 
 professional men."—Mining Journal. 
 
 “The appearance of Mr. Higgins’s Digest 
 is exceedingly opportune. The plan of the 
 work is definite and simple. We consider 
 that Mr. Higgins, in the production of this 
 work, has met a long felt demand. Not 
 merely the legal profession and patent agents, 
 but patentees, actual or intending inventors, 
 manufacturers and their scientific advisers, 
 w'ill find the Digest an invaluable book of 
 reference .”—Chemical News. 
 
 “ The arrangement and condensation of the 
 main principles and facts of the cases here 
 digested render the work invaluable in the 
 way of reference.”— Standard. 
 
 “The work constitutes a step in the right 
 direction, and is likely to prove of much ser¬ 
 vice as a guide, a by no means immaterial 
 point in its favour being that it includes 
 a number of comparatively recent cases.”— 
 Engineer. 
 
 “ Mr. Higgins has given us, in a very 
 natural and convenient order, the recorded 
 decisions of the courts of law and equity in 
 every branch of this great and difficult sub¬ 
 ject. From these decisions the stale of the 
 law upon any point connected with patents 
 may be deduced. In fine, we must pronounce 
 the book as invaluable to all whom it may 
 concern .”—Quarterly Journal of Science. 
 
 Baylis’s Law of Domestic Servants. —By Monckton. 
 
 Foolscap 8vo., 25. cloth. 
 
 THE RIGHTS, DUTIES and RELATIONS of DOMESTIC 
 SERVANTS and their MASTERS AND MISTRESSES. With a short 
 Account of the Servants’ Institutions, &c. and their advantages. By 
 T. Henry Baylis, M.A., of Brasenose College, Oxford, Barrister at Law 
 of the Inner Temple. Fourth Edition, with considerable Additions, by 
 Edward P. Monckton, Esq., B.A., of Trinity College, Cambridge, 
 Barrister at Law of the Inner Temple. 
 
 , ‘ An excellent manual of the subject of which 
 It treats.”— Times. 
 
 “This lilile work thoroughly deserves the 
 success it has gained. It contains in a small 
 
 compass the law on the important subject to 
 which it relates. This volume will be found a 
 convenient handbook to the leading authorities 
 on the subject .”—Solid (ors' Journal. 
 
 o* 
 
 •o 
 
MESSRS. BUTTERWORTH, 7, FLEET STREET, E. C. 9 
 
 Davis’s County Courts Practice and Evidence. 
 
 Fifth Edition. 8vo., 38s. cloth. 
 
 THE PRACTICE AND EVIDENCE IN ACTIONS IN THE 
 COUNTY COURTS. By James Edwakd Davis, of the Middle Temple, 
 Esq., Barrister at Law. Fifth Edition. 
 
 This is the only work on the County Courts which gives Forms of Plaints and treats fully of the 
 
 Law and Evidence in Actions and 
 
 “ We are glad to learn that Mr. Davis’s 
 work has been favourably received. The re¬ 
 cent decisions have been important and re¬ 
 quired noting up. This has been Mr. Davis’s 
 task in the edition before us; we recently had 
 occasion to cite his reading of Horsenail v. 
 Brace on the subject of imprisonment for debt, 
 and that is a good specimen of the annotations 
 in the last edition. We believe Mr. Davis’s is 
 the best and newest work on County Court 
 Practice.”— Law Times. 
 
 “ Mr. Davis’s works are all conspicuous for 
 clearness and accuracy. He has been called 
 upon to publish a fifth edition of his County 
 Courts by reason of the sale of the former one. 
 This is a practical test of the utility of the 
 work, which is of more value than any theo¬ 
 retical criticism. The Index, List of Cases 
 and of Statutes are most complete and elabo¬ 
 rate, and every assistance in the way of dis¬ 
 tinctness and variety of type is given to the 
 reader. The present edition will fully sustain 
 the well-earned reputation of the work. The 
 
 other Proceedings in these Courts. 
 
 excellence of the work consists in the very 
 marvellous amount which it does include. 
 The Indices show that more than 3,000 cases 
 are quoted in it, and about 1,000 sections of 
 statutes. About 200 forms are also given.”— 
 Solicitors' Journal. 
 
 “ Upon looking into this fifth edition we 
 find that the author has carefully noted and 
 incorporated all the recent decisions of the 
 Courts of Westminster on matters directly and 
 indirectly affecting the County Courts. Some 
 idea of the magnitude of Mr. Davis’s labours 
 may be formed from the fact that his List of 
 Cases cited fills thirty-one page s of two columns 
 each. There is an excellent Index to the book 
 and a Table of Statutes, Rules and Forms 
 arranged on a novel and very skilful plan. It 
 is hardly necessary for us to sum up in favour 
 of a book which is so popular that the several 
 editions of it pass rapidly out of print. All we 
 need say is, that the verdict of the purchasing 
 public has our entire approbation.” — Law 
 Journal. 
 
 Supplement to Davises County Courts, 
 
 County Court Rules and Acts of 1875. 
 
 Just ready, uniform with the above, 8vo., cloth. 
 
 THE COUNTY COURT RULES, 1875, with Forms and Scales 
 of Costs and Fees ; together with the County Courts Act, 1.875, the Agri¬ 
 cultural Holdings Act, 1875, and the Provisions of the Friendly Societies 
 Act, 1875, and of other recent Statutes affecting the Jurisdiction of tlie 
 County Courts. Forming a Supplement to Davis’s County Court 
 Practice and Evidence, as also to the same author’s Practice in Equity, 
 Bankruptcy, &c. 
 
 *** This edition of the County Court Rules and Acts of 1875 has been so arranged as to render it 
 complete in itself, and being also furnished with an exhaustive Index, as well as references to 
 Bavins Practice in the County Courts, 2 vols., it brings down the last published edition of the 
 same {the Fifth) to the present time. 
 
 Davis’s Equity, Bankruptcy, &c. in the County Courts. 
 
 8 vo. 18s. cloth. 
 
 The JURISDICTION and PRACTICE of the COUNTY 
 COURTS in EQUITY, ADMIRALTY, PROBATE and ADMINIS¬ 
 TRATION CASES, and in BANKRUPTCY. By J. E. Davis, of the 
 Middle Temple, Esq., Barrister at Law. 
 
 *** This work, although issued separately, forms a Supplementary or Second Volume to Davis's 
 County Coui’ts Practice and Evidence in Actions. 
 
 c 
 
o 
 
 o--- 
 
 10 LA^y WORKS PUBLISHED BY 
 
 Fulton’s Manual of Constitutional History. 
 
 Post 8 VO., 7.9. 6^7. cloth. 
 
 A MANUAL OF CONSTITUTIONAL HISTORY^ founded 
 upon the Works of Hallam, Creasy, May and Broom, comprising all the 
 fundamental principles and the leading cases in Constitutional Law. ^ By 
 Forrest Fulton, LL.B., B.xY., University of London, and of the Middle 
 
 Temple, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. 
 
 “ Copious use has been made by Mr. Fulton 
 of all the leadinf? authorities on the subject, 
 and he writes clearly and intelligibly. There 
 is a full and carefully prepared index.”—ZattJ 
 Times. 
 
 “ We can fairly say the book is well done, 
 and the object of aiding the student in his 
 first entry on the wide field of Consti¬ 
 tutional Law and History is attained ”— The 
 Law. 
 
 “Mr. Fulton appears to have taken great 
 pains to make it thoroughly useful and re¬ 
 liable.”— Civil Sei'vice Gazette. 
 
 “ For practical information and for student’s 
 purposes Mr. Fulton’s is by far the best 
 Manual of Constitutional History with which 
 we are acquainted.”— Irish Law Times. 
 
 “So far as it goes, it is not without merit. 
 The former part is written with care and 
 clearness. Notwithstanding defects, we think 
 Mr. Fulton’s a fairly good elementary manual.” 
 — Solicitors' Journal. 
 
 “The general reader will be much pleased 
 
 with the chapters on the privileges of parlia¬ 
 ment.” — Standard. 
 
 “ A good reference book, as well as a book 
 that ought to be read in the first instance 
 straig ht through.” — John Bull. 
 
 “ The author has spared no pains, and has 
 succeeded in the somewhat difficult task of 
 presenting the results of a wide range of read¬ 
 ing in a well-digested form. Mr. Fulton may 
 be congratulated upon the very successful 
 accomplishment of a by no means easy task ; 
 his book supplies a felt want.” — Public Opinion. 
 
 “Mr. Fulton has compiled a Manual of 
 Constitutional History to aid beginners in 
 their studies : the extracts he has given from 
 his authorities appear to be well chosen.”— 
 Daily News. 
 
 “ It is useless for an ordinary student simply 
 to read a ponderous work on the Constitution, 
 unless at the same time he is able to assimilate 
 its results. Mr. Fulton has recognized this 
 difficulty, and the result is the truly admirable 
 little manual to which we call the attention of 
 our readers.” — Canadian News. 
 
 Collier’s Law of Contributories. 
 
 Post 8 VO., 95. cloth. 
 
 A TREATISE ON THE LAW OF CONTRIBUTORIES 
 in the Winding-np of Joint Stock Companies. By Robert Collier, of the 
 Inner Temple, Esq., Barrister at Law. 
 
 “ Mr. Collier has collected with praiseworthy 
 industry the cases relating to the subject of 
 his work, and he has arranged them with con¬ 
 siderable skill. Mr. Collier’s general arrange¬ 
 ment appears to have been carefully devised, 
 and is probably as neat as the nature of the 
 subject admits of. It is impossible after a 
 perusal of the bo6k to doubt that the author 
 has honestly studied the subject, and has not 
 contented himself with the practice of piecing 
 together head notes from reports.”— Solicitors’ 
 Journal. 
 
 “We invite the attention of the profession 
 to its merits as a collection and Digest of the 
 Cases relating to the liability of persons to be 
 made contributories. Mr. Collier has not 
 shrunk from pointing out his views as to the 
 reconcilability of apparently conflicting deci¬ 
 sions or as to many points on which the law 
 is still unsettled; without making any quota¬ 
 tions for the purpose of illustrating the above 
 remarks, we think we are justified in com¬ 
 mending this treatise to the favourable con¬ 
 sideration of the profession.”— Law Journal. 
 
 “In these days of unlimited speculation the 
 legal position of contributories must be a 
 matter of personal interest to a great many 
 people; and Mr. Robert Collier’s treatise on 
 tJie subject deserves attention beyond the 
 limits of his profession. The chapter showing 
 the modes in which liability may be incurred 
 is full of instructive warning.” — Saturday 
 Review. 
 
 “This work he has done very thoroughly, 
 and the scope of the treatise is far wider than 
 the author has laid down in his preface. There 
 is probably no branch of the law of contracts 
 more difficult and intricate than this of con¬ 
 tribution, and the cases quoted by Mr. Collier 
 
 o---- 
 
 are treated with great discrimination, so that 
 the book enables a man who has not made the 
 subject a matter of special study to advise 
 with comparatively small trouble to himself. 
 This is the advantage of writers devoting 
 themselves to what we may call the byeways 
 of the law—a dangerous track for the weakly, 
 the infirm, or the unaccustomed, but light and 
 easy enough with such a guide as Mr. Collier. 
 Laymen may also learn from the work the 
 exact liability which they incur before enter¬ 
 ing into contracts, and thus avoid the chance 
 of ruin.”— Irish Law Times. 
 
 “The work is clearly and vigorously written, 
 and Mr. Collier has managed to put a great 
 deal of information into a small space. The 
 book will be found to be a useful addition to the 
 list of treatises on a branch of the law which 
 has grown immensely since 1862.— Athenceum. 
 
 “ Mr. Collier has carried out his intention, 
 and has produced a work of great utility.”— 
 The Law. 
 
 “ The perplexity of the laws relating to per¬ 
 sonal liability, naturally suggests a collection 
 of precedents and cases which may be con¬ 
 sidered settled, and of direct application to 
 the generality of cases; and this the author 
 appears to have done with succes.s, as far as 
 we can judge of the merit of the work.”— 
 Standard. 
 
 “ This is a valuable legal work, which 
 should be in the hands of all speculators in 
 the formation of new ventures in the shape of 
 joint stock companies and associations. It is 
 important that such persons should know the 
 exact position they assume, in a legal point of 
 view, and this they will be enabled to do by a 
 perusal of this work, written by a barrister of 
 some repute.”— Bullionist. 
 
 .0 
 
©• 
 
 ■0 
 
 MESSRS. BUTTERWORTH, 7, FLEET STREET, E.C. 11 
 
 Sir T. Erskine May’s Parliamentary Practice.—7th Edit. 
 
 One very thick volume 8vo., 40s. cloth. 
 
 A TREATISE on the LAW, PRIVILEGES, PROCEED¬ 
 INGS and USAGE of PARLIAMENT. By Sir Thomas Erskine 
 May, D.C.L., K.C.B., Clerk of the House of Commons and Bencher of the 
 hliddle Temple. Seventh Edition, Revised and Enlarged. 
 
 Contents :—Book I. Constitution, Powers and Privileges of Parliament.—Book TI. Practice 
 and Proceedings in Parliament.—Book III. The Manner of Passing Private Bills, with the 
 Standing Orders in both Houses, and the most recent Precedents. 
 
 “ Fifty pages of new matter have been added 
 by Sir Thomas May in his seventh edition, 
 thus comprising every alteration in the law 
 and practice of Parliament, and all material 
 precedents relating to public and private busi¬ 
 ness since the publication of the sixth edition. 
 We need make no comment upon the value of 
 the work. It is an accepted authority and is 
 undeniably the law of Parliament. It has been 
 brought up to the latest dale, and should be in 
 the hands of every one engaged in Parlia¬ 
 mentary life, whether as a lawyer or as a se¬ 
 nator .”—Law Times. 
 
 “ A work, which has risen from the position 
 of a text book into that of an authority, would 
 seem to a considerable extent to have passed 
 out of the range of criticism. It is quite un¬ 
 necessary to point out the excellent arrange¬ 
 ment, accuracy and completeness which long 
 ago rendered Sir T. E. May’s treatise the stan¬ 
 dard work on the law of Parliament. Not only 
 are points of Parliamentary law discussed or 
 decided since the publication of the last edition 
 duly noticed in their places, but the matter 
 thus added is well digested, tersely presented 
 and caretully interwoven with the text.”— 
 Solicitors Journal. 
 
 Underhill’s Law of Torts or Wrongs. 
 
 Post 8vo., 6s. cloth. 
 
 A SUMMARY OF THE LAW OF TORTS OR WRONGS 
 INDEPENDENT OF CONTRACT, for the use of Students and Prac¬ 
 titioners. By Arthur Underhill, B.A., of Lincoln’s Inn, Esq., Barrister 
 at Law. 
 
 “ Mr. Underhill states that his chief aim has 
 been to write for the student, but many who have 
 passed their pupilage and are now enjoying the 
 advantages of considerable practice, may consult 
 thesepages with advantage. Mr. Underhill places 
 before his readers broad principles or rules of law, 
 which he illustrates by cases falling under them, 
 so that they are placed before the mind in a 
 manner most impres.sive. Exceptions are not 
 omitted, and the rules are, when necessary, elu¬ 
 cidated by sub-rules. The plan is a good one, 
 and has been honestly carried out, and a good 
 index facilitates re ference.”—J«jrice of the Peace. 
 
 “ Mr. Underhill’s ability in making a clear 
 digest of the subject treated of in this volume is 
 conspicuous. Many works would have to be 
 consulted for the information here concisely 
 given, so that practitioners as well as students 
 will find it useful .”—of the IVorld. 
 
 Mr. Underhill, in his work, gives us an ex¬ 
 ample of how clearly and concisely so difficult 
 and intricate a branch of Law as that of Torts 
 can be set out. He has compressed into a small 
 work a vast amount of information, and his book 
 is so clearly written that it is easily comprehen¬ 
 sible. To the Law Student, for whom it is more 
 particularly written, it may be recommended 
 
 both for its simplicity and accuracy.”— 
 Advertiser. 
 
 ” We strongly recommend the manual to stu¬ 
 dents of both branches of the profession.”— Pre¬ 
 liminary Examination Journal. 
 
 “ A work which will, we think, be found in 
 structive to the beginner, and a useful handy- 
 book for the practitioner in Local Courts.”— 
 Public Opinion. 
 
 “He basset forth the elements of the law with 
 clearness and accuracy. The little work of 
 Mr. Underhill is inexpensive, and may be gene¬ 
 rally relied on."—Law Times. 
 
 A handybook of the law affecting wrongs in¬ 
 dependent of contract .”—The Echo. 
 
 ” Mr. Underhill has here supplied a want long 
 felt in legal treatises, and has entirely, by the 
 present excellent volume, superseded the anti¬ 
 quated work of Mr. Addison, which was totally 
 unfit for practical purposes.”— 
 
 “ This is a very useful little book on the law of 
 Torts. The book is intended for the student who 
 desires to have principles before entering into 
 particulars, and we know no book on the subject 
 so well adapted for the purpose.”—Laze Exami¬ 
 nation Reporter. 
 
 Kelly’s Conveyancing Draftsman 
 
 Post 8 vo., 65 . cloth. 
 
 THE DRAFTSMAN : containing a Collection of Concise Prece¬ 
 dents and Forms in Conveyancing; with Introductory Observations and 
 Practical Notes. By James Henry Kelly. 
 
 “ This is a thoroughly practical book, designed 
 for the solicitor and the student. Mr. Kelly has 
 rightly conceived the duties of a conveyancer; 
 and his short introductory recommendations 
 should be attentively considered by all who are 
 anxious to become safe draftsmen. The author 
 gives a few forms under each heading, confining 
 himself to such as , are likely to be of everyday use 
 in the office. This volume ought to be popular, 
 as it combines law and practice .”—Law Times. 
 
 Mr. Kelly’s object is to give a few precedents 
 of each of those instiuments which are most com¬ 
 monly required in a solicitor’s office, and for 
 which precedents are not always to be met with 
 in the ordinary books on conveyancing. The idea 
 is a good one, and the precedents contained in the 
 
 book are, generally speaking, of the character 
 contemplated by the author’s design. We have 
 been favourably impre.ssed with a perusal of se¬ 
 veral of the precedents in this book ; ai,d practi¬ 
 tioners who have already adopted forms of their 
 own will probably find it advantageous to collate 
 them with those given by Mr. Kelly. Each set 
 of precedents is prefaced by a few terse and prac¬ 
 tical observations.”—.S’a/zciVorf’ Journal. 
 
 ” Such statements of law and facts as are con¬ 
 tained in the work are accurate .”—Law Journal. 
 
 " Itcontains matternot found in the more am¬ 
 bitious works on conveyancing, and we venture to 
 think that the student will find it a useful supple¬ 
 ment to his reading on the subject of convey¬ 
 ancing. Examination Journal, 
 
 .0 
 
o 
 
 
 12 LAW WORKS PUBLISHED BY 
 
 _____I---- 
 
 Shelford’s Companies,—2nd Edit, by Pitcairn and Latham. 
 
 8 vo., 2ls. cloth. 
 
 SHELFORD’S LAW OF JOINT STOCK COMPANIES; 
 
 containing a Digest of the Case Law on that subject; the Companies Acts, 
 1862, 1867, and other Acts relating to Joint Stock Companies; the Orders 
 made under those Acts to regulate Proceedings in the Court of Chancery and 
 County Courts, and Notes of all Cases interpreting the above Acts and 
 Orders. Second Edition, much enlarged, and bringing the Statutes and 
 Cases down to the date of publication. By David Pitcairn, M.A., 
 Fellow of Magdalen College, Oxford, and of Lincoln’s Inn, Barrister at 
 Law; and Francis Law Latham, B.A., Oxon, of the Inner Temple, 
 Barrister-at-Law, author of A Treatise on the Law of Window Lights.” 
 
 “ We may at once state that, in our opinion, the 
 merits of the work are very {jreat,and we confi- 
 dentl^r expect that it will be at least for the present 
 the standard manual of joint stock company law. 
 'I'hat great learning and research have been ex¬ 
 pended by Mr. Pitcairn no one can doubt w-ho reads 
 only a few pages of the book ; the result of each 
 case which has any bearing upon the subject under 
 discussion is very lucidly and accurately stated. 
 VVe heartily congratulate him on the appearance 
 of this work, for wh-ch we anticinate a great suc¬ 
 cess. There is hardly any portion of the law at 
 the present day so important as that which re¬ 
 lates to joint stock companies, and that thi.s work 
 will be the standard authority on the suluect we 
 have not the shadow of a doubt .”—Law Journal, 
 “ After a careful examination of this work we 
 are bound to say that we know of no other 
 which surpasses it in two all-important attri¬ 
 butes of a law book ; first, a clear conception on 
 the part of the author of what he intends to do 
 and how he intends to treat his subject: and 
 .secondly, a consistent, laborious and intelligent 
 adherence lo his proposed order and methoa. 
 All decisions are noted and epitomised in their 
 proper places, the pr-fctice-decisions in the notes 
 to Acts and Rules, and the remainder in the 
 
 introductory account or digest. In the digest 
 Mr. Pitcairn goes into everything with original 
 research, and nothing seems to tscape him. It 
 is enough for us that iyir. Pitcairn’s performance 
 is able and exhaustive. IS othing is omitted, and 
 everything is noted at the proper place. In con¬ 
 clusion we have great pleasure in recommending 
 this edition to the practitioner. Whoever pos¬ 
 sesses it, and keeps it noted up, will be armed on 
 all parts and points of the law of joint stock 
 companies.”— Solicitors' Journal. 
 
 " Although nominally a second edition of Mr- 
 Shelford s treatise, it is in reality an original 
 Avork.the form and arrangement adopted by Mr. 
 Shelford have been changed and, we think, im- 
 'proved by Mr. Pitcairn. A full and accurate in¬ 
 dex also adds to the value of thew'ork,the merits 
 of which, we can have no doubt, will be fully re¬ 
 cognized by the profession.”—Law Magazine. 
 
 •• 'i bis book has alw’ays been the vade mecum 
 on company law, and will, apparently, long con¬ 
 tinue to occupy that position. It is perhaps even 
 more useful to the legal practitioner than to the 
 man of business, but still it is the best source of 
 information to which the latter can finan¬ 
 
 cier and Money Market Review. 
 
 Bainbridge’s Law of Mines and Minerals.—3rd Edit. 
 
 O' 
 
 8 vo., 30s. cloth. 
 
 A TREATISE on the LAW of MINES and MINERALS. 
 By William Bainbridge, Esq., F.G.S., of the Inner Temple, Bamster 
 at Law. Third Edition, carefully revised, and much enlarged by additional 
 matter relating to manorial rights—rights of way and water and other mining 
 easements—the sale of mines and shares—the construction of leases—cost 
 
 book and general partnerships—injuries from undermining and inundations— 
 barriers and working out of bounds. With an Appendix of Forms and 
 Customs and a Glossary of English Mining Terms. 
 
 “ When a work ha.s reached three editions, 
 criticism as to its practical value is superfluous. 
 We believe that .this work was the first pub¬ 
 lished in England on the special subject of 
 mining law—others have sim e been published 
 —butwe see noreason in looking atthe volume 
 before us to believe that it has yet been super<- 
 seded.”— Lau' Magazine. 
 
 “ Mr. Bainbridge was we believe the first to 
 collect and publish, in a separate treatise, the 
 Law of Mines and Minerals, and the work was 
 so well done that his volume at once took its 
 place in the law library as the text book on the 
 subject to which it was devoted. This work 
 must be already familiar to all readers whose 
 
 practice brings them in any manner in con¬ 
 nection with mines or mining, and they w'ell 
 know its value. We can only say of this new 
 edition that it is in all respects worthy of its 
 predecessors .”—Law Times. 
 
 “It would be entirely superfl uous to attempt 
 a general review of a work which has for so 
 long a period occupied the position of the 
 standard work on this important subject 
 Those only who, by the nature of their prac¬ 
 tice, have learned to lean upon Mr. Bainbridge 
 as on a solid staff, can appreciate the deep re¬ 
 search, the admirable method, and the gmce- 
 ful style of this model treatise.”—Zato Journal 
 
 o 
 
MliSSRS. BUTTERVVORTH, 7, FLEET STREET, E.C. 13 
 
 Trower’s Prevalence of Equity. 
 
 Just ready, 8vo., cloth. 
 
 A MANUAL OF THE PREVALENCE OF EQUITY under 
 Section 25 of the Judicature Act, 1873, amended by the Judicature Act, 
 1875. By Charles Francis Trower, Esq., M.A., of the Middle Temple, 
 Barrister at Law, late Fellow of Exeter College, and Vinerian Law Scholar, 
 Oxford; Author of “The Law of Debtor and Creditor,” “ The Law of the 
 Building of Churches and Divisions of Parishes,” &c. 
 
 Fawcett s Law of Landlord and Tenant. 
 
 8vo., 14s. cloth. 
 
 A COMPENDIUM of the LAW of LANDLORD and 
 TENANT. By William Mitchell Fawcett, of Lincoln's Inn, Esq., 
 Barrister at Law. 
 
 “ Ii never wanders from the point, and being 
 intended not for students of the law, but for 
 lessors and lessees and their immediate advisers, 
 wisely avoids historical uisquisitions, and uses 
 language as untechnical as the subject admits, 
 it may safely be assumed to contam information 
 on all the ordinary questions which either con ' 
 tracting party may require to be answered.”— Lazo 
 Jourrial. 
 
 “ I'he author has succeeded in compressing the 
 whole of his subject within the reasonable com- 
 piLSs of 373 pages. Jt may roughly be said of 
 Air. Fawcett’s work, that it is statutory through¬ 
 out, in accordance with the predominant cha¬ 
 racter of the law at the pre.sent day; and Mr. 
 Fawcett takes advantage of this characteristic of 
 modern law to impart to his compendium a de¬ 
 gree of authenticity which greatly enhances its 
 value as a convenient medium of reference, for 
 he has stated the law in the very words of the 
 authorities. We have discovered plain utility to 
 be the aim and end of Mr. F'awcett’s treatise.”— 
 Law Magazine. 
 
 “ The amount of information compressed into 
 the book is very large. The plan of the book is 
 extremely good, aud the arrangement adopted has 
 
 enabled the author to put together in one place 
 the whole law on any particular branch of the 
 subject, and to avoid repetitions. Thus not only 
 is it easy to find what the author has to say ou 
 any particular point, but when we have found a 
 reference to it in one place, we may be satisfied 
 that we have found all the book contains upon 
 the point. In this respect, though probably from 
 its smaller size it must contain less information 
 than Woodfall, it will be found far more con¬ 
 venient for ordinary use than that treatise.”— 
 Solicitors' Journal. 
 
 “ He contents himself with a plain statement of 
 the existing law, prudently omitting all matters 
 of merely historical interest and topics collateral 
 to the special subjects. Above all, it has been 
 his purpose to state the law in the language of 
 the authorities, presenting the principles enun¬ 
 ciated in the very words of the judges. Another 
 excellent feature is a concise summary of the 
 effect of each enactment in the marginal note.s. 
 It will be seen from this that the book is tho¬ 
 roughly practical, and, as such, will doubtless 
 find a favorable reception from the profession.” 
 —Law Times. 
 
 Grant’s Bankers and Banking Companies.—Third Edit. 
 By R. A. Fisher. 
 
 8 VO., 28s. cloth. 
 
 GRANT’S TREATISE ON THE LAW RELATING TO 
 BANKERS AND BANKING COMPANIES. Third Edition. With an 
 Appendix of the Statutes. By R. A. Fisher, Esq., Judge of County Courts. 
 
 “ Eight years sufficed to exhaust the second 
 edition of this valuable and standard work, 
 we need only now notice the improvements 
 which have been made. We have once more 
 looked through the work, and recognize in it 
 the sterling merits which have acquired for it 
 the high position which it holds in standard 
 legal literature. Mr. Fisher has annotated all 
 the recent cases.”— Law Times. 
 
 ‘‘ Prior to the publication of Mr. Grant’s 
 work on this subject, no treatise containing 
 the required information existed; and, since 
 its appearance, such important alterations re¬ 
 specting banks and bankers have been intro¬ 
 duced, that the work needed in many parts 
 entire reconstruction and arrangement. The 
 last two editions have been entrusted to the 
 care of the gentleman whose name is attached 
 to the work. Mr. Fisher’s name is in itself 
 a guarantee that his duties of editor have been 
 ably and conscientiously performed. In this 
 respect we can assure those interested in the 
 
 subject of this book, that they will in no re¬ 
 spect be disappointed; obsolete and immaterial 
 matter haa been eliminated, and the present 
 edition presents the existing law of bankers 
 and banking companies as it at present exists.” 
 —Justice of the Peace. 
 
 ‘‘It is eight years since Mr. Fisher published 
 tlie second edition of this practical book, and it 
 now appears again re-edited by the same hand. 
 Its steady sale shows that the public for whom 
 it is written have recognized the kindness that 
 was meant them, and makes a more elaborate 
 recommendation superfluous. We must add, 
 however, that the additions to the work, and 
 the alterations in it which Mr. Fisher has 
 made, are, as far as we can Judge, real im¬ 
 provements, and that he has not failed to follow 
 out the recent cases. The book used with care 
 will no doubt be of great practical service to 
 bankers and their legal advisers.”—5o/ic</or*’ 
 Journal, 
 
©--— 
 
 1-i LA\y WORKS PUBLISHED BY 
 
 De Colyar’s Law of Guarantees. 
 
 8vo., 14s. cloth. 
 
 A TREATISE ON THE LAW OF GUARANTEES AND 
 OF PRINCIPAL AND SURETY. By Henry A. de Colyar, of tlie 
 Middle Temple, Esq., Barrister at Law. 
 
 “ He has so treated the subject that, after 
 careful examination, we are constrained to 
 commend his book alike lor its fulness and 
 for its brevity. The result is a volume every 
 practitioner should place upon his shelves, 
 and which he cannot consult without advan¬ 
 tage when settling a former giving an opinion 
 upon questions between guarantor and gua¬ 
 rantee. Mr. Colyar’s work contains internal 
 evidence that he is quite at home with his 
 subject. His book has the great merit of 
 thoroughness. Hence its present value, and 
 hence we venture to predict will be its enduring 
 reputation.”— Law Times. 
 
 “ The whole work displays great care in its 
 
 production ; it is clear in its statements oi tiie 
 law, and the result of the many authorities col¬ 
 lected is stated with an intelligent appreciation 
 of the subject in hand.”—/ws/ice of the Peace. 
 
 “This book has been compiled with very 
 considerable care and pains, and we must speak 
 highly of the praiseworthy diligence and as¬ 
 siduity with which the author has endeavoured 
 to reason out the subject. This treatise will 
 prove useful as a manual on a subject not 
 hitherto fully treated of.”— Solicitors' Journal. 
 
 “ The volume before us is a very clear and 
 trustworthy statement of the present bearing 
 and scope of thq law on all such questions.”— 
 Standard. 
 
 Nasmith’s Institutes. 
 
 Post 8vo., 125. cloth. 
 
 THE INSTITUTES of ENGLISH PUBLIC LAW, embracing 
 an Outline of General Jurisprudence, the Development of the British Consti¬ 
 tution, Public International Law, and the Public Municipal Law of England. 
 By David Nasmith, Esq., LL.B., of the Middle Temple, Barrister at Law, 
 Author of “Ihe Chronometrical Chart of the History of England,’^ &c. j 
 Joint Translator of Ortolan’s “ History of Roman Law.” 
 
 “ We believe the plan of the book is the 
 right one. We have only to add that we know 
 of no book which, in our opinion, might more 
 
 fitly, or perhaps so fitly, be placed in the 
 hands of a beginner in the study of law.”— 
 Law Magazine. 
 
 2 vols. or books, post 8vo., 215 . cloth. 
 
 THE INSTITUTES of ENGLISH PRIVATE LAW, embracine 
 an Outline of the Substantive Branch of the Law of Persons and Thinffs. 
 Adapted to the New Procedure. By David Nasmith, LL.B., of the Middle 
 temple, Barrister at Law, Author of “ Institutes of English Public Law,” 
 &c., (VC. • ’ 
 
 “ In his account of tenures, titles and estates 
 Mr, Nasmith is particularly happy, and we 
 Hiink his second volume, treating of things, 
 is, for its size, more c<)mplete and clear in its 
 exposition of the law of property than any 
 manual with which we are acquainted. The 
 plan and execution of the work in its material' 
 essential parts are excellent.”—/rwA Law 
 
 This attempt is made in the right spirit, 
 and that is something, nor is the execution 
 always so much below the intention, as with 
 parts we have felt bound to criticise. The 
 Real Property Law, for instance, where Mr 
 Nasmith gives himself more room, seems very 
 fairly done.”—Saturday Review. ' 
 
 “The.se volumes must be judged as a purely 
 elementary treatise, and from this point ol 
 view the author is to be congratulate-i on hia 
 success in condensing his subject into such 
 narrow limits without being obscure and with¬ 
 out, as far as we can judge, making any verv 
 serious omissions.”— Opinion. 
 
 “It embraces within little space a descrip- 
 tinn of the several branches of our jurispru¬ 
 dence into which the writer has found it ad¬ 
 visable to divide it. The great featuie of the 
 
 work is its systematic order; if crushes the 
 subject into shape, and covers it with a coat¬ 
 ing of technical description quite suitable for 
 the digestion of students accustomed to legal 
 terms.”— Economist. 
 
 “ Great credit is due to him for the pains¬ 
 taking care with which he has prepared the 
 volumes before us. As a scientific text-book 
 it well deserves the attention of the student ” 
 — The Scotsman. 
 
 “This book will be like its predecessor, not 
 only a great boon to the student of law, but 
 will also assist the reading of all who desire to 
 add some acquaintance with English law to 
 th^ir stock of general information.”—PAe 
 Record. 
 
 “ Mr. Nasmith’s ‘ Institmes of Private Law’ 
 
 is a very careful and pojiular compilation.”_ 
 
 D(iily News. 
 
 “ In these volumes, dedicated to the Lord 
 Cliancellor, Mr. Nasmith gives an elementary 
 though detailed, exposition of the substantive 
 branch ()f English private law, the subject beinir 
 divided into two books, which treat respectively 
 of the law of persons and the law of thinffs^ 
 Altogether the treatise is a capital one i 
 Standard. 
 
 
 o- 
 
c--- 
 
 MESSRS. BUTTERWORTH, 7, FLEET STREET, E.C. 15 
 
 O 
 
 Hunter’s Suit in Equity.—Sixth Edition. 
 
 Post 8vo., 12s. cloth. 
 
 AN ELEMENTARY VIEW of the PROCEEDINGS in a 
 SUIT in EQUITY. With an Appendix of Forms. By Sylvester 
 J. Hunter, B.A.. of Lincoln’s Inn, Barrister at Law. Sixth Edition. By 
 
 G. W. Lawrance, M.A., of Lincoln' 
 
 " I'hi?. book is so very well known, and lias 
 proved so extremely useful to law students and 
 practitioners, that we should only reneat w'hat is 
 familiar if we said anythin}.'in its praise, f.dition 
 after edition has been issued as changes in the 
 law have necessitated it, and Mr. Lawrance now 
 sends the work forth annotated with all recent 
 cases requiring notice to illustrate the text.”— 
 La70 
 
 " There can be no better test of the value of 
 this book than the fact that the sixth edition is 
 now before the public. The first was published 
 in 1858, so that it has en.ioyed the good fortune 
 falling to very tew legal works of passingthrough 
 SIX editions in fifteen years. I'he fault which is 
 almost inevitable as a book advances in editions, 
 of quoting too many decisions, has been success¬ 
 fully avoided, so that a student will find this 
 edition as suitable to his wants as was the first 
 edition.”— Law Magazine. 
 
 “ What greater testimony tothevnlueof a book 
 can we pul forward than the bare fact that in 
 
 's Inn, Barrister at Law. 
 
 fifteen years it has run through six editions, and 
 that only two years and some few months have 
 elapsed between the publications ol the last two 
 editions? ‘ TJunter’s Suit in Equity’ is a work 
 that every student for the Chancery bar must 
 read, and its popularity is therefore readily ex¬ 
 plained. I’he new edition contains such altera¬ 
 tions in the text as have been rendered necessary 
 by the Court of Chancery Funds Act, 1872. and 
 the rules and orders thereunder. The editor 
 further stales that the whole work has been care¬ 
 fully revised, proper attention being paid to the 
 decisions of the court since the appearance of the 
 fifth edition.”—Lrtzu Jbwrwa/. . 
 
 “ We have so often noticed previous editions 
 of this useful work that it appears to be only 
 necessary to say of this edition that many 
 recent decisions have been noted, and the text 
 has been adapted to the alterations in practice 
 and procedure introduced by the Court of 
 Chancery Funds Act, \.Q"l2."—iSolicitors' Journal. 
 
 Hunt’s Boundaries, Fences and Foreshores.—2nd Edit. 
 
 Post 8 VO., 12s. cloth. 
 
 A TREATISE on the LAW relating to BOUNDARIES and 
 FENCES and to the Rights of Property on the Sea Shore and in the Beds 
 of Public Rivers and other Waters. Second Edition. By Arthur Joseph 
 Hunt, Esq., of the Inner Temple, Barrister at Law. 
 
 “ It speaks well for this book that it has so 
 soon passed into a .second edition. That its 
 utility has been apiireciated is shown by its 
 success. Mr. Hunt has availed himself of the 
 opiioFtuuity of a second edition to note up all 
 the cases to this time, and to extend consider¬ 
 ably some of the chapters, especially that which 
 treats of rights of property on the sea shore and 
 the surijects of sea walls and commissions of 
 sewers.”— Law Times. 
 
 “ There are few more fertile sources of litiga¬ 
 tion than those dealt with in Mr. Hunt's valu¬ 
 able book. It is sufficient here to sav that the 
 volume ought to have a larger circulation than 
 ordinarily belongs to law books, that it ought 
 to be found in every country gentleman’s library, 
 that the cases are brought down to the latest 
 date, and that it is carefully prepared, clearly 
 
 written, and well edited.”— Law Magazine. 
 
 ” Mr. Hunt chose a good subject for a sepa¬ 
 rate treatise on Boundaries and Fences and 
 Rights to the Seashore, and we are not sur- 
 
 E rised to find that a second edition of his book 
 as been called for. The present edition con¬ 
 tains much new matter. The chapter especially 
 which treats on rights of property on the 
 seashore, has been greatly extended. Ad¬ 
 ditions have been also made to the chapters 
 relating to the fencing of the property of mine 
 owners and railway companies. All the cases 
 which have been decided since the work first 
 appeared have been introduced in their proper 
 laves. Thus it will be seen this new edition 
 as a consiUerably enhanced value.”— Solicitors' 
 Journal. 
 
 O’ 
 
 Ortolan’s Roman Law, translated by Prichard & Nasmith. 
 
 8vo., 28s. cloth. 
 
 THE HISTORY of ROMAN LAW, from the Text of Ortolan’s 
 Histoire de la Legislation Romaine et Generalisation du Droit (Eldition of 
 1870). Translated, with the Author’s permission, and Supplemented by a 
 Chronometrical Chart of Roman History. By Iltudus T. Prichard, Esq., 
 F.S.S., and David Nasmith, LL.B., Barristers at Law. 
 
 “ We know of no work, which, in our opinion, 
 exhibits so perfect a model of what a text-book 
 ought to be. tif the translation before us, it is 
 enough to say. that it is a laiihful representation 
 of the original.”—Law Magazine. 
 
 ” Th s translation, from it.s great merit, de- 
 serves a warm reception from all who desire to 
 be acquainted with the history and elements of 
 Homan law, or have its interests as a necessary 
 part of sound legal education at heart. With re¬ 
 gard to that great work it is enough to say, that 
 English writers have been continually in the 
 habit of doing piecemeal what Messrs. Prichard 
 and N asmith have done wholesale. Hitherto we 
 have had but gold-dust from the mine; now we 
 are fortunate nubtaininganugget. Mr. Nasmith 
 is already known as the designer of a chart of 
 the history of England, which has been generally 
 
 approved, and bids fairly for extensive adoption.” 
 —Law Journal. 
 
 “We are extremely glad to welcome the ap¬ 
 pearance of a translation of any of the works of 
 M. Ortolan, and the history and generalization 
 of Homan law, which are now presented to us 
 in English, are perhajis the most useful books 
 that could be offered at the present time to stu¬ 
 dents of the Homan law. The utility of Homan 
 law, as an instrument of legal education, is now 
 generally admitted. 'The English of the book is 
 unusually free from foreign idioms which sooften 
 disfigure translations. The book itself we strongly 
 recommend lo all wbo are interested in Homnii 
 law, jurisprudence or history, and who are not 
 sufficiently familiar with French, to be able to 
 read the original with eise."—Solicitors'Journal. 
 
 o 
 
c- 
 
 ■o 
 
 10 LAW WORKS PUBLISHED BY 
 
 Rouse’s Conveyancer.—3rd Edit, with Supplement. 
 
 Two vols. 8vo., 30s. cloth. 
 
 The PRACTICAL CONVEYANCER, giving, in a mode com¬ 
 bining facility of reference with general utility, upwards of Four Hundred 
 Precedents of Conveyances, Mortgages and Leases, Settlements, and Mis¬ 
 cellaneous Forms, with (not in previous editions) the La^w and numerous 
 Outline Forms and Clauses of Wills and Abstracts of Statutes affecting 
 Real Property, Conveyancing Memoranda, &c. By Rolla Rouse, Esq., of 
 the Middle Temple, Barrister at Law, Author of “ The Practical Man,” &c. 
 Third Edition, greatly enlarged. With a Supplement, giving Abstracts of 
 the Statutory Provisions affecting the Practice in Conveyancing; and the 
 requisite Alterations in Forms, with some new Forms ; and including a full 
 Abstract in numbered Clauses of the Stamp Act, 1870. 
 
 The Supplement separately, price Is. 6^. served. 
 
 “ The best test of the value of a book written 
 professedly for practical men is the practical 
 one of the number of editions through which 
 it passes. The fact that this well-known work 
 has now reached its third shows that it is con¬ 
 sidered by those for whose convenience it was 
 written to fulfil its purpose well.”— Law 
 Magazine. 
 
 “ This is the third edition in ten years, a 
 proof that practitioners have used and ap¬ 
 proved the precedents collected by Mr. Rouse. 
 In this edition, which is greatly enlarged, he 
 has for the first time introduced Precedents 
 of Wills, extending to no less than 116 pages. 
 We can accord unmingled praise to the con¬ 
 veyancing memoranda showing the practical 
 effect of the various statutory provisions in the 
 different parts of a deed. If the two preceding 
 editions have been so well received, the wel¬ 
 come given to this one by the profession will 
 be heartier still .”—Law Times. 
 
 “ So far as a careful perusal of Mr. Rouse’s 
 book enables us to judge of its merits, we think 
 that as a collection of precedents of general 
 utility in cases of common occurrence it will 
 be found satisfactorily to stand the application 
 of the test. The draftsman will find in the 
 Practical Conveyancer precedents appropriate 
 to all instruments of common occurrence, and 
 the collection appears to be especially well 
 supplied with those which relate to copyhold 
 estates. In order to avoid useless repetition 
 and also to make the precedents as simple as 
 possible, Mr. Rouse has sketched out a num¬ 
 ber of outline drafts so as to present to the 
 
 reader a sort of bird's-eye view of each instru¬ 
 ment and show him its form at a glance. 
 Each paragraph in these outline forms refers, 
 by distinguishing letters and numbers, to the 
 clauses in full required to be inserted in the 
 respective parts of the instrument, and which 
 are given in a subsequent part of the work, and 
 thus every precedent in outline is made of 
 itself an index to the clauses which are neces¬ 
 sary to complete the draft. In order still 
 further to simplify the arrangement of the 
 work, the author has adopted a plan (which 
 seems to us fully to answer its purpose) of 
 giving the variations which may occur in any 
 instrument according to the natural order of 
 its different parts .”—Law Journal. 
 
 “ That the work has found favor is proved 
 by the fact of our now having to review a third 
 edition. This method of skeleton precedents 
 appears to us to be attended with important 
 advantages. To clerks and other young 
 hands a course of conveyancing under Mr. 
 Rouse’s auspices is, we think, calculated to 
 prove very instructive. To the solicitor, es¬ 
 pecially the country practitioner, who has 
 often to set his clerks to work upon drafts 
 of no particular difficulty to the experienced 
 practitioner, but upon which they the said 
 clerks are not to be quite trusted alone, we 
 think to such gentlemen Mr. House’s collec¬ 
 tion of Precedents is calculated to prove ex¬ 
 tremely serviceable. We repeat, in conclusion, 
 that solicitors, especially those practising in 
 the country, will find this a useful work.” — 
 Solicitors’ Journal. 
 
 o- 
 
 Brabrook’s Co-operative and Provident Societies. 
 
 12nio., 6s. cloth. 
 
 THE LAW relating to INDUSTRIAL and PROVIDENT 
 SOCIETIES, including the Winding-up Clauses, with a Practical Intro¬ 
 duction, Notes, and Model Rules, to which are added the Law of France on 
 the same subject, and Remarks on Trades Unions. By Edward W. 
 Brabrook, F.S.A., of Lincoln’s Inn, Esq., Barrister at Law, Assistant 
 Registrar of Friendly Societies in England. 
 
 It may be usefully consulted by practitioners 
 desirous of learning something more upon the 
 subject than is to be found in works on ))artner- 
 ship and joint stock companies. The book is 
 thoughtluUy written, and we recommend it to 
 those who desire to learn something practical 
 about the work which these societies are meant 
 to do and the way in which it is to be done.”— 
 oolicttors' Journal, 
 
 . “ Mr. Brabrook’s little work on these societies 
 IS opportune, and the .statistics and information 
 contained in it are valuable and interesting. 
 Ihere is a chapter devoted to practical advice, 
 
 in which are contained many valuable and im¬ 
 portant hints .”—Lazo Magazine. 
 
 “ Mr. Brabrook brings not merely official know¬ 
 ledge of his legal position as the barrister recently 
 appointed to assist Mr. Tidd Pratt, Registrar of 
 Friendly Societies in England, but the devotion 
 of many years to a practical study of our in¬ 
 dustrial and provident institutions .”—Posi 
 “ The author speaks with practical e.\perience 
 and authority.”— Observer. 
 
 “ The clear exposition made by Mr. Brabrook 
 in this volume supplies all the requisite informa¬ 
 tion, and persons interested in the subject will do 
 well to consult its pages.”—iViem of the World. 
 
 
MESSRS. BUTTERWORTH, 7, FLEET STREET, E. C. 17 
 
 Rogers’s Judicature Acts, 1873 and 1875. 
 
 One vol., demy 8vo., 21«. cloth. 
 
 (^Dedicated, hy permusio7i, to the Lord Chancellor.') 
 
 THE LAW AND PRACTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT 
 OF JUDICATURE. By Arundel Rogers, Esq., of the Inner Ternple, 
 Barrister at Law, Author of “The Law of Mines, Minerals and Quarries.” 
 
 Bund's Law of Salmon Fisheries. 
 
 Post 8 VO., 15s. cloth. 
 
 The LAW relating to the SALMON FISHERIES of ENGLAND 
 
 and WALES, as amended by the 
 Statutes and Cases. By J. W. Willis- 
 Esquire, Barrister at Law, Vice Chaii 
 
 “ I would wish in this place to express my 
 approval of ‘ Bund’s Law of Salmon Fisheries 
 in England and Wales, with Statutes and 
 Cases.’ This work will afifoid great assistance 
 to those engaged in administering the law, 
 while it affords valuable information on the 
 theory and practice of salmon legislation in 
 general.”— From the Thirteenth Annual Report 
 oj InspectorBuckland on Salmon Fisheries, 1874. 
 
 “ Mr. Willis-Bund, the draughtsman of the 
 new act, has published an important treatise 
 on the whole of the Salmon Fishery Acts, 
 which has already been accepted as a complete 
 exposition of those statutes.” — From the 
 Thirteenth Annual Report of Inspector Walpole 
 on Salmon Fisheries, 1874. 
 
 “ Doubtless all thejaw will be found between 
 his covers, and we have not been able to detect 
 any erroneous statements. We can recommend 
 the book as a disquisition,—it is conscientiously 
 executed.”— Law Times. 
 
 “Mr. Bund, whose name is so well known to 
 all who take interest in our Salmon fisheries, 
 has lost no time since the passing of the Act 
 of 1873 in bringing out his work on salmon 
 fishery law. That the book, so far as England 
 and Wales are concerned, is a very complete 
 and exhaustive one, no one who knows Mr. 
 Bu' d’s clearness and power of application 
 will doubt. Mr. Bund has done the work 
 
 Salmon Fishery Act, 1873, with the 
 Bund, M.A., LL.B., of Lincoln's Inn, 
 man Severn Fishery Board. 
 
 excellently well, and nothing further in this 
 way can be desired.”— The Field. 
 
 “This terse and useful summary gives not 
 merely the Salmon Fishery Act of 1873, but 
 the state of the law as left repealed and un¬ 
 affected by that act, with statutes and cases 
 arising from them. The whole subject is treated 
 exhaustively, and in a manner most satis¬ 
 factory.”— Standard. 
 
 “ There is happily a good and ample index 
 at the end of the volume. By means of this 
 we have tested the author on various difficult 
 points, and we have always found his opinion 
 sound, apd his explanations clear and lucid. 
 This volume must of necessity become a 
 hand-book to salmon-fishers in general, and 
 especially to boards of conservators, who will 
 thereby be much assisted in the formation of 
 the new boards of conservators, under the Act 
 of 1873; also the operation of the Acts of 1861 
 and 1865, as amended by the Act of 1873.”— 
 Land and Water. 
 
 “ The author of the work before us has done 
 much to supply the shortcomings of legisla¬ 
 tion. He has brought to the subject not only 
 a comprehensive knowledge of this branch of 
 the law, but a practical acquaintance with its 
 administration, and the result is a book of 
 considerable merit.”— Public Opinion. 
 
 Dixon’s Law of Partnership. 
 
 1 vol. 8vo., 22s. cloth. 
 
 A TREATISE on the LAW of PARTNERSHIP. By 
 Joseph Dixon, of Lincoln's Inn, Esq., Barrister at Law. Editor of 
 
 “ Lushes Common Law Practice.'^ 
 
 “We imagine that very few questions are 
 likely to come before the practitioner which 
 Mr. Dixon’s book will not be found to solve. 
 Having already passed our opinion on the way 
 in which the work is carried out, we have 
 only to add that the value of the book is very 
 materially increased by an excellent marginal 
 summary, and a very copious index.”— Law 
 Magazine and Review. 
 
 “ Mr, Dixon has done his work well. The 
 book is carefully and usefully prepared,”— 
 Solicitors' Journal. 
 
 “ Mr. Dixon enters into all the conditions of 
 partnerships at common law, and defines the 
 rights of partners among themselves ; the 
 rights of the partnership against third per¬ 
 sons ; the rights of third persons against the 
 partnership; and the rights and liabilities of 
 individuals, not actually partners, but liable 
 to be treated by third persons as partners.”— 
 The Times. 
 
 “ We heartily recommend to practitioners 
 and students Mr. Dixon’s treatise as the best 
 exposition of the law we have read, for the 
 arrangement is not only artistic, but concise¬ 
 ness has been studied without sacrifice of clear¬ 
 ness. He sets forth the principles upon which 
 the law is based as well as the cases by which 
 its application is shown. Hence it is something 
 more than a digest, which too many law books 
 are not: it is really an essay,”— Law Times. 
 
 “ He has evidently bestowed upon this 
 book the same conscientious labour and 
 painstaking industry for which we had to 
 compliment him some months since when 
 reviewing his edition of Lush’s ‘ Practice of 
 the Superior Courts of Law,’ and, as a re¬ 
 sult, he has produced a clearly written and well 
 arranged manual upon one of the most inrpor- 
 tant branches of our mercantile law.”—Zaw 
 Journal. 
 
 O- 
 
 D 
 
 ■C 
 
18 
 
 LAW WORKS PUBLISHED BY 
 
 Robson’s Bankrupt Law.—Third Edition. 
 
 Very nearly ready, 8vo., cloth. 
 
 A TREATISE ON THE LAW OF BANKRUPTCY; con¬ 
 taining a full Exposition of the Principles and Practice of the Law, 
 including the Alterations made by the Bankruptcy Act, 1869. With an 
 Appendix comprising the Statutes, Rules, Orders and Forms. By George 
 Young Robson, Esq., of the Inner Temple, Barrister at Law. Third 
 Edition. 
 
 Coote’s Admiralty Practice.—Second Edition. 
 
 8 vo„ I 65 . cloth. 
 
 THE PRACTICE of the HIGH COURT of ADMIRALTY 
 of ENGLAND: also the Practice of the Judicial Committee of Her 
 Majesty^s Most Honorable Privy Council in Admiralty Appeals, with Forms 
 and Bills of Costs. By Henry Charles Coote, F.S.A., one of the Ex¬ 
 aminers of the High Court of Admiralty, Author of ‘‘The Practice of the 
 Court of Prohate,&c. Second Edition, almost entirely re-written, with a 
 Supplement giving the County Courts Jurisdiction and Practice in Admiralty, 
 the Act of 1868, Rules, Orders, &c. 
 
 This work contains every Common Form in use by the Practitioner in Admiralty, as well as every 
 description of Bill of Costs in that Court, a feature possessed by no other work on the Practice in 
 Admiralty. 
 
 Mr. Justice Lush’s Common Law Practice.—Third 
 Edition by Dixon. 
 
 2 vols. 8vo., 46s. cloth. 
 
 LUSH’S PRACTICE of the SUPERIOR COURTS of 
 COMMON LAW at WESTMINSTER, in Actions and Proceedings over 
 which they have a common Jurisdiction: with Introductory Treatises re¬ 
 specting Parties to Actions; Attornies and Town Agents, their Qualifica¬ 
 tions, Rights, Duties, Privileges and Disabilities ; the Mode of Suing, 
 whether m Person or by Attorney in Forma Pauperis, &c. &c. &.C.; and an 
 Appendix, containing the authorized Tables of Costs and Fees, Forms of 
 Proceedings and Writs of Execution. Third Edition. By Joseph Dixon, 
 of Lincoln’s Inn, Esq., Barrister at Law. 
 
 Phillips’s Law of Lunacy. 
 
 Post 8 VO., 18^. cloth. 
 
 THE LAW CONCERNING LUNATICS, IDIOTS and 
 PERSONS of UNSOUND MIND. By Charles Palmer Phillips, 
 M.A., of Lincoln’s Inn, Esq., Barrister at Law, and one of the Commis¬ 
 sioners in Lunacy. 
 
 Phillips has in his very complete, 
 einnorate and useful volume preseuied us wjih an 
 excellent view of the present law as well as the 
 to lunacy.”-Law AJatsazine and 
 
 The work is one on which the author has 
 evidently bestowed ^reat pains, and which not 
 only he^ars the mark of great application and 
 research, but which shows a familiarity with the 
 subject. —Justice oj the Peace, 
 
MESSRS. BUTTERWORTH, 7, FLEET STREET, E. C. 19 
 
 MR. BEDFORD’S STUDENTS’ EXAMINATION GUIDES. 
 
 Bedford’s Intermediate Examination Guide. 
 
 2 vols. 8 VO., Qd. cloth. 
 
 The INTERMEDIATE EXAMINATION GUIDE: containinjr 
 a Digest of the Examination Questions on Common Law, Conveyancing and 
 Equity, with the Answers. By Edward Henslowe Bedford, Solicitor, 
 Temple, Editor of the “ Preliminary,’^ Intermediate” and “ Final,” &c. 
 
 Bedford’s Final Examination Guide to the Judicature 
 Acts, 1873-5. 
 
 1 vol. 8vo., Is. 6d. cloth. 
 
 THE FINAL EXAMINATION GUIDE to the PRACTICE 
 of the SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE: containing a Digest 
 of the Final Examination Questions, with many new ones, with Answers 
 under the Supreme Court of Judicature Acts. By Edward Henslowe 
 Bedford, Solicitor, Editor of the ‘‘ Preliminary,” “ Intermediate,” and 
 “ Final,” &c., &c. 
 
 “Mr. Bedford’s Final Examination Guide 
 supplies a want which will he much felt by 
 students as to what they are to read with refer¬ 
 ence to the new practice. The Guide and Time 
 Table will he found useful helps to students 
 in perusing the Judicature Acts.”— Law Ex¬ 
 amination Journal. 
 
 “ Mr. Bedford’s Guide to the Practice of the 
 Supreme Court, while prepared for the use of 
 candidates for the various law examinations, 
 is moreov-^r calculated to convey to others a 
 clearer notion of the main alterations that may 
 have been effected than might be obtained 
 from many more pretentious treatises. The 
 various sections, orders and rules of the acts 
 have been here arranged under their proper 
 
 and consecutive headings in the form of ques¬ 
 tion and answer, and the result is a useful and 
 readable book, which we would recommend 
 students to keep in view.”— Irish Law Times. 
 
 “We have in these pages a well arranged 
 and clear digest of the final examination ques¬ 
 tions, and many new questions, with answers, 
 under the Supreme Court of Judicature Acts.” 
 — Standard. 
 
 “ There are a great many dull people who 
 cannot prepare for examination without having 
 every conceivable question placed before them 
 in anticipation, immediately followed by its 
 corresponding answer. This is the object of 
 the book and it seems to fulfil it.”— Echo. 
 
 By the saiAe Author, on a Sheet, I 5 . 
 
 A TABLE of the PRINCIPAL STEPS and TIMES in an 
 ACTION UNDER THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE 
 ACTS. 
 
 “ It will not only prove of service to common 
 law and chancery clerks, but also to articled 
 clerks in the course of their studies.”—Zazr 
 Times. 
 
 “ Mr. E. H. Bedford has prepared a third 
 edition of his useful broadsheet, containing a 
 Table of the principal steps and times in an 
 ordinary action in the Supreme Court of 
 
 Judicature. This Table has been corrected 
 so as to embrace the changes introduced by the 
 Rules of December 1,1875.”— Law Journal. 
 
 “The Time Table by the same author (Mr. 
 Bedford) presents in a conspicuous and con¬ 
 venient form the times allowed for taking the 
 various steps in an action.”— Law Examina¬ 
 tion Journal. 
 
 Also just published on a Sheet, I 5 . 
 
 A TABLE of the PRINCIPAL STEPS and TIMES in a 
 CHANCERY SUIT. By Edward Henslowe Bedford, Solicitor, Editor 
 of the “ Intermediate Examination Guide.” 
 
 Just ready, in 8vo. 
 
 THE FINAL EXAMINATION GUIDE to the LAW of 
 PROBATE and DIVORCE. By E. H. Bedford, Solicitor, Temple, 
 Author of the “Final Examination Guide to the Practice of tlie Supreme 
 Court of Judicature,” &c., &c. 
 
 D 2 
 
20 LAW WORKS PUBLISHED BY 
 
 Seaborne’s Law of Vendors and Purchasers. 
 
 Post 8vo., 9s. cloth. 
 
 A CONCISE MANUAL of the LAW of VENDORS and 
 PUKCHASEUS of REAL PROPERTY, with a Supplement, including 
 the Vendor and Purchaser Act, 1874, with Notes. By Henry Seaborne. 
 
 %* This work is designed to furnish Practitioners with an easy means of reference to the Statidory 
 Enactments and Judicial Decisions regulating the transfer of Real Property, and also to bring 
 these authorities in a compendious shape under the attention of Students. 
 
 “ The value of Mr Seaborne’s work consists 
 in its being the mo-st concise summary yet pub¬ 
 lished <if one oi the most important branches of 
 the law. The student will find this book a useful 
 introduction to a dry and difficult subject.”— 
 Law Examination Journal. 
 
 '* The book before ns contains a good deal, es¬ 
 pecially of practical information as to the course 
 of conveyancing matters iu solicitors’ offices. 
 
 which may be useful to students.’’— Solicitors^ 
 Journal. 
 
 “ We will do Mr. Seaborne the justice to say 
 that we believe nis work will be of some t^e to 
 articled clerks and others in solicitors omces. 
 who have not the opportunity or inclination to 
 refer to the standard works from which his is 
 compiled .”—Law Journal. 
 
 Clark’s Digest of House of Lords Cases. 
 
 Royal 8vo., 31s. 6d. cloth. 
 
 A DIGESTED INDEX to all the REPORTS in the HOUSE 
 of LORDS from the commencement of the Series by Dow, in 1814, to the 
 end of the Eleven Volumes of House of Lords Cases, with references to more 
 recent Decisions. By Charles Clark, Esq., one of Her Majesty’s 
 Counsel, Reporter by Appointment to the House of Lords. 
 
 “ The decisions of the supreme tribunal of 
 this country, however authoritative in them¬ 
 selves, were not, until of late years, at all 
 familiar to the great body of the legal pro¬ 
 fession ; the early reports of them being in the 
 hands of but few persons. In that tribunal, 
 more than in any other, questions can be con¬ 
 sidered, as they have been, upon purely legal 
 principles, freed from the letters and obstruc¬ 
 
 tions of mere precedent. The acknowledged 
 eminence of the noble and learned persons by 
 whom the decisions have been pronounced, 
 gives them a value beyond their official autho¬ 
 ritativeness. It is hoped that this Digest will 
 have the effect of making the profession at 
 large familiarly acquainted with them.”—/*/€- 
 fatonj Notice. 
 
 Barry’s Practice of Conveyancing. 
 
 8vo., 185. cloth. 
 
 A TREATISE on the PRACTICE of CONVEYANCING. 
 By W. Whittaker Barry, Esq., of Lincoln's Inn, Barrister at Law, late 
 Holder of the Studentship of the Inns of Court, and Author of “ A Treatise 
 on the Statutory Jurisdiction of the Court of Chancery." 
 
 “We feel hound to strongly recommend it to 
 the practitioner as well as the student. The 
 author has proved himself to be a master of the 
 subject, lor he not only gives a most valuable 
 supi)ly of practical sugge.stions, but criticises 
 them with much ability, and we have no doubt 
 that his criticism will meet with general ap- 
 juoval .”—Law Magazine. 
 
 “ It contains, in a concise and readable form, 
 the law relating to almost every point likely to 
 arise in the ordinary every day practice of the 
 conveyancer, with references to the various 
 authorities and statutes to the latest date, and 
 may be described as a manual of practical con¬ 
 veyancing.”—Law Journal. 
 
 “ Ihis treatise supplies a want which has long 
 
 been felt. There has been no treatise on the 
 Practice of Conveyancing issued for a long time 
 past that is adequate for the present requirements. 
 AJr. Harry’s work is essentially what it professes 
 to be, a treatise on the Practice of Conveyancing. 
 1 he treatise, although capable of compression, 
 IS the production of a person of great merit and 
 still greater promise.”—iib/ici/aAj’ Journal. 
 
 A work the substance of which is so well 
 known to our reader^, needs no recommen- 
 datiou from us, for its merits are patent to all, 
 from personal acquaintance with them 'Jhe 
 information that the treatise' so much admired 
 may now be in the more convenient form of 
 a book, will suftce of itself to secure a large and 
 eager demand for it.”—Law Times. 
 
 Barry’s Forms in Conveyancing. 
 
 / 8vo., 215. cloth. 
 
 FORMS AND PRECEDENTS IN CONVEYANCING ; with 
 
 Introduction and Practical Notes. By W. Whittaker Barry of 
 Lincoln's Inn, Esq., Barrister at Law, Author of Treatise on the 
 of Conveyancing." 
 
MESSltS. BUTTERWOllTH, 7, FLEET STREET, E.C. --il 
 
 Goldsmith’s Equity.—Sixth Edition. 
 
 Post 8 VO., 18s. cloth. 
 
 THE DOCTRINE AND PRACTICE OF EQUITY: or a 
 
 concise Outline of Proceedinors in the High Court of Chancery, designed 
 principally for the Use of Students. Sixth Edition, according to the recent 
 Statutes and Orders. By Geo. Goldsmith, Esq., M.A , Barrister-at-Law. 
 
 “ A well-known law student’s book, the best, 
 because the most thoroughly complete, yet sim¬ 
 plified in.structor, in the principles and practice 
 of equity that has ever been provided for him ; 
 and that its value has been recognized by those 
 who have made use of it is proved by this—that 
 their commendations have carried it to a sixth 
 edit-on. The principles of equity are as they 
 were, but the practice has so changed since the 
 publication of the first edition, that every part 
 of this division of the work has required to be 
 rewritten almost as often as a new edition was 
 demanded. Of course, the size of the book has 
 grown also, and from being, as we remember it, 
 a very little book, to be carried in the pocket, it 
 has become a portly volume, and this fairly re- 
 jiresenis its increased merits. Mow that every 
 student aspiring to the bar is to be examined be¬ 
 fore admission, good bo <ks for instruction in 
 the law will be more tuan ever in request ”— 
 Law Times. 
 
 “ It is difficult to know which to praise most, 
 the excellence and dignity of the style, or the ex¬ 
 haustiveness of the information furnished to the 
 reader. . Mr. Goldsmith's plan corresponds to 
 
 some extent with that adopted by Mr. Haynes 
 in his excell nt 'Outlines of Equity,’ but hiH 
 work is more complete than that of Mr. Haynes. 
 —Law Etaminatton Journal. 
 
 “ I he whole work is elaborated by Mr. Gold¬ 
 smith with evident care, and a determination to 
 deal with all that can come within the scope of the 
 ti le. It is characterized by comprehensiveness 
 and at the same time conciseness, by clearness of 
 diction and attractiveness of style and avoidance 
 of technicalities which might prove embarrassing 
 to the student, ai.d a close adherence to the pur¬ 
 pose as expressed in the preface. l\Ir. Gold 
 smith’s volume is marked by as much originality 
 as well can be found in a work of its kind.”— 
 Law Journal. 
 
 " Altogether the author’s method and his exe¬ 
 cution are alike commendable—and we are of 
 opinion that the lawyer, who, as a student, 
 avails himself of the primary intention of Mr. 
 Goldsmith’s work by finding in it his first equity 
 reading book or primer, will afterwards verify 
 the anticipation of the author by making of it 
 dilectu juvenili or vade mecum in his later prac¬ 
 tice.”— Law Magazine, ind notice. 
 
 Lewis’s Introduction to Equity Drafting. 
 
 Post 8vo., 12«. cloth. 
 
 PRINCIPLES of EQUITY DRAFTING; with an Appendix 
 of Forms. By Hubert Lewis, B.A., of the Middle Temple, Barrister at 
 Law ; Author of ‘‘ Principles of Conveyancing,’’ &c. 
 
 Lewis’s Introduction to Conveyancing. 
 
 8vo., 185. cloth. 
 
 PRINCIPLES of CONVEYANCING explained and illus- 
 trated Concise Precedents; with an Appendix on the effect of the Trans¬ 
 fer of Land Act in modifying and shortening Conveyances. By Hubert 
 Lewis, B.A., late Scholar of Emmanuel College, Cambridge, of the Middle 
 Temple, Barrister at Law. _ 
 
 Hare on Discovery.—Second Edition. 
 
 Post 8 VO., 12s. cloth. 
 
 A TREATISE ON THE DISCOVERY OF EVIDENCE 
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. Being a Second Edition of 
 A TREATISE ON THE DISCOVERY OF EVIDENCE BY BILL 
 
 AND ANSWER IN EQUITY, by Thomas Hare, of the Inner Temple, 
 Esq., Barrister at Law. Adapted to tlie Procedure under the Supreme 
 Court of Judicature Acts and Rules, 1873 and 1875, by Sherlock Hare, 
 
 of the Inner Temple, Esq., Barrister 
 
 ” We have read his work with considerable 
 attention and interest, and we can speak in 
 terms of cordial praise of the manner in which 
 the new procedure has been worked into the 
 old material. Not that the old material has 
 been allowed to remain unimproved. In 
 many instances necessary changes and amend¬ 
 ments have been made, evincing a thorough 
 appreciation of the necessities of the case on 
 the part of the learned editor. We purposely 
 abstain from referring to the details of the 
 book. ‘ Hare on Discovery ’ has long been 
 well known, it must now become better known. 
 All the sections and orders of the new legis- 
 
 at Law. 
 
 lation are referred to in the text, a synopsis of 
 recent cases is given, and a good index com¬ 
 pletes the whole.”—Aou? Times. 
 
 ” The original work speedily became an au¬ 
 thority on this subject, and has been for years 
 a recognized text-book among the profession 
 and the courts, and we are pleased to see that 
 the present editor has in no way abated his 
 care in noting up the new cases and explaining 
 the present law and practice, so that in all 
 essential points the present edition is a w orthy 
 successor to its predecessor.” — Irish Law 
 Times. 
 
 O 
 
Judicature Acts. By Locock Webb, Q.C. 
 
 1 vol. 8vo., price 215. cloth, 
 
 THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE ACTS, 1873 
 and 1875, with the Rules of Court, Forms, &c.; Consolidation of those 
 Statutes and Rules, and Practical Commentaries on the Rules of Law the 
 Jurisprudence and Judicature of the Supreme Court, the Practice ot on 
 Appeals to the Court and Appeals to the House of Lords. A copious 
 Index. By Locock Webb, Esq., one of her Majesty’s Counsel. 
 
 Caches’ Town Councillors and Burgesses Manual. 
 
 Rost 8VO., 75. cloth. 
 
 THE TOWN COUNCILLORS and BURGESSES MANUAL, 
 a Popular Digest of Municipal and Sanitary Law, with information as to 
 Charters of Incorporation, and a Collection of useful Forms espemally 
 adapted for newly Incorporated Boroughs. By Louis Gaches, L.L.M., B. A., 
 of the Inner Temple, Esq., Barrister at Law. 
 
 “ Mr. Gaches undoubtedly supplies a want in 
 popularizing the subject, and making it familiar 
 and easily intelligible to minds not endowed 
 with any great faculty of research.”— Times. 
 
 *' Mr. Gaches has drawn together within a 
 short compass the statutory provisions relating 
 to municipal corporations and the administraUon 
 of sanitary law, and he has printed them in a 
 
 neat and convenient form. It should be added 
 that the appendix to the work contains a large 
 number of useful f orois.”— Solicitors' Journal. 
 
 “ I'he object is excellent. A town councillor 
 who reads Mr. Gaches’ book will be more likely 
 to discharge his duties efficiently than a town 
 councillor who has not read any book on muni¬ 
 cipal and sanitary authority.”— Law Journal. 
 
 Kerr’s Action at Law.—Third Edition. 
 
 12mo., 95. cloth. 
 
 AN ACTION AT LAW : being an Outline of the Jurisdiction 
 of the Superior Courts of Common Law, with an Elementary View of the 
 Proceedings in Actions therein. By Robert Malcolm Kerr, Barrister 
 at Law; now Judge of the Sheriff’s Court of the City of London. Third 
 Edition. 
 
 “ There is considerable merit in both works that of Mr. John William Smith, and is therefore 
 
 ( John William Smith’san.i Molcolm Kerr’s); but belter adapted for those who desire to obtain not 
 
 the second (Kerr) has rather the advantage.”— merely a general notion but also a practical ac- 
 
 Jurist. Quaintance with Common Law Procedure ” — 
 
 ” Mr. Kerr’s book is more full and detailed than Solicitors' Journal. 
 
 Tudor’s Leading Cases on Real Property, &c.—2nd Edit. 
 
 One thick vol. royal 8vo., 425. cloth. 
 
 A SELECTION OF LEADING CASES on the LAW 
 RELATING to REAL PROPERTY, Conveyancing, and the Construc¬ 
 tion of Wills and Deeds; with Notes. By Owen Davies Tudor, Esq., 
 of the Middle Temple, Barrister at Law. Author of “ A Selection of Lead¬ 
 ing Cases in Equity.” Second Edition. 
 
 ” The Second Edition is now before u.s, and 
 we are able to say that the same extensive 
 knowledge and the same laborious industry as 
 have been exhibited by Mr. i'udor on former 
 occasions characterize this later production of 
 his legal authorship; and it is enough at this 
 moment to reiterate an opinion that Mr. Tudor 
 has well maintained the high legal reputation 
 which his standard works have achieved in all 
 countries where the Knglish language is spoken, 
 and the decisions of our Courts are quoted.*' 
 —Law Magazine and Revieu. 
 
 “ J’he work before us comprises a digest of 
 decisions which, if not exhaustive of all the 
 l>rinciples of our real property code, will at 
 least be found to leave nothing untouched or 
 unelaborated under the numerous legal doc¬ 
 trines to which the cases severally relate. To 
 Mr. Tudor’s treatment of all these subjects, so 
 • omplicated and so varied, we accord our entire 
 commendation. There are no omissions of any 
 impnriant cases relative to the various branches 
 of the law comprised in the work, nor are there 
 any omissions or defects in his statement of the 
 
 law itself applicable to the cases discussed by 
 him. We cordially recommend the work to the 
 practitioner and the student alike, but espe¬ 
 cially to the former.”— Solicitors' Journal. 
 
 ” This and the other volumes of Mr. I'udor are 
 almost a law library in themselves, and we are 
 satisfied that the student would learn more 
 law from the careful reading of them than he 
 would acquire from double the time given to 
 the elaborate treatises which learned professors 
 recommend the student to peruse, with entire 
 forgetfulness that time and brains are limited, 
 and that to do what they advise would be the 
 work of a life. Smith and Mr. Tudor will to¬ 
 gether give them such a knowledge of law as 
 they could not obtain from a whole library of 
 text books, and of law that will be useful every 
 day, instead of law that they will not want 
 three times in their lives. At this well the 
 practising lawyer might beneficially refresh his 
 memory by a draught, when a leisure hour will 
 
 F ermit him to study a leading case No law 
 ihrary should be without this most usetul 
 book,”— Law Times. 
 
•o 
 
 o -- 
 
 MESSRS. BUTTERWORTH, 7, FLEET STREET, E.C. 23 
 
 Chute’s Equity in Relation to Common Law. 
 
 Post 8 VO., ds. cloth. 
 
 EQUITY UNDER THE JUDICATURE ACT, OR THE 
 BELATION OF EQUITY TO COMMON LAW: with an Appendix, 
 containing the Hijjh Court of Judicature Act, 1873, and the Schedule of 
 
 Rules. By Chaloner William C 
 Magdalen College, Oxford; LecHirer 
 Great Britain. 
 
 “His manner is eminently philosophical, 
 and proves the capacity of the author for the 
 position of a lecturer, while it is just the kind 
 of teaching by which students are attracted to 
 the light. Students may here congratulate 
 themselves on the possibility of finding, within 
 the limits of two hundred pages, many of the 
 chief doctrines of Equity, set forth briefly, 
 lucidly and comp\eie\y."—Law Journal. 
 
 “ We may add that his style presents a very 
 agreeable contrast to the general style of law 
 books. In conclusion, we would heartily re¬ 
 commend this most instructive and interesting 
 wrirk to the perusal of the student .”—Law 
 Examination Journal. 
 
 “ The present volume can scarcely fail to 
 oecome a standard work on the subject of 
 which it treats. Mr. Chute has one special 
 virtue for which his readers will be thankful— 
 the method and arrangement—which are spe¬ 
 cially valuable in a book of this kind.”—J/or»- 
 ing Post. 
 
 “The book is deserving of praise, both for 
 clearness of exposition and for the interesting 
 
 !hute. Barrister at Law; Fellow of 
 to the Incorporated Law Society of 
 
 way in which modern cases are used to illus¬ 
 trate the doctrines expounded. As it stands 
 it appears to us to be a useful guide to the 
 leading principles of Equity Jurisprudence. 
 The book is written in easy and familiar lan¬ 
 guage, and is likely to prove more attractive 
 to the student than many formal treatises.” 
 — Solicitors' Journal, 
 
 “ He thinks clearly, writes very well. As a 
 small and meritorious contribution to the 
 history of jurisprudence it deserves to be 
 welcomed .”—Law Times. 
 
 “ The work is conscientiously done and will 
 be useful to the student at the present junc¬ 
 ture. ” 
 
 “ Mr. Chute’s book is founded upon lectures 
 delivered by him to the students at the Law 
 Institution. The object of it is to point out 
 concisely the principles on which the doctrines 
 of Equity depend, and to show the relation of 
 Equity to the Common Law, and the work is 
 a useful one for the class of persons to whom 
 the lectures are delivered.”— Athenceum. 
 
 Tomkins and Jencken’s Modem Roman Law. 
 
 8vo., 14^. cloth. 
 
 COMPENDIUM of the MODERN ROMAN LAW. Founded 
 upon the Treatises of Puclita, Von Vangerow, Arndts, Franz Moehler and 
 the Corpus Juris Civilis. By Frederick J. Tomkins, Esq., M.A., D.C.L., 
 Author of the Institutes of Roman Law,” Translator of “ Gains,” &c., 
 and Henry Diedrich Jencken, Esq., Barristers at Law, of Lincoln’s Inn. 
 
 “Mr. Tomkins and Mr. Jencken could not 
 have written such an excellent book as this if 
 they had not devoted many laborious days, 
 probably years, to the study of Roman Law in 
 its entirety, and to research into the laws of 
 continental states, for the purpose of learning 
 what principles of Roman Law are preserved 
 in their jurisprudence.”—Law Tirms. 
 
 “ To those who think with us that the study 
 of the modern civil law has been too much 
 neglected in the education of solicitors, the ad¬ 
 mirable book whose title we have above an¬ 
 nounced will be indeed invaluable.” — Law 
 Examination Journal. 
 
 Tudor’s Law of Charitable Trusts,—Second Edition. 
 
 Post 8vo., 18s. cloth. 
 
 THE LAW OF CHARITABLE TRUSTS; with the Statutes 
 to the end of Session 1870, the Orders, Regulations and Instructions, issued 
 pursuant thereto ; and a Selection of Schemes. By Owen Davies Tudor, 
 Esq., of the Middle Temple, Barrister-at-Law; Author of “ Leading Cases in 
 Equity;” “ Real Property and Conveyancing;” &c. Second Edition. 
 
 only to add that the index is very carefully 
 compiled.”— Solicitors' Journal. 
 
 “ Ml. Tudor’s excellent little book on Cha¬ 
 ritable Trusts. It is in all respects the text¬ 
 book for the lawyer, as well as a hand-book for 
 reference by trustees and others engaged in the 
 management of charities .”—Law Times. 
 
 “ No living writer is more capable than 
 Mr. Tudor of producing such a work: his 
 Leading Cases in Equity, and also on the 
 Law of Real Property, have deservedly earned 
 for him the highest reputation as a learned, 
 careful and judicious text-writer. We have 
 
 o 
 
LAW WORKS PUBLISHED BY 
 
 Phillimore’s Commentaries on International Law. 2nd Ed. 
 
 4 Vols. 8vo., Ql. 35. cloth. 
 
 COMMENTARIES on INTERNATIONAL LAW. By the 
 Rt. Hon. Sir Robert Phillimore, Knt., Member of H.M.’s Most Hon. 
 Privy Council, and Judge of the High Court of Admiralty of England. 
 
 *** For the convenience of purchasers, Vol. 1, price 25s., Vol. 2, price 2%s., Vol. 3, price 36s., and 
 Vol. 4, price 34s. cloth, may be had separately to complete sets. 
 
 Extract from Pamphlet on ^'•American Neutrality," by George Bemis {Boston, U.S.). —“Sir 
 Robert Phillimore, the present Queen’s Advocate, and author of the most comprehensive and 
 systematic ‘Commentary on International Law ’ that England has produced.” 
 
 ” The authority of this work is admittedly 
 great, and the learning and ability displayed 
 in its preparation have been recognized by 
 writers on public law both on the Continent of 
 Europe and in the United States. With this 
 necessarily imperfect sketch we must conclude 
 our notice of the first volume of a work which 
 forms an important contribution to the litera¬ 
 ture of public law. The book is of great utility, 
 and one which should find a place in the library 
 of every civilian.”— Law Magazine. 
 
 ” We cordially welcome a new edition of 
 vol. 1. It is a work that ought to be studied 
 by every educated man, and which is ol con¬ 
 stant use to the public writer and statesman. 
 We wish, indeed, that our public writers would 
 read it more abundantly than they have done, 
 as they would then avoid serious errors in dis¬ 
 cussing foreign questions. Any general criti¬ 
 cism of a book which has been received as a 
 standard work would be superfluous; but we 
 may remark, that whilst Sir Robert strictly ad¬ 
 heres to the canons of legal authorship,* and 
 never gives a statement without an authority 
 or offers a conclusion which is not manifestly 
 deducible from established facts or authorita¬ 
 tive utterances,yet so lucid is his style, we had 
 almost said so popular, so clear is the enunci¬ 
 ation of principles, so graphic the historical 
 portions, that the book may be read with plea¬ 
 sure as well as profit. It will not be out of 
 place to further remark, that the arrangement 
 is excellent, the table of contents, the list of 
 authorities are complete, and, therefore, these 
 Commentaries are singularly handy for refer¬ 
 ence. Altogether this work is a witness to the 
 zeal, industry and ability of Sir R. Phillimore. 
 It will not only be read at home, but also in the 
 United States, and it cannot fail to smooth the 
 way for the thorough international understand¬ 
 ing between England and America that the true 
 men of both countries so ardently desire.”— 
 Law Journal. 
 
 “ It is the most complete repository of mat¬ 
 ters bearing upon international law that we 
 have in the language. We need not repeat 
 the commendations of the text itself as a 
 treatise or series of treatises which this journal 
 expressed upon the appearance of the two 
 first volumes. The reputation of the Author 
 is too well established and too widely known. 
 We content ourselves with testifying to the 
 fulness and thoroughness of the work as a 
 compilation after an inspection of the three 
 volumes (second edition).”— (United 
 States) Daily Advertiser. 
 
 ” Sir Robert Phillimore may well be proud 
 of this work as a lasting record of his ability, 
 learning and his industry. No one, unless he 
 is a man of talent, can venture to deal with 
 such a difficult and involved subject as inter¬ 
 national law, and only an author of extensive 
 reading and untiring industry can deal with 
 it as exhaustively as Sir Robert has done. The 
 
 development of commerce has made inter¬ 
 national relations more intimate. It follows 
 that international law will be more studied, 
 not only by lawyers, but also by laymen, who 
 take part in public life, and whatever other 
 books the English lawyer or statesman may 
 use, he will, of course, include Phillimore’s 
 Commentaries in his list. Having read the 
 work carefully and critically, we are able to 
 highly recommend it. Usually when such a 
 work reaches a second edition critical com¬ 
 mendation is superfluous, but the present is 
 an exceptional case, because Phillimore’s Com¬ 
 mentaries will be of the greatest use to many 
 non-professional readers who, as public men 
 and public writers, find it necessary to study 
 internationallaw. It is in itself a well digested 
 body of laws.”— Law Journal (second notice). 
 
 “We have within a short period briefly 
 noticed the previous volumes of the important 
 work of which the fourth volume is now before 
 us. We have more than once recognized the 
 anility and profound research which the learned 
 author has brought to bear upon the subject, 
 but this last volume strikes us as perhaps the 
 most able and lucid, and, in addition to these 
 merits, it deals with a division of international 
 jurisprudence which is of very great interest, 
 namely, private international law or comity. 
 The issue of a second edition proves that it 
 has attained a position of autliority and is 
 favourably received by international jurists. 
 We have no grounds for impugning its accu¬ 
 racy, and as a compilation it must receive our 
 acknowledgment that it is able and learned.” 
 — Law Times. 
 
 “ The latest arrivals bring us Vol. 4 of this 
 great work : it is the close of the second edition 
 begun a few years ago. Sir Robert Phillimore 
 has one great advantage over new commenta¬ 
 tors on International Law, in that he is and 
 has always been a working publicist, judge and 
 parliamentarian and not a mere student of the 
 closet. It is his life long habit to look at 
 things in a practical way in the concrete and 
 to judge of propositions by their adaptation 
 tried or probable to the working world of 
 public transactions. The reputation and 
 authority of Dr. Phillimore on this side of 
 the water are too well known and established 
 to require any general commendation of this 
 work. It is enough to recognize the fact that 
 private international law is becoming of more 
 and more importance with the vastly increased 
 opportunities for private dealings between 
 citizens or inhabitants of different nationalities 
 and to changings of domicil and habitancy, 
 and to express gratitude that the learned, 
 experienced and thorough commentator has 
 made the latest contribution towards peace 
 and good understanding among civilized men.” 
 - Boston (United States) Daily Advertiser, Dec. 
 3rd, 1874 (second notice). 
 
MESSRS. BUTTERWORTH, 7, FLEET STREET, E. C. 25 
 
 Christie’s Crabb’s Conveyancing.—Fifth Edit, by Shelford. 
 
 Two vols. royal 8vo., 3/. cloth. 
 
 CRABB’S COMPLETE SERIES of PRECEDENTS in 
 CONVEYANCING and of COMMON and COMMERCIAL FORMS 
 in Alphabetical Order, adapted to the Present State of the Law and the 
 Practice of Conveyancing; with copious Prefaces, Observations and Notes 
 on the several Deeds. By J. T. Christie, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. The 
 Fifth Edition, with numerous Corrections and Additions, by Leonard 
 Shelford, Esq., of the Middle Temple, Barrister at Law. 
 
 *** This Work, which embraces both the Principles and Practice of Conveyancing, contains likewise 
 every description of Instrument wanted for Commercial Purposes. 
 
 General Table of Heads of Prefaces and Forms. 
 
 Abstracts.— Accounts. — Acknowledgments.—Acquittances.—Admittances.—Affidavits, Affir¬ 
 mations or Declarations.—Agreements: to relinquish Business: to Guarantee: for a 
 Lease: before Marriage: for a Partition: between Principal and Agent: for the Sale and 
 Purchase of Estates: for Sale of Copyhold Estates: for Sale of Leaseholds: for Sale of 
 an Advowson.—Annuity: secured on Copyholds.—Annuities: Assigments of.—Appoint¬ 
 ments: of Guardians.—Apportionment.—Apprenticeship : to the Sea Service: to an 
 Attorney : Assignment of.—Arbitration : Award.—Assignments : Bonds : Leases: Patents : 
 Pews : Policies of Insurance : Reversionary Interests.—Attestations.—Attornments.— 
 Auctions : Particulars of Sale.—Bargains and Sales: of Timber.—Bills of Sale of Goods. 
 —Bonds: Administration: Receiver pending Suit: Post Obit: Stamps on.—Certificates. 
 —Composition: Conveyances in Trust for Creditors.—Conditions: of Sale.—Confirmations. 
 —Consents.—Copartnership: Dissolution of Copartnership.—Covenants: Stamps on: for 
 Production of Title Deeds.—Declarations.—Deeds: I. Nature of Deeds in General: II. 
 Requisites of a Deed: III. Formal parts of Deeds: IV. Where a Deed is necessary or 
 otherwise: V. Construction of Deeds: VI. Avoiding of Deeds: VII. Proof of Deeds: 
 VIII. Admission of Parol Evidence as to Deeds: IX. Possession of Deeds : X. Stamp 
 Duty on Deeds.—Defeasances.—Demises—Deputation.—Disclaimers.—Disentailing Deeds. 
 —Distress: Notices of.—Dower.—Enfranchisements.—Exchanges—Feoffments.—Further 
 Charges.—Gifts.—Grants.—Grants of Way or Road.—Indemnities.—Leases . I. Nature 
 of Leases in General: II. Requisites to a Lease: III. Parts of a Lease: IV. Incidents to 
 a Lease : V. Stamps on Leases.—Letters of Credit.—Licences.—Mortgages : of Copyholds : 
 of Leaseholds: Transfer of; Stamp Duty on.—Notes, Orders, Warrants, &c.—Notices: to 
 Quit.—Partition.—Powers : of Attorney.—Presentation.—Purchase Deeds : Conveyance of 
 Copyholds : Assignments of Leaseholds: Stamps on.—Recitals.—Releases or Conveyances : 
 or Discharges.—Renunciations or Disclaimers.—Resignations.—Revocations.—Separation. 
 —Settlements: Stamp Duty on.—Shipping: Bills of Lading: Bills of Sale: Bottomry 
 and Respondentia Bonds : Charter Parties.—Surrenders.—Wills: 1. Definition of Will and 
 Codicil: 2. To what Wills the Act 7 Will. 4 & 1 Viet. c. 26 does not apply: 3. What may 
 be disposed of by Will: 4. Of the capacity of Pei sons to make Wills: 5. W ho may or may 
 not be Devisees ; 6. Execution of Wills: 7. Publication of Wills: 8. Revocation of Wills: 
 9. Lapse of Devises and Bequests; 10. Provisions and Clauses in Wilis: 11. Construction 
 of WiUs. 
 
 From the Law Times. 
 
 “ The preparation of it could not have been con¬ 
 fided to more able hands than those of Mr. Shel- 
 lord.the veteran authority on real property law. 
 With the industry that distinguishes him he has 
 done ample justice to his task. In carefulness we 
 have in him a second Crabb, in erudition Crabb’s 
 superior ; and the result is a work of which the 
 original author w’ould have been proud, could it 
 have appeared under his own auspices. It is not 
 a book to be quoted, nor indeed could its merits be 
 exhibited by quotation. It is essentially a book ol 
 practice, which can only be described in rude out¬ 
 line and dismissed with applause, and a recom¬ 
 mendation of it to the notice of those for whose 
 service it has been so laboriously compiled.” 
 
 From the Solicitors' Journal. 
 
 “ The collection of precedents contained in these 
 two volumes are all that could be desired. 1 hey 
 are particularly well adapted foi Solicitors,being 
 of a really practical character. They are more¬ 
 over free from the useless repetitions of common 
 forms that so much increase the bulk and expense 
 of some collectionsthat we could name. VVeknow 
 not of any collection of conveyancing precedents 
 that would make it so possible for a tyro to put 
 together a presentable draft at an exigency, or 
 which are more handy in every respect, even lor 
 
 the experienced draftsman. Mr. Shelford has 
 
 K roved nimself in this task to be not unworthy of 
 is former reputation, lo those familiar with his 
 other works it will be asufficieutrecommendation 
 of this.” 
 
 From the Law Magazine and Review. 
 
 “ J o this important part of his duty—the remo¬ 
 delling and perfecting of the Forms-even with 
 the examination which we have already been able 
 to afford this work, we are able to affirm, that the 
 learned editor has been eminently successful and 
 effected valuable improvements.” 
 
 From the Law Chronicle* 
 
 “ It possesses one distinctive feature in devoting 
 more attention than usual in such works to forms 
 of a commercial nature We are satisfied from 
 anexaminationof the present with theimmediaiely 
 preceding edition that Mr. .Shelford has very con¬ 
 siderably improved the character of the work, 
 both in the jirefaces and in the forms. On the 
 whole the two volumes of Crabb’s Precedents, as 
 edited by Mr. Leonard Shelford. will be found 
 extremely useful in a solicitor’s office, presenting 
 a large amount of real projierty learning, with 
 vervnumerousprecedents: indeed we knowof no 
 book sojustly entitled to the ajipellntion of * handy’ 
 as the fifth edition of Mr. Crabb’s Precedents ” 
 
•«» 
 
 26 
 
 LAW WORKS PUBLISHED BY 
 
 Mosely’s Articled Clerks’ Handy-Book. 
 
 l2mo., 7s. cloth. 
 
 A PRACTICAL HANDY-BOOK of ELEMENTARY LAW, 
 designed for the use of Articled Clerks, with a Course of Study and Hints on 
 Reading for the Intermediate and Final Examinations. By M. S. Mosely, 
 Solicitor, Clifford's Inn Prizeman, M. T. 1867. 
 
 ' This useful little book is intended for the use 
 of articled clerks during the period of their arti¬ 
 cles. Tlie style of this book is peculiar : it is an 
 exaggeration of the style adopted by Mr. Haynes 
 in his admirable ‘outlines of Equity.’ The 
 author seems to think the adoption of such a 
 style the only way to make the study of the law 
 popular, and we are not prepared to say he is 
 wrong.”— Law Magazine and Review. 
 
 ” 1 he design of this little book is to combine 
 instruction, advice and amusement, if anything 
 amusing can be extracted from the routine of a 
 solicitor’s office and the studies of articled clerks. 
 'J'he book will certainly be found useful by any 
 articled clerk, for it contains much information 
 which it is sometimes very troublesome to find, 
 and the facetiousness of Mr. Mosely’s manner 
 will doubtless help to grease the course of a 
 rough and uneasy sul ject.”—Law Journal. 
 
 ‘ There are few who read this book with care 
 who will not readily admit that on many intricate 
 points of law their notions have become much 
 clearer than before their acquaintance with it. 
 Both parts are well worked out, and will be found 
 useful; but in the second division of each chap¬ 
 ter the law student will find most valuable in¬ 
 formation, as there Mr. Mosely not only marks 
 out the course of reading which he recommends 
 for each year, but also carefully analyses the 
 contents of each book, and points out those 
 chapters and subjects which it will be most ad¬ 
 vantageous for the student to master at the first 
 reading, and those which he ought to defer till 
 a second perusal and a wider experience have 
 made him more competent to understand them. 
 '1 he style is remarkably good. and. considering 
 the sunject^ free from technical expressions.”— 
 Irith Law I'i/nes. 
 
 Rouse’s Copyhold Manual.—Third Edition. 
 
 12mo., 10s. 6d. cloth. 
 
 THE COPYHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT MANUAL, 
 
 giving the Law, Practice and Forms in Entrancbisements at Common Law 
 and under Statute, and in Commutations ; with the Values of Enfranchise¬ 
 ments from the Lord’s various Rights : the Principles of Calculation being 
 clearly explained, and made practical by numerous Rules, Tables and 
 Examples. Also all the Copyhold Acts, and several other Statutes and 
 Notes. Third Edition. By Rolla Rouse, Esq., of the Middle Temple, 
 Barrister at Law, Author of The Practical Conveyancer,” &c. 
 
 “ This new edition follows the plan of its pre¬ 
 decessor, adopting a fivefold division :—1. The 
 Taw. 2. The Practice, with Practical Sugges¬ 
 tions to Lords, Stewards and Copyholders. .3. 
 The Mathematical consideration of the Subject 
 in all its Details, with Rules,'J'ables and Exam¬ 
 ples. 4. Forms. 5. 1 he Statutes, with Notes. Of 
 these, we can only repeat what we have said before, 
 that they exhaust the subject ; they give to the 
 practitioner all the materials required by him to 
 conduct the enfranchisement of a copyhold, whe¬ 
 ther voluntary or compulsory ”— Law Times. 
 
 ” When we consider what favor Mr. Kouse’s 
 Practical Man and Practical Conveyancer have 
 found with the profession, we feel sure the legal 
 
 world will greet with pleasure a new and im¬ 
 proved edition of his copyhold manual. The 
 third edition of that work is before us. It is a 
 work of great practical •value, suitable to lawyers 
 and laymen. VVe can freely and heartily recom¬ 
 mend this volume to the practitioner, the steward 
 and the copyholder .”—Laro Magazine. 
 
 ” Now, however, that copyhold tenures are 
 being frequently converted into freeholds, Mr. 
 Rouse’s treatise will doubtless be productive of 
 very extensive benefit; for it seems to us to have 
 been very carefully prepared, exceedingly well 
 composed and written, and to indicate much ex¬ 
 perience in copyhold law on the part of the 
 author.”—•Sn/ici/gfi’ Jouiiial. 
 
 
 Shelford’s Succession, Probate and Legacy Duties. 
 Second Edition. 
 
 12mo., 165. cloth. 
 
 THE LAW relating to the PROBATE, LEGACY and 
 SUCCESSION DUTIES in ENGLAND, IRELAND and SCOTLAND, 
 including all the Statutes and the Decisions on those Subjects: with Forms 
 and Official Regulations. By Leonard Shelford, Esq., of the Middle 
 Temple, Barrister-at-Law. The Second Edition, with many Alterations and 
 Additions. 
 
 The book is written mainly for solicitors. 
 Mr Shelford has accordingly planned his work 
 with careful regard to its practical utility and 
 aauy use.”— Solicitors' Journal. 
 
 ‘ One of the most useful and popular of his 
 productions, and being now the text book on me 
 
 subject nothing remains but to make known its 
 appearance to our readers. Its merits have been 
 already tested by most of them.”— Law Times 
 ” On the whole Mr. Shelford’s book appears’ to 
 us to be the best and most complete work on this 
 extremely intricate subject.”—Laa; Magazine 
 
 © 
 
 
MESSRS. BUTTERWORTH, 7, FLEET STREET, E. C. 
 
 Baxter’s Judicature Acts and Rules, 1873-5.— 2nd Edit. 
 
 Rewritten and much Enlarged. Crown 8vo., with Supplement, 10s. 6c?. cloth. 
 
 THE LAW AND PRACTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT 
 OF JUDICATURE, comprising the Supreme Court of Judicature Acts, 
 1873 and 1875; Rules of Court, Forms, Notes arranged section by section. 
 Statutes referred to, and a very copious Index. By Wynne E. Baxter, 
 Solicitor of the Supreme Court. Second Edition. With Supplement, con¬ 
 taining the Scale of Fees to be taken under the Act. The Supplement 
 separately, Qd. sewed. 
 
 Woolrych’s Law of Sewers.—Third Edition. 
 
 8vo., 125. cloth. 
 
 A TREATISE of the LAW of SEWERS, including the 
 DRAINAGE ACTS. By Humphry W. Woolrych, Serjeant at Law. 
 Third Edition, with considerable Additions and Alterations. 
 
 “ Two editions of it have been speedily ex¬ 
 hausted, and a third called for. The author 
 is an accepted authority on all subjects of this 
 class.”—Z,ctt7 Times. 
 
 “ This is a third and greatly enlarged edition 
 of a book which has already obtained an esta¬ 
 blished reputation as the most complete dis¬ 
 cussion of the subject adapted to modern 
 times. Since the treatise of Mr. Serjeant 
 Callis in the early part of the 17th century, 
 
 no work filling the same place has been added 
 to the literature of the Profession. It is a work 
 of no slight labour to digest and arrange this 
 mass of legislation; this task, however, Mr. 
 Serjeant Woolrych has undertaken, and an 
 examination ol his book will, we think, con¬ 
 vince the most exacting that he has fully 
 succeeded. No one should attempt to meddle 
 with the Law of Sewers without its help.”— 
 Solicitors' Journal. 
 
 Grant’s Law of Corporations in General. 
 
 Royal 8vo., 26s. boards. 
 
 A PRACTICAL TREATISE on the LAW of CORPORA¬ 
 TIONS in GENERAL, as well Aggregate as Sole; including Municipal 
 Corporations; Railway, Banking, Canal, and other Joint-Stock and Trading 
 Bodies; Dean and Chapters; Universities; Colleges; Schools; Hospitals; 
 with quasi Corporations aggregate, as Guardians of the Poor, Church¬ 
 wardens, Churchwardens and Overseers, etc.; and also Corporations sole, as 
 Bishops, Deans, Canons, Archdeacons, Parsons, etc. By James Grant, 
 Esq., of the Middle Temple, Barrister at Law. 
 
 J. Chitty, jun’s. Precedents in Pleading.—Third Edition. 
 
 Complete in 1 vol. royal 8vo., 385. cloth. 
 
 J. CHITTY, JuN s. PRECEDENTS in PLEADING; with 
 copious Notes on Practice, Pleading and Evidence. Third Edition. By 
 the late Tompson Chitty, Esq., and by Leofric Temple, R. G. Wil¬ 
 liams, and Charles Jeffery, Esquires, Barristers at Law. (Part 2 
 may, for the present, be had separately, price 185. cloth, to complete sets.) 
 
28 law works published BY 
 
 Scriven’s Law of Copyholds.—5th Edit, by Stalman. 
 
 Abridged in 1 vol. royal 8vo., 80s. cloth. 
 
 A TREATISE ON COPYHOLD, CUSTOMARY FREE¬ 
 HOLD and ANCIENT DEMESNE TENURE, with the Jurisdiction of 
 Courts Baron and Courts Leet. By John Schiven, Serjeant at Law. 
 Fifth Edition, containing references to Cases and Statutes to 1867. By 
 Henry Stalman, of the Inner Temple, Esq., Barrister at Law. 
 
 “No lawyer can see or hear the word ‘copy- 
 hold’ without associating with it the name of 
 Scriven, wnose book has been always esteemed 
 not merely the best but the only one of any 
 worth. Until a commutation of the tenure for 
 a fixed rent-charge, after the manner of a tithe 
 commutation, is compelled by the legislature, 
 this treatise will lose none of its usefulness to the 
 solicitors in the country.’’—Law Times. 
 
 “ It would be wholly superfiuous to offer one 
 word of comment on the general boily of the 
 work. Scriven on Copyholds has for exactly 
 
 half a century been not only a standard work 
 but one of unimpeachable authority, and in its 
 pages the present generation has learned all that 
 is known of copyhold and customary tenures. 
 All that is necessary to say is, that in the pre¬ 
 sent edition of Scriven on Copyholds Mr. Stal- 
 nian has omitted what it was useless to retain, 
 and inserted what it was necessary to add. 
 Until copyholds have disappeared utterly, it is 
 at least certain that Scriven on Copyholds by 
 Stalman wilt hold undisputed sway in the pro¬ 
 fession .’’—Law Journal. 
 
 Davis’s Law of Registration and Elections. 
 
 One small 12mo. vol., 15^. cloth. 
 
 manual of the law and practice of elec¬ 
 tions AND REGISTRATION. Comprising all the Statutes, with Notes 
 and Introduction, and a Supplement containing the Cases on Appeal down 
 to 1869, the Rules relating to Election Petitions, and a complete Index 
 to the whole Work. By James Edward Davis, Esq., Barrister at Law, 
 Author of “ Manual of Practice and Evidence in the County Courts,&c. 
 
 “ A work, which, in our judgment, is the han¬ 
 diest and most useful of the manuals which the 
 Iteform Act of 1867 has brought into existence.” 
 — Lav) Magazine. 
 
 “ We think this the best of the now numerou.s 
 works on this subject. It has a great advantage 
 in its arrangement over those which are merely 
 new editions of works published before the recent 
 legislation. To read through consecutively, in 
 
 The Supplement may he I 
 
 order to obtain a fair mastery of the whole sub¬ 
 ject, we^iave no hesitation in highly recommend 
 ing this work.”— Solicitors' Journal. 
 
 “No one comes forward with better credentials 
 than Mr. Davis, and the book before us seems to 
 possess the gualities essential to a guide to a 
 discharge of their duties l y the officials. The 
 scheme of Mr. Davis's work is very simple.”— 
 Law Journal 
 
 I sejjarately, price 3s. sewed. 
 
 Browning’s Divorce and Matrimonial Causes Practice. 
 
 Post 8 vo., 85 . cloth. 
 
 THE PRACTICE and PROCEDURE of the COURT for 
 DIVORCE and MATRIMONIAL CAUSES, including the Acts, Rules, 
 Orders, copious Notes of Cases and Forms of Practical Proceedings, 
 with Tables of Fees and Bills of Costs. By W. Ernst Browning, Esq., 
 Barrister at Law. 
 
 Brandon’s Law of Foreign Attachment. 
 
 8vo., 14s. cloth. 
 
 A TREATISE upon the CUSTOMARY LAW of FOREIGN 
 ATTACHMENT, and the PUACTICE of the MAYOR’S COURT of the 
 CITY OF LONDON therein. With Forms of Procedure. By Wood- 
 THORPE Brandon, Esq., of the Middle Temple, Barrister at Law. 
 
•o 
 
 
 Miissns. BUTTERWORTH, 7, FLEET STREET, E.C. 29 
 
 iWr. ©fers iDftagiistrrtal aJBorlts* 
 
 Oke’s Laws as to Licensing Inns, 1874, &c. &c.; con- 
 
 taininjj the Licensing Acts, 1872 and 1874, and the other Acts in force as 
 to Alehouses, Beer-houses, Wine and Refreshment-houses, Shops, &c., 
 where Intoxicating Liquors are sold, and Billiard and Occasional Licences. 
 Systematically arranged, with Explanatory Notes, the authorized Forms of 
 Licences, Tables of Offences, Index, &c. By George C. Oke, late Chief 
 Clerk to the Lord Mayor of London. Second Edition, by W. C. Glen, 
 Esq., Barrister at Law. Post 8vo., 10s. cloth. 
 
 “ A new edition of the late Mr. Oke’s care¬ 
 fully prepared manual is rendeied necessary by 
 recent changes in the law, and Mr. Glen has 
 done his work well. He has made the book of 
 1872 available as a book of reference in 1874. 
 It is very fortunate that there is a well indexed 
 treatise to refer to, for lawyers may have a 
 great deal of business in respect of the last 
 Licensing Act.” — Law Journal, Sept. 12ih, 
 1874. 
 
 “ Mr. Oke has brought out by far the best 
 edition of the act, or perhaps we should say a 
 treatise on it. Everything appears to be given 
 which can by possibility be required, and the 
 forms are abundant.”— Law Times. 
 
 “ We have to acknowledge a second edition 
 of the late Mr. Oke’s Licensing Law, edited by 
 Mr. W. C. Glen. Recent legislation has been 
 added so as to make the work a complete book 
 of reference on the subject of which it treats 
 down to the present time.”— Law Times {second 
 notice). 
 
 “This treatise on the Licensing Laws is 
 accurate and thoroughly practical. Of Mr. 
 Oke’s treatment of his subject we can speak 
 with the highest praise. The book will no 
 doubt at once take its place as the recognized 
 guide for those who have to do with licensing 
 
 law. The table of offences is especially valu¬ 
 able.”—<So7icrtor'5* Journal. 
 
 “ The arrangement in chapters by Mr. Oke 
 seems to us better than the plan pursued by 
 the authors of the rival work, and w’e think 
 that Mr. Glen has done well to le^ve in many 
 cases a concise statement of the effect of the 
 legislation repealed by the late Act. He also 
 gives a useful list of places beyond the metro¬ 
 politan district, and in the police district.”— 
 SolicitorJ Journal {second notice). 
 
 “ Messrs. Butterworth have judiciously con¬ 
 fided the task of revision to the pen of Mr. 
 Cunningham Glen ; the whole is comprised in 
 a well got up volume of 353 pages. Both the 
 table of contents and the index are capitally 
 .arranged, and afford every facility for refer¬ 
 ence.”— Brewers' Guardian. 
 
 “ We can pronounce a favourable opinion 
 with a clear conscience, and that verdict is, 
 that for fulness, perspicuity, careful indexing 
 and exhaustive treatment of dubious and de- 
 bateable points, this neatly printed volume is 
 the most comprehensive, convenient and re¬ 
 liable digest of the often indigestible licensing 
 laws that has yet appeared.”— Licensed Vic¬ 
 tuallers' Gazette. 
 
 Oke’s Magisterial Synopsis ; a Practical Guide for 
 
 Magistrates, their Clerks, Attomies, and Constables; Summary Convictions 
 and Indictable Offences, with their Penalties, Punishments, Procedure, &c., 
 being alphabetically and tabularly arranged: with a Copious Index. 
 Eleventh Edition, much enlarged. By George C. Oke, late Chief Clerk 
 to the Lord Mayor of London. In 2 vols. 8vo. 63s. cloth. 
 
 “The tenth edition of this valuable work 
 was published so recently as 1868, and this 
 fact is more eloquent of the merits of Mr. 
 Oke’s labours than any amount of commen¬ 
 dation from us. It is only necessary that we 
 should notice the appearance of this last 
 (eleventh) edition, 1872, which we do with 
 much pleasure.”— Law Times. 
 
 “This is the eleventh edition of Mr. Oke’s 
 work since 1848, a fact which speaks for itself. 
 The profession and the public have proved by 
 experience the excellence of the book; and 
 the personal supervision of the author is a 
 guarantee that the present edition is equal to 
 its predecessors. Mr. Oke’s labour in prepar¬ 
 ing it must have been considerable, and the 
 rapid growth of magisterial jurisdiction having 
 
 rendered it necessary to insert much new mat¬ 
 ter and to rewrite and condense no small por¬ 
 tion of the old. In the result, in spite of 
 every effort made to keep down the bulk of 
 the volume, it has been absolutely necessary 
 to add 200 pages. The whole Synopsis now 
 consists of nearly 1,600 pages of elaborately 
 arranged and carefully digested information. 
 It is needless to say that we cannot do more 
 than indicate in very general terms the con¬ 
 tents of this valuable work. Mr. Oke may 
 well be proud of it. The result of his labours 
 is highly creditable to him, and he deserves 
 the thanks of all who in any capacity are en¬ 
 gaged in the administration of justice.”— 
 Solicitor^ Journal. 
 
 Oke’s Magisterial Fonnulist; being a Complete Col- 
 
 lection of Fc rms and Precedents for practical use in all Cases out of Quarter 
 Sessions, and in Parochial Matters, by Magistrates, their Clerks, Attomies 
 and Constables. Fifth Edition, enlarged and improved. By Thomas 
 W. Saunders, Esq., Barrister at Law and Recorder of Bath. 8vo. 38s. 
 cloth. {Now ready.) 
 
 6 
 
 
o- 
 
 •o 
 
 30 LAW WORKS PUBLISHED BY 
 
 jfflr. ©fee’s iSlagistertal fflKotfes — continued. 
 
 Oke’s Law of Turnpike Roads; comprising the whole 
 
 of the General Acts now in force, including those of 1861 ; the Acts as to 
 Union of Trusts, for facilitating Arrangements with their Creditors, as to the 
 interference by Railways with Roads, their non-repair, and enforcing contri¬ 
 butions from Parishes, &c., practically arranged. With Cases, copious 
 Notes, all the necessary Forms, and an elaborate Index, &;c. By George 
 C. Oke. Second Edition. 12mo. 185. cloth. 
 
 “All Mr. Oke’s works are well done, and guidance of magistrates and legal practi- 
 his‘Turnpike Laws’ is an admirable speci- tioners in country districts.” — Solicitors' 
 men ot the class of books required for the Journal. 
 
 Shelford’s Law of Railways.—Fourth Edition by Glen. 
 
 In 2 thick vols. royal 8vo., 635. cloth. 
 
 SHELFORD’S LAW of RAILWAYS; containing the whole 
 of the Statute Law for the Regulation of Railways in England, Scotland 
 and Ireland: with copious Notes of Decided Cases upon the Statutes, In¬ 
 troduction to the Law of Railways, and Appendix of Official Documents. 
 Fourth Edition. By William Cunningham Glen, Barrister at Law, 
 
 Author of the “ Law of Highways,’^ 
 Government,’’ &c. 
 
 From the Law Magazine. 
 
 “Though we have not had the opportunity of 
 going conscientiously through the whole of this 
 elaborate compilation, we have been able to de¬ 
 vote enough time to it to be able to speak in the 
 highest terms of the judgment and ability with 
 which it has been prepared. Its execution quite 
 justifies the reputation which Mr. Glen has 
 already acquired as a legal writer, and proves 
 that no one could have been more_ properly 
 singled out for the duty he has so well discharged. 
 The work must take its unqnestiovahle position as 
 the leading Manual of the Railway Law oj Great 
 Britain. The cases seem to have been examined, 
 and their effect to be stated with much care and 
 accuracy, and no channel from which informa¬ 
 tion could he gained has been neglected. Mr. 
 Glen, indeed, seems to be saturated with know¬ 
 ledge of his subject. The value of the work is 
 reatly increased by a number of supplemental 
 ecisions, which give all the cases up to the 
 time of publication, and by an index which ap¬ 
 pears to be thoroughly exhaustive.” 
 
 From the La w Times. 
 
 “ Mr. Glen has done wisely in preserving that 
 reputation, and, as far as possible, the text of 
 Shelford—though very extensive alterations and 
 additions have been required, but he has a 
 claim of his own. He is a worthy successor of 
 the original author, and possesses much of the 
 same industry, skill in arrangement and astute¬ 
 ness in enumerating the points really decided 
 by cited cases. But we have said enough of a 
 work already so well known. It will have a 
 place not in the' library of the lawyer alone. It 
 is a book which every railway office should 
 keep on its shelf for reference.” 
 
 From the Law Jou r nal. 
 
 “ Mr. Glen has modestly founded his work as 
 a superstructure on that of Mr. Leonard bhellord, 
 but he has certainly claims to publish it a^ a 
 purely independent composition. The toil has 
 been as great, and the reward ought to be as 
 l oniplete, as if Mr. Glen had disregarded all his 
 predecessors in the production of treatises on 
 railway law. Since tha year 1864 he has been 
 
 “ Law of Public Health and Local 
 
 unceasingly engaged in collecting materials, and 
 though he has been ready for the printer for 
 some time, and has delayed the appearance of 
 the volumes in the expectation of legislative 
 changes in railway law. yet he has expended full 
 five years of care and attention on his work. 
 Let us hope that he will have no cau.oe to think 
 his labour has been in vain. At any rate we may 
 venture to predict that Mr. Cunningham Glen's 
 edition of Shelford on Railways will be the stan¬ 
 dard work of our day in that department of law." 
 
 From the Justice of the Peace. 
 
 “ Far be it from us to undervalue Mr. Shelford’s 
 labours, or to disparage his merits. But we may 
 nevertheless be pernoitted to observe that what 
 has hitherto been considered as the ‘ best work on the 
 subject' (Shelford) has been immeasurably im¬ 
 proved by the application of Mr. Glen's dilltgence 
 and learning. Sufficient, however, has been done 
 to show that it is in every respect worthy of the 
 reputation which the work has always enjoyed. 
 We feel little doubt that the credit of that work 
 will be greatly increased by Mr. Glen’s instru¬ 
 mentality, and that not only will he have ably 
 maintained its reputation by his successful exer¬ 
 tions, but that he will have added materially to 
 it.” 
 
 From the Solicitors’ Journal. 
 
 “ The practitioner will find here collected 
 together all the enactments bearing on every 
 possible subject which may come before him in 
 connection with railways or railway travelling. 
 Whatever questions may arise the lawyer who 
 has this book upon his shelves, may say to him¬ 
 self ‘ If there has been any legislation at all con¬ 
 nected with this branch of the subject I shall at 
 once find it in Shelford;’ and it needs not to be 
 said that on this account the bork will be a very 
 * comfortable’ one to possess. The collection is 
 equally exhaustive in the matterof rules, orders, 
 precedents and documents of offiftial authority. 
 To sura up our review; as a collection of 
 statutes and general information the work will 
 prove extremely useful, because in these respects 
 It is so perfectly exhaustive.” 
 
MESSRS. BUTTERWORTH, 7, FLEET STREET, E.C. 31 
 
 Crump’s Marine Insurance and General Average. 
 
 Iloyal 8 VO., 215. cloth. 
 
 THE PRINCIPLES of the LAW RELATING to MARINE 
 INSURANCE and GENERAL AVERAGE in England and America, 
 with occasional references to French and German Law. By Frederic 
 Octavius Crump, of the Middle Temple, Esq., Barrister at Law. 
 
 “ Three years have elapsed since the pub¬ 
 lication of an edition of a standard work on 
 Marine Insurance. During those years nume¬ 
 rous important cases have been decided—cases 
 establishing principles in many instances 
 novel and of the last consequence to parties 
 to policies. The author believes that all the 
 decisions reported up to the date of publication 
 will be found noted in his work .”—Extract 
 from Prtface. 
 
 “This is decidedly a clever book. We 
 always welcome cordially any genuine effort 
 to strike out a new line of legal exposition, 
 not merely because such effort may more 
 effectually teach law, but because it may 
 exhibit a better method than we now possess 
 of expressing law. The author does not ven¬ 
 ture to use the term ‘codification’ in speaking 
 of the design of this book. He is content if 
 he has made a single step in advance towards 
 simplification, and so much merit we have no 
 hesitation in awarding to him. From the 
 extracts we have made it is manifest that the 
 author has followed the fashion neither of the 
 ordinary text book nor the plan of a digest of 
 cases, but that he has developed a method 
 nearly approaching to ‘ codification.’ We have 
 been at pains to search the book for many of 
 the most recent cases in marine insurance, 
 and although some of them are exactly of a 
 character to puzzle and embarrass a codifier, 
 Mr. Crump has dealt successfully with them. 
 We think we may fairly congratulate the 
 author upon the production of a work original 
 in design, excellent in arrangement, and as 
 complete as could fairly be expected .”—Law 
 Journal. 
 
 “The principles and practice of general 
 average are included in this admirable sum- 
 m ary. ’ ’— Standard. 
 
 “ Alphabetically arranged this work contains 
 a number of the guiding principles in the 
 judge-made law on this subject, which has got 
 into such a tangle of precedents that a much 
 less careful digest than that under the above 
 title would have been welcome to students as 
 well as merchants. Mr. Crump has made a 
 very commendable effort at brevity and clear¬ 
 ness.”— Economist. 
 
 “Theplan of the work differs materially, and, 
 we think, advantageously, from the ordinary 
 text-book. Commencing with the principle of 
 an alphabetical arrangement, Mr. Crump enu¬ 
 merates all the definitions and settled prin¬ 
 ciples of the branch of the law selected by 
 him for treatment, giving careful references 
 for every statement, but repudiating the per¬ 
 functory method of adhering slavishly to the 
 actual words of the authorities. By this sys¬ 
 tem several advantages are secured. We have 
 examined several of Mr. Crump’s propositions 
 in order to test him on these points, and the 
 result is decidedly in his favour. We have 
 no hesitation in commending the plan of Mr. 
 Crump’s book; its use in actual practice must, 
 of course, be the ultimate gauge of its accu- 
 racv and completeness; but from the tests 
 that we have applied we have little doubt 
 that it will stand the ordeal satisfactorily. 
 AthencBum. * j 
 
 “ His design is to compile a digested sum¬ 
 mary of rules, tersely expressed and easy of 
 
 © - 
 
 reference; and though such a work can never 
 supersede treatises like those of Arnould, 
 Phillips, or Duer, he has produced what will 
 be a very useful manual of reference and will 
 guide the practitioner to the sources where he 
 will find the principles more fully developed. 
 The work, which must have involved great 
 labour, appears to us to have been exe¬ 
 cuted with fulness, accuracy and fidelity, and 
 its value is much increased by references not 
 only to English and American decisions and 
 text-writers, but to the French and German 
 law on the same subject. Considering the 
 narrow compass within which it is comprised, 
 we have been surprised to find how complete 
 and comprehensive it appears to be; and if 
 further experience should justify the expecta¬ 
 tions which our perusal of it induces us to 
 form, Mr. Crump will not be disappointed in 
 his hope that he has made ‘ a step in advance 
 towards simplification—not to use the term 
 codification—of Solicitors'Journal. 
 
 “ There are many portions of it well ar¬ 
 ranged, and where the law is carefully and 
 accurately stated.”—iatri Magazine. 
 
 “It is at once a treatise and a dictionary on 
 the difficult and complicated branch of the 
 law with which it deals, and to which 
 Mr. Crump has in this volume done some¬ 
 thing to give an orderly simplicity.”— 
 
 News. 
 
 “ We rejoice at the publication of the book 
 at the head of this notice. Mr. Crump is a 
 bold man, for he has positively made an inno¬ 
 vation. Instead of a ponderous tome, replete 
 with obsolete law, useless authorities and 
 antiquated quotations, we have a handy, 
 clearly-written and well-printed book, seem 
 ingly containing the whole law on the subject, 
 in the shape of a digest of decided cases, in 
 the very words of the judges, and leaving 
 nothing doubtful and misleading to beguile 
 the reader. It is true that such a plan in¬ 
 creases the trouble of the author, but, as it 
 diminishes that of the reader, he may pardon 
 the irregularity. Seriously speaking, Mr. 
 Crump’s book seems very perfect, and is cer¬ 
 tainly very clear in its arrangement and com¬ 
 plete in its details, conscientiously going into 
 the most minute points and omitting nothing 
 of importance .”—Irish Law Times. 
 
 “ Mr. Crump has here compiled a work on 
 Marine Insurance and General Average, and 
 brought down the judicial decisions to April, 
 1875. The subject-matter of the book in every 
 instance is printed in large type, and the 
 clauses followed by smaller letters of refer¬ 
 ence. This makes the work convenient for 
 consultation, and the law cases being appended 
 to every paragraph with quotations from the 
 laws of foreign countries, its conciseness in 
 the mode of explanation tends to render the 
 author’s reasonings intelligible more readily 
 than they would otherwise have been if over¬ 
 laid by laborious dissertations upon the cases 
 and eft'ects of decisions on disputed points. 
 Mr. Crump enhances the value of his book by 
 naming the authorities from whence he derives 
 his information. Mr. Crump, we may observe, 
 in this treatise of tlie law of Average and 
 Insurance, has supplied a ready armoury of 
 reitience."—Shipping and Mercantile Gazette, 
 
Chadwick’s Probate Court Manual. 
 
 Royal 8vo., 12s. cloth. 
 
 EXAMPLES of ADMINISTRATION BONDS for the 
 COURT of* PROBATE; exhibiting the Principle of various Grants of 
 Administration, and the correct Mode of preparing the Bonds in respect 
 thereof; also Directions for preparing the Oaths, arranged for practical 
 utility. With Extracts from the Statutes; also various Forms of Affirmation 
 prescribed by Acts of Parliament, and a Supplemental Notice, bringing the^ 
 work down to 1865. By Samuel Chadwick, of Her Majesty’s Court of 
 Probate. 
 
 * We undertake to say that the po.«*session of 
 this volume by practitioners will prevent many 
 a hitch and awkward delay, provoking to the 
 lawyer himself and difficult to be satisfactorily 
 explained to the clients.”—La?*; Magazine and 
 Review. 
 
 “ Mr. Chadwick's volume will be a necessary 
 
 E art of the law library of the practitioner, for he 
 as collected precedents that are in constant re¬ 
 quirement. This is purely a book of practice, 
 but therefore the more valuable. It tells the 
 reader what to do, and that is the information 
 most required after a lawyer begins to practise.” 
 —Law Times. 
 
 Glen’s Poor Law Orders.—Seventh Edition. 
 
 Post 8vo., 2 I 5 . cloth. 
 
 The GENERAL CONSOLIDATED and other ORDERS of 
 the POOR LAW COMMISSIONERS and the POOR LAW BOARD; 
 with explanatory Notes elucidating the Orders, Tables of Statutes, Cases 
 and Index to the Orders and Cases. By W. C. Glen, Esq., Barrister at 
 Law. Seventh Edition. 
 
 Bulley and Bund’s Bankruptcy Manual: with Supplement. 
 
 12mo., 105. cloth. 
 
 A MANUAL of the LAW and PRACTICE of BANK¬ 
 RUPTCY as Amended and Consolidated by the Statutes of 1869: with an 
 APPENDIX containing the Statutes, Orders and Forms. By John F. 
 Bulley, B.A., of the Inner Temple, Esq., Barrister at Law, and 
 J. W. Willis-Bund, M.A., LL.B., of Lincoln’s Inn, Esq., Barrister at 
 Law. With Supplement, including the Orders to 30th April, 1870. 
 
 The Supplement viay he had separately^ Is. sewed, 
 
 Coombs’ Manual of Solicitors’ Bookkeeping. 
 
 8vo., IO 5 . <ad. cloth. 
 
 A MANUAL of SOLICITORS’ BOOKKEEPING: com¬ 
 prising Practical Exemplifications of a Concise and Simple Plan of Double 
 Entry, with Forms of Account and other Books relating to Bills, Cash, &c., 
 showing their Operation, giving Instructions for Keeping, Posting and 
 Balancing them, and Directions for Drawing Costs, adapted to a large or 
 small, sole or partnership business. By W. B. Coombs, Law Accountant 
 and Costs Draftsman. 
 
 *** The various Account Boohs described in the above System^ the forms of 
 which are copyright^ may be had from the Publishers at the prices 
 stated in the worh^ page 274. 
 
 “ It adds some excellent instructions for 
 drawing bills of costs. Mr. Coombs is a 
 practical man, and has produced a practical 
 book .”—Law Times. 
 
 “He has performed his task in a masterly man¬ 
 ner, and in doing so has given the wliy and the 
 wherelore of the whole system of Solicitors’ 
 Bookkeeping. The volume is the most compre¬ 
 hensive we remember to have seen on the sub¬ 
 ject, and from the clear and intelligible manner 
 in which the whole has been worked out it will 
 render it unexceptionable in the hands of the 
 student and the practitioner .”—Law Magazine. 
 
 “ So clear do the instructions appear, that a 
 
 tyro of average skill and abilities, with applica¬ 
 tion, could under ordinary circumstances open 
 and keep the accounts of a busi ness; and, so far 
 as we can judge, the author has succeeded in 
 his endeavour to divest Solicitors’ Bookkeeping 
 of complexity, and to be concise and simple, 
 without being inefficient .”—Law Journal 
 “This is not merely a valuable addition to 
 the library of every solicitor, it is a book that 
 every articled clerk, now that intermediate 
 examinations embrace bookkeeping, will be 
 read with profit and benefit to himself. It 
 may be fairly said to exhaust the subject of 
 which it treats.”— Journal, 
 
 
A- 
 
 MESSRS. BUTTERWORTH, 7, FLEET STREET, E.C. 33 
 
 Hertslet’s Commercial Treaties. 
 
 12 vols., 8 VO., \il. 155. boards. 
 
 HERTSLET’S TREATIES of Commerce, Navigation, Slave 
 Trade, Post Office Communications, Copyright, &c., at present subsisting 
 between Great Britain and Foreign Powers. Compiled from Authentic 
 Documents by Edward Hertslet, Esq., C.B., Librarian and Keeper of 
 the Papers of the Foreign Office. 
 
 Vol. 1, price 125. ; Vol. 2, price 125. ; Vol. 3, price I 85 . ; Vol. 4, price I 85 .; 
 Vol. b, price 20s.; Vol. 0^ price 25s.; Vol. price 305.; Vol. % price 305.; 
 Vol. 0, price 305.; Vol. 10^ price 305.; Vol. W^ptrice 305.; Vol. \2y price 
 405. ; may he had separately to complete sets. Vol. 12 includes an Index 
 of Subjects to the Twelve published VolumeSy which Index is also sold 
 separatelyy price IO 5 . cloth. 
 
 Hertslet’s Treaty Map of Europe. 
 
 3 vols., royal 8vo., VI. 145. Od. cloth. 
 
 THE “MAP of EUROPE” by Treaty, 1814—1875, shewing 
 the various political and territorial changes which have taken place since 
 the General Peace of 1814. Numerous Notes and Coloured Maps are 
 also added, as well as a copious Index. By Edward Hertslet, C.B., 
 Librarian and Keeper of the Papers, Foreign Office. 
 
 *** The icork contains Declarations of War; Treaties of Peace and Boundary; Decrees annexing 
 Territory; Protests; Treaties for Maintaining the Balance of Power tn Europe, and for the 
 Guarantee of the Independence and Neutrality of Certain States, &€., d'c., d:e.; with a 
 Description of the Deliberations of European Conferences. 
 
 Hertslet’s Treaties on Trade and Tariffs. 
 
 In royal 8vo. 
 
 TREATIES and TARIFFS regulating the Trade between Great 
 Britain and Foreign Nations, and Extracts of the Treaties between 
 Foreign Powers, containing “ Most Favoured Nation” Clauses applicable 
 to Great Britain in force on the 1st January, 1875. By Edward 
 Hertslet, Esq., C.B., Librarian and Keeper of the Papers of the Foreign 
 Office. Part I.— Austria^ Is. 6d. cloth. Part II.— Turkey^ 155. cloth. 
 
 “ This is one of a series of valuable works our comniexcial relations with Turkey.”— 
 hearing on the trade of England and loreign Standard. 
 nations, the present instalment dealing with 
 
 Wills on Circumstantial Evidence.—Fourth Edition. 
 
 8vo., IO5. cloth. 
 
 AN ESSAY on the PRINCIPLES of CIRCUMSTANTIAL 
 
 EVIDENCE. Illustrated by numerous Cases. By the late William 
 Wills, Esq. Fourth Edition, edited by his Son, Alfred Wills, Esq., 
 Barrister at Law. 
 
34 
 
 LAW WORKS PUBLISHED BY 
 
 Dr. Tristram’s Probate Contentious Practice.—7tli Edit. 
 
 In 1 vol. 8VO., cloth. 
 
 THE CONTENTIOUS PRACTICE OF THE PROBATE 
 DIVISION OF THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. By T. H. Tristram, 
 D.C.L., Advocate and Barrister at Law (and one of the compilers of the 
 Rules and Orders under the Supreme Court of Judicature Acts). Seventh 
 Edition. _ (-f® the Press.) 
 
 Trower’s Church Building Laws, 1874. 
 
 Post 8vo., 9s. cloth. 
 
 THE LAW of the BUILDING of CHURCHES, PAR¬ 
 SONAGES, and SCHOOLS, and of the Division of Parishes and Places. 
 By Charles Francis Trow^r, M.A., of the Inner Temple, Esq., Barrister 
 at Law, late Fellow of Exeter College, Oxford, and late Secretary of Pre¬ 
 sentations to Lord Chancellor Westbury. 
 
 “ We may pronounce it a useful work. It con¬ 
 tains a great mass of information of essential im¬ 
 port, and those who, as parishioners, legal ad¬ 
 visers, or clergymen, are concerned with glebes, 
 endowments,district chapelries. parishes.ecclesi¬ 
 astical commissions, and such like matters, about 
 which the public, and notably the clerical public, 
 seem to know but little, but which it is needless 
 to say are matters of much importance.”— Soli¬ 
 citors' Journal. 
 
 " His book is just the one we could wish every 
 clergyman to possess, for if itwas in tbehandsof 
 our readers they would be saved the trouble of 
 asking us very many questions.”—C/erica4/(0wrafl/. 
 
 “ In a well-arranged volume this gentleman 
 points out concisely and intelligibly how thedifh- 
 culties which usually beset parlies in such mat¬ 
 ters maybe avoided .”—Oxford University Herald. 
 
 “ On all the topics germane to its title this vo¬ 
 lume will be found a handy book of ecclesiastical 
 law, and should on that account be made widely 
 known among the clergy.”—C’/mrcA Mail. 
 
 “It is a compact andhandy treatise, very clearly 
 written, well arranged, easy of reference, and, be¬ 
 sides a good table of contents, it has an elaborate 
 index. It i.s a book we are glad to have and to 
 recommend .”—Literary Churchman. 
 
 Benham’s Student’s Examination Gnide. 
 
 12mo., 35. cloth. 
 
 THE STUDENTS GUIDE to the PRELIMINARY EXA¬ 
 MINATION for ATTORNEYS and SOLICITORS, and also to the Oxford 
 and Cambridge Local Examinations and the College of Preceptors; to which 
 are added numerous Suggestions and Examination Questions, selected from 
 those asked at the Law Institution. By James Erle Benham, of King’s 
 College, London. _ 
 
 Latham’s Law of Window Lights. 
 
 Post 8vo., 10V. cloth. 
 
 A TREATISE on the LAW 
 Francis Law Latham, of the Inner 
 
 “ This is not merely a valuable addition 
 to the law library of the practitioner, it is a 
 book that every law student will read with 
 profit. It exhausts the subject of which it 
 treats.”—Zotti Times. 
 
 of WINDOW LIGHTS. By 
 
 Temple, Esq., Barrister at Law. 
 
 “ His arrangement is logical, and he dis¬ 
 cusses fully each point of his subject. The 
 work, in our opinion, is both perspicuous and 
 able, and we cannot but compliment the author 
 on it ”—Law Journal. 
 
 Drewry’s Equity Pleader. 
 
 12mo., 6s. cloth. 
 
 A CONCISE TREATISE on the PRINCIPLES of EQUITY 
 PLEADING ; with Precedents. By C. Stewart Drewry, of the Inner 
 Temple, Esq., Barrister at Law. 
 
 “It will be found of great utility as intro¬ 
 ductory to the more elaborate treatises, or to 
 
 refresh the memory after the study of the 
 larger books.”—Z om; Times. 
 
 o- 
 
 Lushington’s Naval Prize Law. 
 
 Royal 8vo., 10s. 6d. cloth. 
 
 A MANUAL of NAVAL PRIZE LAW By Godfrey 
 Lushington, of the Inner Temple, Esq., Barrister at Lavy. 
 
< 
 
 >—-—-—--- 
 
 MESSRS. BUTTERWORTH, 7, FLEET STREET, E.C. 35 
 
 
 Saunders’ Law of Negligence. 
 
 1 vol., post 8vo., 9s. cloth. 
 
 A TREATISE on the LAW applicable to NEGLIGENCE. 
 
 By Thomas W. Saunders, Esq., Barrister at Law, Recorder of Bath. 
 
 “The book is admirable; while small in “ As a work of reference tlie book will be very 
 
 bulk, it contains everything that is necessary, welcome in the office of the solicitor or in the 
 
 and its arrangement is such that one can chambers of the barrister.”— Morning Advertiser. 
 
 readily refei to it. Amongst those who have “ A short and clear treatise like the present 
 
 doue good service, Mr. Saunders will find a on the law relating to the subject ought to be 
 
 place.”— Law Magazine. welcomed. It is a moderate size volume, and 
 
 “ In the useful little volume now before us makes references to all the authorities on the 
 
 he has gathered the whole law of negligence. question easy.”— Standard. 
 
 All his works are distinguished by painstaking “ It is a great advantage to the legal pro- 
 
 and accuracy. This oue is no exception ; and fession to find all the law of negligence col- 
 
 the subject, which is of very extensive interest, lected and arranged in a manual of reasonable 
 
 will insure for it a cordial welcome from tlie size. Such is Mr. Saunders’ book.”— Public 
 
 profession.”— Law Times, Opinion. 
 
 “ The references to the cases are given much “ A serviceable and seasonable treatise on 
 
 more fully, and on a more rational system the law of negligence, by Thomas W. Saunders, 
 
 than is common with text book writers. lie Esq., Recorder of Bath.”— Telegraph. 
 
 has a good index; he has produced a work “ A careful treatise on a branch of law which 
 
 which will facilitate reference to the author!- is daily acquiring importance. The manual 
 
 ties.”— Solicitors' Journal. before us is a useful treatise.”— Echo. 
 
 Ingrain’s Law of Compensation.—2nd Edit, by Elmes. 
 
 Post 8vo., 12s. cloth. 
 
 COMPENSATION to LAND and HOUSE OWNERS: 
 being a Treatise on the Law of the Compensation for Interests in Lands, &c. 
 payable by Railway and other Public Companies ; with an Appendix of 
 Forms and Statutes. By Thomas Dunbar Ingram, of Lincoln’s Inn, Esq., 
 Barrister at Law. Second Edition. By J. J. Elmes, of the Inner Temple, 
 Esq., Barrister at Law. 
 
 “ We say at once that it is a work of great satiou for it, cannot fail to perform his duty 
 
 merit. It is a concise, clear and complete ex- rightly.”— Law Times. 
 
 position ot the law of compensation applicable “ This work appears to be carefully prepared 
 
 to the owners of real property and railway and as regards its matter. This edicion is a third 
 
 other companies.”— Law Magazine. larger than the first; it contains twice as many 
 
 “ Whether for companies taking land or hold- cases, and an enlarged index. It was much 
 
 ing it, Mr. Ingram's volume will be a welcome called for, and doubtless will be found very 
 
 guide. With this in his hand the legal adviser of useful to the practitioner.”— Law Magazine, 
 
 a company, or of an owner and occupier whose second notice. 
 
 property is taken, and who demands compen- 
 
 Cutler’s Law of Naturalization. 
 
 12mo., 3s. 6d. cloth. 
 
 THE LAW of NATURA LIZATION ; as Amended by tlie Acts 
 of 1870. By John Cutler, B.A., of Lincoln’s Inn, Barrister at Law, 
 Editor of ‘‘ Powell’s Law of Evidence,” &c. 
 
 “The author’s position as Professor of English foreigners resident in this country.”—P m^/ic 
 
 Law and Jurisprudence is a guarantee of his Opinion. 
 
 legal competence, whilst his literary abilities “ The book is e model of what a treatise of 
 
 have enabled him to clothe his legal knowledge its kind should bt.*'--Sundav Times. 
 
 in language which laymen can understand with- “ A very convenient hand book to the law 
 
 out being misled by it.”—JoAn Bull. of naturalization, as amended by the Acts of 
 
 “ Mr. Cutler, in the work before us, lucidly 1870.”—/PeeA/y Times. 
 
 explains the state of the law previous to the “To anyone not having much previous ac- 
 
 recent statute, and shows the alterations pro- quaintance with the subject, who wishes for a 
 
 duced by it, so that a careful perusal of this general sketch of the law affecting aliens, as it 
 
 book will enable the reader fully to comprehend was, and as it is now, this book wdl be useful.” 
 
 the present state of the law upon tliis most im- —Solicitors' Journal. 
 
 nonantsMbiect."—Justice of the Peace. “It has been carefully compiled, and the 
 
 “ This little work will be found of use to our authorities referred to are accurately cited.”— 
 
 countrymen resident abroad, as well as to Pall Mall Gazette. 
 
 ^—■—-- 
 
 o 
 
o 
 
 
 36 LAW WORKS PUBLISHED BY 
 
 Hunt on Frauds and Bills of Sale. 
 
 Post 8vo., 9s. cloth. 
 
 The LAW relating to FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCES, 
 under the Statutes of Elizabeth and the Bankrupt Acts: with Remarks on 
 the Law relating to Bills of Sale. By Arthur Joseph Hunt, of the 
 Inner Temple, Esq., Barrister at Law, Author of “The Law relating to 
 Boundaries, Fences and Foreshores.’^ 
 
 “This work is calculated to be of service 
 to the profession. Mr. Hunt has brought 
 to bear upon the subject a clearness of state¬ 
 ment, an orderliness of arrangement and a 
 subtlety of logical acuteness which carry him 
 far towards a complete systematization of 
 all the cases. Neither has his industry been 
 lacking: the cases that have arisen under the 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1869, and under the Bills of 
 Sale Act have been carefully and completely 
 noted up and disposed of by him in their appro¬ 
 priate places. The index also is both accurate 
 and careful and secures much facility of refer¬ 
 ence to the various matters which are the sub¬ 
 jects of the work .”—Law Magazine. 
 
 “Though smaller in size, Mr. Hunt’s book 
 deals with fraudulent conveyances under the 
 Bankruptcy Acts, a subject which Mr. May in 
 his work left almost untouched, although his 
 book has the undoubted merit of being the 
 first to break fresh ground in treating fraudu¬ 
 lent conveyances in a separate volume. In 
 
 reviewing that book last year we took occasion, 
 while praisi ng the industry and care with which 
 it was compiled, to remark on the obscurity of 
 its style. In this respect its younger rival has 
 considerable advantage. Mr. Hunt’s book is 
 as readable as a treatise on so technical a sub¬ 
 ject can well be made. Mr. Hunt’s arrange¬ 
 ment of his materials follows an orderly and 
 intelligible plan. The index is apparently 
 carefully prepared, and the table of cases 
 shews that none of the recent cases have been 
 overlooked. Mr. Hunt has produced a really 
 useful book unencumbered by useless matter, 
 which deserves great success as a manual of 
 the law of fraudulent dispositions of property.” 
 —Law Journal. 
 
 “ The author has collected with industry 
 and care the authorities bearing on the ques¬ 
 tion he has undertaken to deal with. The 
 matter is conveniently broken up, and the 
 reader is assisted by a good index.”— Solicitors^ 
 Journal. 
 
 Fry’s Specific Performance of Contracts. 
 
 8vo., 165. cloth. 
 
 A TREATISE on the SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE of 
 CONTRACTS, including those of Public Companies, with a Preliminary 
 Chapter on the Provisions of the Chancery Amendment Act, 1858. By 
 Edward Fry, B.A., of Lincoln’s Inn, Esq., one of Her Majesty’s Counsel. 
 
 The practitioner who uses it as a text book will 
 find jii it an adviser who will tell him not only 
 what the law is, but how it may be enforced.”— 
 Lau' Times. 
 
 “ Mr. Fry’s work presents in a reasonable com¬ 
 pass a large quantity of modern learning on the 
 subject of contracts, with reference to the com¬ 
 mon remedy by specific performance, and will 
 
 thus be acceptable to the profession generally.”— 
 Law Chronicle. 
 
 “ Mr. Fry’s elaborate essay appea’".*' to exhaust 
 the subject, on which he has cited and brought 
 to bear, with great diligence, some 1,500 cases, 
 which include those of the latest reports.”— Law 
 Magazine and Review. 
 
 Wright’s Law of Conspiracy. 
 
 8 vo., 45. cloth. 
 
 TFIE LAW of CRIMINAL CONSPIRACIES and AGREE¬ 
 MENTS. Bv R. S. Wright, of the Inuer Temple, Barrister at Law, 
 Fellow of Oriel Coll., Oxford. 
 
 O- 
 
 Michael and Will’s Law of Gas and Water Supply. 
 
 Post 8VO., 185. cloth. 
 
 THE LAW of GAS and WATER SUPPLY; comprising the 
 Rights and Duties as well of Local Authorities as of Private Companies in 
 regard thereto, and including the Legislation of the last Session of Parlia¬ 
 ment. By W. H. Michael and J. Shiress W ill, Esqrs., Barristers at Law. 
 
 “ An honest and a successful attempt to deal 
 with the laws affecting gas and water supply.” 
 —Law Journal. 
 
 “ We feel thoroughly justified in recommend¬ 
 ing the volume to the attention of the com¬ 
 
 panies, the public and the profession .”—Law 
 Times. 
 
 “On the whole, we can thoroughly recom¬ 
 mend the work to those who require guidance 
 on the subject.”— Solicilors' Journal, 
 
MESSRS. BUTTERWORTH, 7, FLEET STREET, E.C. 37 
 
 Glen’s Law of Highways.—Third Edition. 
 
 In the Press. Post 8vo. 
 
 The LAW of HIGHWAYS: comprising the Highway Acts 
 1835, 1862 and 1864; the South Wales Highway Act ; the Statutes and 
 Decisions of the Courts on the subject of Highways, Bridges, Ferries, &c., 
 including the Duties of Highway Boards, Surveyors of Highways, the Law 
 of Highways in Local Board of Health Districts; Highways affected by 
 Railways, and Locomotives on Highways.** With an Appendix of Statutes 
 in force relating to Highways. By W. Cunningham Glen, Esq., Barrister 
 at Law. Third Edition. 
 
 Glen’s Law of Public Health.—Eighth Edition. 
 
 In the Press. 8vo. 
 
 THE LAW relating to PUBLIC HEALTH and LOCAL 
 GOVERNMENT, and Urban and Rural Sanitary Authorities, including 
 the Law relating to the Removal of Nuisances injurious to Health and the 
 Prevention of Disease; with Statutes and Cases. By W. Cunningham 
 Glen and Alexander Glen, B.A., LL.B., Barristers at Law. 
 
 Holland on the Form of the Law. 
 
 8 vo., 7s. 6d. cloth. 
 
 ESSAYS upon the FORM of the LAW. By Thomas Ersktne 
 Holland, M.A., Fellow of Exeter College, and Chichele Professor of 
 International Law in the University of Oxford, and of Lincoln's Inn, Bar¬ 
 rister at Law. 
 
 “ A work of great ability.”— Athenaeum. \ 
 
 “ Entitled to very high commendation.”— 
 Law Times. 
 
 “The essays of an author so well qualified 
 to write upon the subject .”—Law Journal. 
 
 “ We can confidently recommend these 
 
 essays to our readers .”—Law Magazine. 
 
 “A work in which the whole matter is 
 easily intelligible to the lay as well as the 
 professional public ”—Saturday Review. 
 
 “ Mr. Holland’s extremely valuable and in¬ 
 genious essays.”— Spectator. 
 
 Heales’s History and Law of Pews. 
 
 2 vols. 8vo., 16«. cloth. 
 
 The HISTORY and LAW of CHURCH SEATS or PEWS. 
 By Alfred Heales, F.S.A., Proctor in Doctors’ Commons. 
 
 “ Great pains have evidently been taken in 
 the compilation of this work, which exhibits 
 throughout an immense amount ol research 
 and a careful arrangement of cases and ex¬ 
 tracts.”— Law Magazine. , 
 
 “The work deserves a place in all public 
 libraries, and doubtless many practitioners, 
 especially those whose law learning has any 
 
 antiquarian proclivities, will be glad to pos¬ 
 sess it. For original research and faithful 
 labour in verifying references no other writer 
 can lay any claim to come anywhere near 
 Mr. Heales. The author deserves particular 
 commendation for the conscientious labour 
 with which he has traced up all his autho¬ 
 rities .”—SolicitorJ Journal. 
 
 Parkinson’s Common Law Chamber Practice. 
 
 12 mo., 7s. cloth. 
 
 A HANDY BOOK FOR THE COMMON LAW 
 JUDGES’ CHAMBERS. By Geo. H. Parkinson, Chamber Clerk to 
 the Hon. Mr. Justice Byles. 
 
 wnrk is now done in Common Law The practice in Chambers has become suffi- 
 
 nu K c hvh?nior clerks that such a liille trea- cienily important to call for a treatise devoted to 
 Chambers by parkinson has per- n, nor could a more competent man for the task 
 
 form’erhlS tS skUfally md with ca«.”-&0- “r- ParkmaoD,”- 
 
 citors' Journal. 
 
38 LAW WORKS PUBLISHED BY 
 
 Smith’s Practice of Conveyancing. 
 
 Post 8vo., 6s. cloth. 
 
 AN ELEMENTARY VIEW of the PRACTICE of CON¬ 
 VEYANCING in SOLICITORS’ OFFICES; with an Outline of the 
 Proceedings under the Transfer of Land and Declaration of Title Acts, 1862, 
 for the use of Articled Clerks. By Edmund Smith, B. A., late of Pembroke 
 College, Cambridge. Attorney and Solicitor. 
 
 Tomkins’ Institutes of Roman Law. 
 
 Part I. royal 8vo. (to be completed in Three Parts) 12s. cloth. 
 
 THE INSTITUTES OF THE ROMAN LAW. Part I. 
 
 The Sources of the Roman Law and its external History to the decline of 
 the Eastern and Western Empires. By Frederick J. Tomkins, M.A., 
 D.C.L., Barrister at Law, of Lincoln’s Inn. 
 
 Gaius’s Roman Law, by Tomkins and Lemon. 
 
 Complete in 1 vol. 8vo., 27s. cloth extra. 
 
 THE COMMENTARIES OF GAIUS ON THE ROMAN 
 
 LAW : with an English Translation and Annotations. By Frederick J. 
 Tomkins, Esq., M.A., D.C.L., and William George Lemon, Esq., LL.B. 
 Barristers at Law, of Lincoln’s Inn. 
 
 Williams’s Common Law Pleading and Practice. 
 
 8VO., 12s. cloth. 
 
 An INTRODUCTION to PRACTICE and PLEADING 
 in the SUPERIOR COURTS of LAW, embracing an outline of the 
 whole proceedings in an Action at Law, on Motion, and at Judges’ Cham¬ 
 bers; together with the Rules of Pleading and Practice, and Forms of all the 
 principal Proceedings. By Watkin Williams, Esq., M.P., of the Inner 
 Temple, Barrister at Law. 
 
 “ For the Student especially the book has fea- with a practical treatment of the subject, illus- 
 tures of peculiar value, it is at the same time trated by forms and examples of the main pro- 
 scientific and practical, and throughout the work ceedings.”—Jariir. 
 there is a judicious union of general principles 
 
 Smith’s Bar Education. 
 
 Svo., 9s. cloth. 
 
 A HISTORY of EDUCATION for the ENGLISH BAR, 
 
 with SUGGESTIONS as to SUBJECTS and METHODS of STUDY. 
 
 By Philip Anstie Smith, Esq., M.A., LL.B., Barrister at Law. 
 
 O ' -A 
 
MESSRS. BUTTERWORTH, 7, FLEET STREET, E.C. 39 
 
 Eedman’s Law of Arbitrations and Awards. 
 
 8vo., 12s. cloth. 
 
 A CONCISE TREATISE on the LAW of ARBITRATIONS 
 and AWARDS, with an Appendix of Precedents and Statutes. By Joseph 
 Haworth Redman, of the Middle Temple, Esq., Barrister at Law. 
 
 ‘‘ Mr. Redman goes straight through his 
 task, and gives his cases at the end of his pro¬ 
 positions. The chief merit of the work is the 
 singular lucidity with which the law is ex¬ 
 pounded. We give the work all the praise 
 which it can claim when we say that the 
 arrangement is good, the style clear, and the 
 work exhaustive. There is a useful appendix 
 of precedents and statutes, and a very good 
 index .”—Law Times. 
 
 “ This is likely to prove a useful hook in 
 practice. All the ordinary law on the subject 
 is given shortly and in a convenient and acces¬ 
 sible form, and the index is a good one. The 
 book is of a portable size and moderate price, 
 and contains a fairly complete appendix of pre¬ 
 
 cedents. It is likely enough that it will meet 
 a demand both in the profession and amongst 
 lay arbitrators.”— Solicitors' Journal. 
 
 “ It is a concise statement of the law on the 
 questions which are likely to arise in the course 
 of a reference or in subsequent proceedings 
 which may be taken in regard to it. The pre¬ 
 cedents of awards are clearly and concisely 
 drawn. The arrangement of chapters is con- 
 veniently managed. The law is clearly stated, 
 and, so far as we can judge, all the important 
 cases bearing directly on the subject are given, 
 while the index appears reasobably copious. 
 These facts, combined with the smallness of 
 the volume, ought to rnake the book a suc¬ 
 cess .”—Law Journal. 
 
 Powell’s Law of Inland Carriers.—Second Edition. 
 
 8vo., H'S. cloth. 
 
 THE LAW OF INLAND CARRIERS, especially as regu¬ 
 lated by the Railway and Canal Traffic Act, 1854. By Edmund Powell, 
 Esq., of Lincoln College, Oxon, M.A., and of the Western Circuit, Barrister 
 at Law, Author of “ Principles and Practice of the Law of Evidence.’^ 
 Second Edition, almost re-written. 
 
 “ Mr Powell’s writing is sinealarly precise and it aspires to become, the text book on the Law of 
 condensed,without being at all dry, as those who Carriers .”—Law Times. 
 
 have read his admirable Book of Lvideuce will ” I he two chapters on the Railway and Canal 
 attest. It will be seen, from our outline of the Traffic Act, J856, are quite new. and the recent 
 contents, how exhaustively the subject has been cases under the provisions of that statute are 
 treated, and that it is entitled to be, that which analyzed in lucid language.”—Lazo Magazine, 
 
 Davis’s Criminal Law Consolidation Acts. 
 
 12mo., 10s. cloth. 
 
 THE NEW CRIMINAL LAW CONSOLIDATION ACTS, 
 
 1861 ; with an Introduction and practical Notes, illustrated by a copious 
 reference to Cases decided by the Court of Criminal Appeal. Together with 
 alphabetical Tables of Offences, as well those punishable upon Summary 
 Conviction as upon Indictment, and including the Offences under the New 
 Bankruptcy Act, so arranged as to present at one view the particular Offence, 
 the Old or New Statute upon which it is founded, and the Limits of Punish¬ 
 ment; and a full Index. By James Edwd. Davis, Esq., Barrister at Law. 
 
 Lovesy’s Law of Arbitration (Masters and Workmen). 
 
 12mo., 4'S. cloth. 
 
 ( Dedicated, lypermission, to Lord St. Leonards.') 
 
 THE LAW of ARBITRATION between MASTERS and 
 AVORKMEN, as founded upon the Councils of Concilintion Act of 1867 
 (30 & 31 Viet. c. 105), tlie Masters and Workmen Act (5 Geo. 4, c. 96), and 
 other Acts, witli an Introduction and Notes. By C. W. Lovesy, Esq., of 
 the Middle Temple, Barrister at Law, now one of Her Majesty's Judges, 
 British Guiana. 
 
O' 
 
 o 
 
 40 law works published by 
 
 Dowell’s Income Tax Laws. 
 
 8vo., 125. 6 d . cloth. 
 
 THE INCOME TAX LAWS at present in force in the United King¬ 
 dom, with Practical Notes, Appendices and a copious Index. By Stephen 
 Dowell, M.A., of Lincoln’s Inn, Assistant Solicitor of Inland Kevenue. 
 
 “ Only men thoroutihly conversant with the 
 subject could have prepared it, and despite 
 Mr. Dowell’s knowledge it must have been a 
 heavy labour. To commissioners and all con¬ 
 cerned in the working of the Income Tax Mr. 
 Dowell’s book will be of great value .”—Law 
 Journal. 
 
 “ We cannot doubt that the work will prove 
 of much service to persons engaged in the 
 administration of the Income Tax laws, and to 
 the practitioner on the points which frequently 
 arise in referenge to those la.vfa.”—Solicitors’ 
 Journal. 
 
 “ A collection of the Income Tax Acts made 
 easy of reference by a copious index. The 
 acts are connected together by cross-references, 
 and for practical purposes the compilation 
 must prove very useful .”—Law Times. 
 
 ‘‘We can honestly commend Mr. Dowell’s 
 
 work to our readers as being well done in every 
 respect. They will find it a neatly written 
 and complete history and explanation of the 
 Stamp duties; and they will also find the 
 Act of 1870 set out completely and clearly set 
 before them in a good bold type, easy of re¬ 
 ference and supported in its utility by a good 
 index.”—Zatt; Magazine. 
 
 “ Mr. Dowell has collected and accompanied 
 with notes of reference and decided cases all 
 the Statutes directly or indirectly bearing 
 upon this subject. A full and well-constructed 
 index completes the volume. Mr. Dowell’s 
 official position eminently fits him for the 
 work he has undertaken, and his history of 
 the Stamp Laws shows how carefully and con¬ 
 scientiously he performs what he undertakes.” 
 —Justice of the Peace. 
 
 Dowell’s Stamp Duties and Stamp Laws. 
 
 8VO., 125. Qicl . cloth. 
 
 A HISTORY and EXPLANATION of the STAMP DUTIES, 
 from tlieir commencement to the present time, the past and the present State 
 of the Stamp Laws, the System and the Administration of the Tax, Observa- 
 tionsx on the Stamp Duties in Foreign Countries; the Stamp Laws at 
 present in force in the United Kingdom; with Notes, Appendices and a 
 copious Index. By Stephen Dowell, M.A., of Lincoln’s Inn, Assistant 
 Solicitor of Inland Revenue. 
 
 “ This is a work of some power. The author 
 is evidently master of his subject. The style of 
 the composition is singularly felicitous and makes 
 the subject—a rather thorny one—clear and in¬ 
 telligible .”—Law Times. 
 
 “ J'here is justification for Mr. Dowell’s ap¬ 
 pearance before the public, for he gives a good 
 deal of useful information. Statesmen who con¬ 
 template future legislatign, judges whose duty 
 it is to administer the law, and officials who have 
 
 to carry out practical details will pay a well 
 merited tribute to the industry which places 
 before them the law as it stands wuth a sketch 
 of the steps which have led up to it.”— Atheneum. 
 
 ‘‘ This book belongs to a class which we are 
 glad to think is becoming increasingly popular. 
 It is written by a man who is practically con¬ 
 versant with the subject of which he treats.”— 
 Spectator, 
 
 Wigram on Extrinsic Evidence as to Wills. 
 
 Fourth Edition. 8vo., ID. cloth. 
 
 AN EXAMINATION OF THE RULES OF LAW respecting 
 the Admission of EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE in Aid of the INTER¬ 
 PRETATION OF WILLS. By tl>e Right Hon. Sir James Wigram, 
 Knt. The Fourth Edition, prepared for the press with the sanction of the 
 learned Author, by W. Knox Wigram, M.A., of Lincoln’s Inn, Esq., 
 Barrister-at-Law. 
 
 “ In the celebrated treatise of Sir James 
 Wigram, the rules of law are stated, discussed 
 and explained in a manner which has excited the 
 
 admiration of every judge who has had to con- 
 suit It. '—Lord Isingsdown, in a Privy Cou 7 icil 
 JudumenttJuly Qth, 1858. 
 
MESSRS. BUTTERWORTH, 7, FLEET STREET, E. C. 41 
 
 Cutler and GrifiBn’s Indian Criminal Law. 
 
 8vo., G5. cloth. 
 
 AN ANALYSIS of the INDIAN PENAL CODE (includinir 
 the Indian Penal Code Amendment Act, 1870), with Notes. By John 
 Cutler, B.A., of Lincoln’s Inn, Barrister at Law, Professor of English 
 Law and Jurisprudence, and Professor of Indian Jurisprudence at King’s 
 College, London, and Edmund Fuller Griffin, B.A., of Lincoln’s Inn, 
 Barrister at Law. 
 
 “It may Le added that the code is just at 
 at present out of print, so that the production 
 of an analysis at the present moment is espe¬ 
 cially opportune. Messrs. Cutler and Griffin 
 have produced a useful little book, and pro¬ 
 duced it at a time when it will be especially 
 useful.”— Solicitors' Journal. 
 
 “ This analysis of the Indian Penal Code 
 seems to have conferred a great boon on the 
 Indian practitioner, and will doubtless be of 
 
 use to professional men in England. It has a 
 good index .”—Law Magazine. 
 
 “This is a work intended for students and 
 for practitioners in India. Knowing how well 
 the same authors edited the Indian portion of 
 Powell on Evidence, we should be.content to 
 take it on the faith of their reputation only. 
 The mode of analysis is very clear and brings 
 well forward the prominent features of the 
 code.”—ZflR' Times. 
 
 Field’s Table of, and Index to, Indian Statute Law. 
 
 Demy 4to., 4:2s. cloth. 
 
 A CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE of and INDEX to the 
 INDIAN STATUTE-BOOK from the Year 1834, with a General Intro¬ 
 duction to the Statute Law of India ; with a Supplement bringing the work 
 down to August, 1872. By C. D. Field, M.A., LL.D., of the Inner 
 Temple, Barrister at Law, and of H.M.’s Bengal Civil Service. 
 
 “ Mr. Field has produced a work which will in India, but to tho.se practising in the Privy 
 -be extremely useful, not only to the profession Council at home."—Solicilon’ Journal. 
 
 Field’s Law of Evidence in British India. 
 
 8 vo., 28^. cloth. 
 
 THE LAW OF EVIDENCE AS ADMINISTERED IN 
 BRITISH INDIA. By C. D. Field, LL.D., of the Inner Temple, Barrister 
 at Law, and of H. M.’s Bengal Civil Service. Second Edition, containing 
 the New Code of Evidence passed by the Legislative Council of India. 
 
 “ It is w'orthy of the law of which it treats, any better recommendation could be given to 
 and it is made additionally and exceptionally persons contemplating the practice of the law 
 -valuable by an introduction, which is an ori- in India than to procure Mr. Field’s work and 
 ginal essay on evidence in general and Indian master it .”—Law Times. 
 
 -evidence in particular. We do not think that 
 
 Clifford and Stephens’s Practice of Referees Court, 1873. 
 
 Vols, I. and II., royal 8vo., 3L IO 5 . cloth. 
 
 THE PRACTICE of the COURT of REFEREES on PRI¬ 
 VATE BILLS in PARLIAMENT, with Reports of Cases as to the locus 
 standi of Petitioners during the Sessions 1867-68-69-70-71 and 72. By 
 Frederick Clifford and Pembroke S. Stephens, Barristers-at-Law. 
 
 or agents engaged in parlia- “The reports, forming the most important 
 10 couiisc & part of the volume, are given with fulness and 
 
 .t?lme^l7se^rviceable.”-.9o7/czto/-^^ Journal. accuracy Journal. 
 
 VOT II Part II., eoidaining the Cases decided during the Sessions 1871 and 
 ^ ' ’ 1872, may Ve had separatelg, 30s. seived. 
 
o 
 
 B—___ 
 
 42 law works published BY 
 
 THE LAW EXAMINATION JOURNAL. 
 
 Edited by Herbert Newman Mozley, M.A., 
 
 Fellow of King’s College, Ciinibriclge; anti of Lincoln’s Inn, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. 
 
 Published i/i Hilar if, Easter, Trinit ii and Michaelmas Sittings in each gear. Price l5., by post l.s. Id. 
 annual subscription, payable in adcance, 4.s'., by i^ost, 4*’. 4c?. All the back A umbers may be had. 
 
 No, 26 . Hilar}’-, 1S76.—I. The New Rules relating to Examinations. II. The Statutes of ISTo 
 '(Second Notice). HI. Digest of Cases. IV. Intermediate Examination, Michaelmas Sittings, 
 IS75: Questions and An.swers. V. Final Examination, Hilary Sittings, 187(1: Questions and 
 Answers. VI. Reviews. VII. Correspondence and Notices. 
 
 No. 25 . Michaelmas, 1875.—I. Stjitute of Fraudulent Conveyances, 13 Eliz. c. 5. II. Statutes 
 of 1875 (First Notice). III. Digest of Cases. IV. Intermediate Examination, Trinity Term, 1875 : 
 Questions and Answers. V. Final Examination, 3Iichaelmas Term, 1875 : Questions and Answers. 
 VI. Reviews of Books. VII. Correspondence and Notices. 
 
 No. 2 « 4 . Trinity, 1875.—I. The Statute of Uses, eontinued. II. Digest of Cases. III. Interme¬ 
 diate Examination, Easter Term, 1875: Questions and Answers. IV. Final Examination, Trinit}' 
 Term, 1875: Questions and Answers. V. A New Law Dictionary. VI. Correspondence and Notices. 
 
 No. 23 . Easter, 187.5.—I. The Statute of Uses. II. The Statutes of 1874 (Third Notice). 
 HI. Digest of Cases. IV. Intermediate Examination, Hilary Term, 1875 : Questions and Answers. 
 V. Final Examination, Easter Term, 1875 : (2uestions and Answers. VI. Correspondence and 
 Notices. 
 
 No. 22 . Hilary, 1875.—I. The Statute of Frauds in relation to Contracts of Sale: Sale v. Lambert \ 
 and Potter v. Dutheld. H. The Statutes of 1874 (Second Notice). HI. Digest of Cases. IV. Inter¬ 
 mediate Examination, iMichaclmas 'i'erm, 1874: Questions and Answers. V. Final Examination, 
 Hilary Term, 1875: Questions and Answers. AH. Notice of Intermediate Examinations for 1875. 
 VH. Correspondence and Notices. 
 
 No. 21 . Michaelmas, 1874.—I. The Statutes of 1874 (First Notice). II. Digest of Cases. 
 HI. Intermediate Examination Questions and Answers (T.T. 1874). IV. Final Examination Ques¬ 
 tions and Answers (i\I. T. 1874). V. Reviews of Books. A”"!. Correspondence and Notices. 
 
 No. 20 . Trinity, 1874.—I. Legislative Prospects of the Session. H. Digest of Cases. HI. Inter¬ 
 mediate Examination, Easter Term, 1874 : (Questions and Answers. lA'’. Final Examination, Trinity 
 Term, 1874 : Questions and Answers. A’’. Reviews. A'"!. Correspondence and Notices. 
 
 No. 19 . Easter, 1874.—I. Leading Cases (continued). H. Digest of Cases. HI. Intermediate 
 Examination, H. T. 1874: Questions and Answers. lA". Final Examination, E. T. 1874: Questions 
 and Answers. A””. Review. 7th Edit, of Stephen’s Blackstone’s Commentaries. A'l. Correspondence. 
 
 No. 18 . Hilai-y, 1874.—I. Statutes of 1873 (Second Notice, including the Supreme Court of 
 .ludicature Act and subsequent Statutes). H. Digest of Cases. HI. Intermediate Examination, 
 Michaelmas Tei'm, 1873: Questions and Answers. lA''. Final Examination, Ililaiy Term, 1874: 
 (Questions and Answers. A^. Correspondence and Notices. 
 
 No. 17 . Michaelmas, 1873.—I. Leading Cases (Note by the Editor). II. Statutes of 1873 (First 
 Notice). HI. Digest of Cases. lAL Intermediate Examination, T. T. 1873 : Questions and Answers. 
 V. Final Examination, AI. T. 1873 : Questions and Amswers. A’’!. Notice of Intermediate Examina¬ 
 tion for 1874. AHI. Reviews of Books. VHI. Law Student’s Soeieties. IX. Correspondence. 
 
 No. 16. Trinity, 1873.—I. The Study of the Law, concluded. II. Leading Cases—Spencer’s Case, 
 continued. HI. Digest of Cases. lA’’. Intermediate Examination, Easter, 1873: Questions and 
 Answers. V. Final Examination, Trinity, 1873: Questions and Answers. AH. A Review—Kelly’s 
 Draftsman. A’^H. Correspondence and Notices. 
 
 No. 15 . Easter, 1873.—1. The Study of the Law, continued. II. Analysis of Leading Cjiscs. 
 HI. Digest of Cases. lA’’. Intermediate Examination, H. T. 1873: (Questions and Answers. 
 V. Final Examination, E. T. 1873 : Questions and Answers. A’l. Correspondence and Notices. 
 
 No. 14 -. Hilary, 1873.—I. The Study of the Law, continued. II. Digest of Cases. HI. Inter¬ 
 mediate Examination, M. T. 1872: Questions and Answers. lA'. Final Examination, H. T. 1873: 
 Questions and Answers. A^. Reviews. A^I. Answers to Correspondents and Notices. 
 
 No. 13 . Michaelmas, 1872.—I. Public Prosecutore, concluded. II. The Statutes of 1872. 
 HI. Digest of Cases. IV. Intermediate Examination, Trinity Term, 1872 : Questions and Answers. 
 V. Final Examination, Michaelmas Term, 1872 : (iuestions and Answers. AH. Reviews. AHI. An¬ 
 swers to Correspondents and Notices. 
 
 No. 12 . Trinity, 1872.— I. Public Prosecutors, continued. II. Study of the Law, continued. 
 HI. Digest of Cases. lA''. Intermediate Examination, Easter Term, 1872 : Questions and Answers. 
 A\ Final Examination, Trinity Term, 1872: (iuestions and Answers. AH. Law Students’Congress, 
 Birmingham: Law Examinations. A'’!I. Review. VHI. Answers to Correspondents. 
 
 No. 11 . Easter, 1872.—I. The Study of the Law. II. Legislative Prospects of the Session. 
 Alarried Women’s Property Act Amendment Bill. Imperial Court of Appeal. HI. Digest of Cases 
 IV. Intermediate Examination Questions and Answers. Hilary Term, 1872. V. Final Examination 
 -Questions and Answers. Easter Term, 1872. AH. Answers to Correspondents. 
 
 No. lO. Hilary, 1872.—I. Notice of the late Editor. II. The Study of the Law. HI. Digest 
 of Cases. IV. Intei-mcdiatc Examination (iucstions and Answers. V. Final Examination Questions 
 and Answers. VI. Answers to Correspondents. 
 
 No. 9 . Michaelmas, 1871.—I. On Examinations. II. The Subject of Public Prosecutors (con¬ 
 tinued). HI. Digest of Cases. lA'. Intermediate Examination Questions on Chitty, AVilliams and 
 Smith, Trinity, 1871, Avith Answers. A'^. Final Examination Questions and Answers, Michaelmas 
 Term, 1871. VI. RevicAVS of Books. AHI. AnsAvers to Correspondents. 
 
 Cojnes of Yol. /. of the Laav Examination Journal, containing Kos. 1 to 
 U, with full Indexes and Tahlcs of Cases cited, mag now he had, price 16*’., 
 hound in cloth. 
 
 O- 
 
 'O 
 
MESSRS. BUTTERWORTH, 7, FLEET STREET, E. C. 43 
 
 BAR EXAMINATION JOURNAL 
 
 Edited by A. D. TYSSEN, B.C.L., M.A. and Sir IE K. WILSON, Bart., M.A., 
 
 liarristers at Law. 
 
 Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4-, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, lO and 11, from TRINITY TERM, 1871, to 
 MICHAELMAS SITTINGS, 1875. 
 
 PuMished in Xumljcrs, Svo., at 8.s. each, h// post Ss. Id., after each Par 
 Examination. 
 
 Subjects of Bar Examination. E.xaminatioii Papers, with the Answers. 
 
 ENGLISH LAAV :—Constitutional Law and Legal History; Equity; Common Law ; Real Pro¬ 
 perty ; Jurisprudence, &c.; General Paper. 
 
 INDIAN LAW Hindu Law ; Mahomedan Law ; Penal Code ; Criminal Procedure Code ; Civil 
 Procedure Code ; Succession Act; General Paper. 
 
 Copies of Vol. I. of the Bar Examination Journal, containing Nos. 1 to G (1871 to 
 1873), with Index, &c. may be bad,, price 185. cloth. 
 
 Copies of Vol. II. of the same, containing Nos. 7 to 11 (1873 to 1875), may be 
 had, price IG 5 . cloth. 
 
 Pearce’s Guide to the Inns of Court and Chancery; with 
 Notices of their Ancient Discipline, Customs and Entertainments; an 
 Account of the Eminent Men of Lincoln’s Inn, the Inner Temple, the 
 Middle Temple, and Gray’s Inn, &c.; together with the Regulations as to 
 the Admission of Students, Keeping Terms, Call to the Bar, &c. By 
 Robert R. Pearce, Esq., Barrister at Law. 8 vo. 85 . cloth. 
 
 <lI)c ^rdiiniiLirij drianiiimtimi lounval 
 
 AND STUDENT’S LITERARY MAGAZINE. 
 
 Edited by JAMES ERLE DENHAM, 
 
 Formerly of King’s College, London; Author of “ The Student’s Examination Guide,” &c. 
 
 Xow complete in Eighteen Xumhers, containing all the Questions and Ansu'crs 
 from 1871 to 1875, and to he had in One Vol. %i'o., ijrice I 85 . cloth. 
 
 Nos. I. to XVIII. of the Preliminary Examination Journal may 
 also still be had at Is. each, by post Is. Id. 
 
 They contain the following Articles by the Editor, on— 
 
 “ The Imperfections of the (li thography of the English Language.” “ Lectures 
 •on the Origin of the English Language.” “ What Endowments are essential to 
 those aspiring to become Barristers and Solicitors ?” “ The Study of the English, 
 French and Latin Languages.” “ How to become an Orator ; with Selections from 
 the Speeches of Lord Brougham, Pitt, Curran, Daniel O’Connell, the late Earl of 
 Derby, Mr, Gladstone, Mr. Disraeli, and others.” “ How many Hours a Day do 
 von recommend me to study ?” “ The Improvement of the Memory.” “What 
 
 leads to Success in Life?” “Brains; (Quantity or (Quality.” “The Power of 
 Imaf'-ination.” “ The Amalgamation of the Two Branches of the Profession.” 
 “TiTc Advantage of Education.” “Common Sense.” “The New Jury Bill.” 
 “Ladies as LaivyersI” “Psychological Enquiries.” “Eminent Lawyers.” 
 “Rhetoric.” “ Quotations by Authors and Advocates.” “ Men of Genius dcli- 
 cient in Conversation.” “The Choice of a Profession, and its Influence on the 
 Mind.” “ The Incorporation of the Inns of Court and the proposed Law Uni¬ 
 versity.” “ Orthography of Proper Names.” “ Absence of Mind.” “A Predi¬ 
 lection* for One Author.” “Accommodation for Law Students in Courts of 
 Justice.” “ The School Board.” “ Inequalities of Genius.” “ Mysterious Pg - 
 «onages” “ The I^ord Chief Justice of England on the Choice of a Profession.” 
 
 “ The Solicitor General on Perseverance.” “ (a) Modern Classics; (f) the Value 
 of Genuine Talent; (c) the Quality of Wit.” “Synopses of leading Authors, 
 Statesmen Poets, and Philosophers, and Ancient Classical AYriters.” “ Memoirs 
 rimlps’Dichens, the late Lord Lytton, and John Stuart Mill.” 
 
 Besides other Articdcs, Reviews, &c. &c. 
 
 i----- O 
 
44 law works published BY 
 
 Drainage of Land: How to procure Outfalls by New Drains, or the 
 Iniprovement of Existing Drains, in the Lands of an adjoining Owner, under 
 the Powers contained in Part Ilf. of the Act 24 & 25 Viet. c. 133; with an 
 Explanation of the Provisions, and Suggestions for the Guidance of Land 
 Owners, Occupiers, Land Agents and Surveyors. By J. William Wilson, 
 Solicitor. 8vo. l5. sewed. 
 
 Supreme Appellate Jurisdiction. A Speech delivered in the 
 House of Lords on the 11th June, 1874. By the Right Hon. Lord O’Hagan. 
 8 vo. Is. sewed. 
 
 The Law and Facts of the Alabama Case, with Reference to the 
 Geneva Arbitration. By James O’Dowd, Esq., Barrister at Law. 8vo. 
 2 s. sewed. 
 
 Foreshores. Report of case The Queen at the prosecution of Williams 
 V. Nicholson, for removing Shingle from the Foreshore at Withernsea. 
 Heard at the Police Court, Hull, 31st May, 1870. 8vo. Is. sewed. 
 
 A Letter to the Right Hon. the Lord High Chancellor concerning 
 Digests and Codes. By William Richard Fisher, of Lincoln’s Inn, Esq., 
 Barrister at Law. Royal 8vo. Is. sewed. 
 
 Indian Civil Service Examinations. On reporting Cases for the 
 Periodical Examinations by Selected Candidates for the Civil Service of 
 India: Being a Lecture delivered on Wednesday, June 12, 1867, at King’s 
 College, London. By John Cutler, B.A., of Lincoln’s Inn, Barrister at 
 J^aw, Professor of English Law and Jurisprudence and Professor of Indian 
 Jurisprudence at King’s College, London. 8vo., Is. sewed. 
 
 Hamel’s International Law, in connexion with Municipal Statutes 
 relating to the Commerce, Rights and Liabilities of the Subjects of Neutral 
 Statespending Foreign War; considered with reference to the Case of the 
 Alexandra, seized under the provisions of the Foreign Enlistment Act. By 
 Felix Hargrave Hamel, Barrister at Law. Post 8vo. 3s. boards. 
 
 Francillon’s Lectures, Elementary and Familiar, on English Law. 
 First and Second Series. By James Francillon, Esq., County Court 
 Judge. 2 vols. 8vo. 8s. each cloth. 
 
 The Laws of Barbados. (By Authority.) Royal 8vo. 21s. cloth. 
 
 Le Marchant’s Report of Proceedings of the House of Lords 
 on the Claims to the Barony of Gardner, with an Appendix of Cases illus¬ 
 trative of the Law of Legitimacy. By Sir Denis Le Marchant, of 
 Lincoln’s Inn, Barrister at Law. 8vo. 18s. boards. 
 
 Norman’s Treatise on the Law and Practice relating to Letters 
 Patent for Inventions. By J. P. Norman, M.A., Barrister at Law. Post 
 8VO., 7s. 6d. cloth. 
 
 Gray’s Treatise on the Law of Costs in Actions and other Proceed¬ 
 ings in the Courts of Common Law at Westminster. By John Gray, Esq., 
 of the Middle Temple, Barrister at Law. 8vo., 21s. cloth. 
 
 Elements of the Logical and Experimental Sciences considered in 
 
 their relation to the Practice of the Law. 8vo. 14s. boards. 
 
 Remarks on Law Reform. By G. W. M. Dale, of Lincoln’s Inn, 
 
 Xsq. 8 VO. Is. 6d, sewed. 
 
 The Inns of Court and Legal Education pending Legislation 
 Reviewed, with Suggestions for the proper Foundation of a Law University. 
 A Paper read at the Provincial Meeting of the Incorporated Law Society 
 of the. United Kingdom, held at Liverpool, 14th October, 1875. Bv 
 C. T. Saunders, a Member of the Council. 8vo. Is. sewed. 
 
--- 
 
 MESSRS. BUTTERAVORTH, 7, FLEET STREET, E. C. 4-3 
 
 Law Students. Full Report of the Proceedings of the First 
 General Congress of Law Students’ Societies, held at Birmingham 21st and 
 22nd May, 1872. 8vo. 2s. sewed. 
 
 Legal Education. By W. A. Jevons. A Paper read at the Social 
 
 Science Congress at Leeds. 1871. 8vo. Qd. sewed. 
 
 A Memoir of Lord Lyndhurst. By William Sidney Gibson, Esq., 
 M.A., F.S.A., Barrister at Law, of Lincoln’s Inn. Second edition, enlarged. 
 8vo. 2s. 6c?. cloth. 
 
 A Memoir of Mr. Justice Talfourd. By a Member of the Oxford 
 
 Circuit. Reprinted from the Law Magazine. 8vo. Is. sewed. 
 
 Speech of Sir R. Palmer, O.C., M.P., at the Annual Meeting of the 
 Legal Education Association in the Middle Temple Hall, 1871; with a 
 Report of the Proceedings. 8vo. Is. sewed. 
 
 The Ancient Land Settlement of England. A Lecture delivered at 
 University College, London, October 17th, 1871. By J. AV. AA^illis Bund, 
 M.A., Professor of Constitutional Law and History. 8vo. Is. sewed. 
 
 Baker’s Compendium of the Statutes, Cases and Decisions af¬ 
 fecting the Office of Coroner. By AA^'illiam Baker, Coroner of Middlesex- 
 12mo. 7s. cloth. 
 
 Greening’s Forms of Declarations, Pleadings and other Pro¬ 
 ceedings in the Superior Courts of Common Law, with the Common Law 
 Procedure Act, and other Statutes ; Table of Officers’ Fees; and the New 
 Rules of Practice and Pleading, with Notes. By Henry Greening, Esq., 
 Special Pleader. Second Edition. 12mo. 10s. 6^?. boards. 
 
 The Laws, Customs and Privileges, and their Administration in 
 the Island of Jersey, with Notices of Guernsey. By Abraham J. Le Cras. 
 12mo. 6s. cloth. 
 
 Bowditch’s Treatise on the History, Revenue Laws, and Govern¬ 
 ment of the Isles of Jersey and Guernsey, to which is added the recent Acts 
 as to Smuggling, Customs and Trade of the Isle of Man and the Channel 
 Islands, Forms, Costs, &c. By J. Bowditch, Solicitor. 8vo. 3s. 6c?. sewed. 
 
 Pulling’s Practical Compendium of the Law and Usage of 
 Mercantile Accounts: describing the various Rules of Law affecting them, 
 at Common Law, in Equity, Bankruptcy and Insolvency, or by Arbitration. 
 Containing the Law of Joint Stock Companies’ Accounts, and the Legal 
 Regulations for their Adjustment under the AA^inding-up Acts of 1848 
 and 1849. By Alexander Pulling, Esq. of the Inner Temple, Barrister 
 at Law. 12mo. 9s. boards. 
 
 Leigh’s Abridgment of the Law of Nisi Prius. By P, Brady 
 
 Leigh, of the Inner Temple, Barrister at Law. 2 vols. 8vo. £2 : 8s. boards. 
 
 Gurney’s System of Short Hand. By Thomas Gurney. First pub¬ 
 lished in 1740, and subsequently improved. 17th Edition. 12mo. 3s. 6c?. cloth. 
 
 “ Gurney’s is, we believe, admitted to be the best of the many systems, and a seventeenth 
 edition appears to attest that fact .”—Law Times. 
 
 Linklater’s Digest of, and Index to, the New Bankruptcy Act, 1869, 
 
 and the accompanying Acts. By John Linklater, Solicitor. Second 
 Edition. Imperial 8vo., 3s. 6c?. sewed. 
 
 Moseley’s Law of Contraband of War; comprising all the American 
 and English Authorities on the Subject. By Joseph Moseley, Esq., B.C.L., 
 Barrister at Law. Post 8vo. 5s. cloth. ' 
 
 Dr. Deane’s Law of Blockade, as contained in the Judgments 
 of Dr. Lushington and the Cases on Blockade decided during 1854. By 
 J. P. Deane, D.C.L., Advocate in Doctors’ Commons. 8vo. 10s. cloth. 
 
o------- 
 
 •40 LAW WORKS PUBLISHED BY 
 
 
 Chart of Inheritance according^ to the Bengal School of Hindu 
 Law. By C. D. Field, LL.D., Barrister at Law, Author of “The Law 
 of Evidence in British India.’’ On stiff' card, 55. 
 
 The Acts for the Commutation, of Tithes in England and Wales, 
 with Notes, Observations, and an Epitome of the Law of Tithes. Second 
 Edition. By J. T. Schomberg, Esq., Q.C. 12nio. 7s. cloth. 
 
 A Practical Treatise on Life Assurance; in which the Statutes, 
 
 &c., affecting unincorporated Joint Stock Companies are brieffy considered 
 and explained. Second Edition. By Frederick BlaYney, Esq., 
 Author of “A Treatise on Life Annuities.” 12mo. 7s. boards. 
 
 Sewell’s Treatise on the Law of Sheriff, with Practical Forms 
 and Precedents. By Bichard Clarke Sewell, Esq., D.C.L., Barrister 
 at Law. 8vo. 215. boards. 
 
 The Law relating to Transactions on the Stock Exchange. 
 
 By Henry Keyser, Esq., Barrister at Law. 12mo., 85. cloth. 
 
 Sewell’s Municipal Corporation Acts, 5 & 6 Will. 4, c. 76, and 
 
 0 & 7 Will. 4, cc. 103, 104, 105, with Notes, and Index. By R. C. Sewell, 
 Esq., Barrister at Law. 12mo. 95. boards. 
 
 A Legigraphical Chart of Landed Property in England from 
 the time of the Saxons to the present iEra. By Charles. Fearne, Esq., 
 Barrister at Law. On a large sheet, 65. coloured. 
 
 Dwyer’s Compendium of the Principal Laws and Regulations 
 relating to the Militia of Great Britain and Ireland 12mo. 5s. 6d. cloth. 
 
 The Common Law of Kent; or the Customs of Gavelkind. 
 
 With an Appendix concerning Borough English. By T. Robinson, Esq. 
 Third Edition, with Notes and References to modern Authorities, by 
 John Wilson, Esq. Barrister at Law. 8vo. I85. boards. 
 
 Kft^The Marriage and Registration Acts, 6 & 7 Will.^ 4, caps* 
 
 85, 86; with Instructions, Forms, and Practical Directions. The Acts of 
 1837, viz. 7 Will. 4, c. 1, and 1 Viet. c. 22, with Notes and Index. By 
 
 J. S. Burn, Esq., Secretary to the Commission. 12mo. 65. Qd. boards. 
 
 A Treatise on the Law of Gaming, Horse-Racing, and Wagers. 
 
 By Frederic Edwards, Esq., Barrister at Law. 12mo. 5s. cloth. 
 
 A Digest of Principles of English Law; arranged in the order 
 of the Code Napoleon, with an Historical Introduction. By George 
 Blaxland, Esq. Royal 8vo, £1 : 45. boards. 
 
 A Treatise on the Law of Commerce and Manufactures, and 
 
 the Contracts relating thereto; with an Appendix of Treaties, Statutes, and 
 Precedents. By Joseph Chitty, Esq. Barrister at Law. 4 vols. royal 
 
 8vo. £6 : 65. boards. 
 
 Anstey’s Pleader’s Guide ; a Didactic Poem, in Two Parts, 
 
 The Eighth Edition. 12mo. 7s. boards. 
 
 Hardy’s Catalogue of Lords Chancellors, Keepers of the Great Seal, 
 and Principal Officers of the High Court of Chancer 3 ^ By Thomas 
 Duffus PIardy, Principal Keeper of Records. Royal 8vo. 205. cloth. 
 (Only 250 copies printed.) 
 
 Ppthier’s Treatise on the Contract of Partnership : with the 
 
 Civil Code and Code of Commerce relating to this Subject, in the same 
 Order. Translated from the French. By O. D. Tudor, Esq., Barrister. 
 
 8vo., 5s. cloth. 
 
 Browne’s Practical Treatise on Actions at Law, embracing the 
 subjects of Notice of Action; Limitation of Actions; necessary Parties to 
 and proper Forms of Actions, the Consequence of Mistake therein ; and the 
 
 Law of Costs with reference to Damages. By R. J. Browne, Esq., of 
 Lincoln’s Inn, Special Pleader. 8vo., I65. boards. 
 
 i--- a 
 
 
o--o 
 
 MESSRS. BUTTERWORTH, 7, FLEET STREET, E. C. 47 
 
 35rrlc6iastiral 
 
 The Case.of the Rev. G. C. Gorham against the Bishpp of Exeter, 
 
 as heard and determined by the Judicial CoJimiittee of tlie Privy Council on 
 appeal from the Arches Court of Canterbury. By Edward F. Moork, 
 Esq., M.A., Barrister at Law ; Author of Moore’s Privy Council Reports. 
 Royal 8vo. 8s. cloth. 
 
 Archdeacon Hale’s Essay on the Union between Church and State, 
 and the Establishment by Law of the Protestant Reformed Religion in 
 England, Ireland, and Scotland. By W. H. Hale, M.A., Archdeacon of 
 London. 8vo. Is. sewed. 
 
 The Judgment of the Privy Council on Appeal in the Case of 
 Hebbert v. Purchas. Edited by Edward Bullock, of the Inner Temple, 
 Barrister at Law, Reporter in Privy Council for the Law Journal Reports. 
 Royal 8vo., 2s. 6f7. sewed. 
 
 Burder Heath. Judgment delivered on November 2, 1861, 
 by the Right Honorable Stephen Lushington, D.C.L., Dean of the 
 Arches. Folio, Is. sewed. 
 
 The Case of Long r. Bishop of Cape Town, embracing the opinions 
 of the Judges of Colonial Court hitherto unpublished, together with the de¬ 
 cision of the Privy Council, and Preliminary Observations by the Editor. 
 Royal 8vo., 6s. sewed. 
 
 The Judgment of the Dean of the Arches, also the Judgment of 
 the PRIVY COUNCIL, in Liddell (clerk), and Horne and others against 
 Westerton, and Liddell (clerk) and Park and Evans against Beal. Edited 
 by A. F. Bayford, LL.D. : and with an elaborate analytical Index to the 
 whole of the Judgments in these Cases. Royal 8vo., 3s. Qd. sewed. 
 
 The Law of the Building of Churches, Parsonages and Schools, 
 and of the Division of Parishes and Places—continued to 1874. By 
 Charles Francis Troaver, M.A., Barrister at Law. Post 8vo. 9 s. cloth. 
 
 The History and Law of Church Seats or Pews. By Alfred 
 Heales, F.S.A., Proctor in Doctors’ Commons. 2 vols. 8vo. 16 s. cloth. 
 
 Field’s Law relating to Protestant Curates and the Residence 
 of Incumbents or their Benefices in England and Ireland. By C. D. Field, 
 M. A.,LL.D., Author of “The Law of Evidence in India,” &c. Post 8vo. 6s. cl. 
 
 Hamel’s Law of Ritualism in the United Church of England and 
 Ireland. With Practical Suggestions for Amendment of the Law, and a 
 Form of Bill for that purpose. By F. Hargave Hamel, Esq., of the 
 Inner Temple, Barrister at Law. Post 8vo. Is. sewed. 
 
 The Judgment delivered by the Right Hon. Sir Robert Phillimore, 
 D.C.L., Ofhcial Principal of the Court of Arches, in the Cases of Martin v. 
 Mackonochie and Flamank v. Simpson. Edited by Walter G. F. Phil¬ 
 limore, B.A., of the Middle Temple, Fellow of All Souls College, and 
 Vinerian Scholar, Oxford. Royal 8vo. 2s. Qd. sewed. 
 
 Judgment delivered by the Right Hon. Lord Cairns on behalf 
 of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in the case of Martin v. 
 Mackonochie. Edited by W. Ernst Browning, Barrister at Law'. 
 Royal 8vo. Is. Qd. sewed. 
 
 The Privilege of Religious Confessions in English Courts of 
 
 Justice considered in a Letter to a Friend, liv Edward Badeley, Esq., M.A., 
 Barrister at Law. 8vo. 2s. sewed. 
 
 The Practice of the Ecclesiastical Courts, with Forms and Tables 
 of Costs. By H. C. Coote, F.S.A., Proctor in Doctors’ Commons, &c., 
 8vo. 28s. boards. 
 
 A Practical Treatise on the Law of Advowsons. By J. Mirehouse, 
 Esq., Barrister at Law\ 8vo. 14 s. boards. 
 
 The Lord’s Table: its true Rubrical Position. The Purchas 
 Judgment, not reliable. The Power of tlie Laity and Cliurchw'ardens to 
 prevent Romanizing. Suggestions to the Laity and Parishes for the due 
 ordering of the Table at Communion Time. The Rubrical Position of the 
 Celebrant. By II. F. Napper, Solicitor. 8vo. Is. sewed. 
 
 O’ 
 
o- 
 
 antr i^ciu <®tiitious in ^preparation. 
 
 Lr. Tristram’s Contentious Practice of the High Court of Justice 
 
 in granting Probates and Administrations. Seventh Edition. In 8vo. 
 
 * The Third Edition of Robson’s Treatise on the Law and Practice 
 
 in Bankruptcy. In 1 vol. 8vo. 
 
 A Concise Law Dictionary. By H. N. Mozley, of Lincoln's inn, and 
 G. C. WiiiTELEY, of the Middle Temple, Esquires, Barristers at Law. In 
 1 vol. 8vo. 
 
 The Fourth Edition,of Starkie’s Law of Slander and Libel. 
 
 By H. C. Folkard, Esq., Barrister at Law. In 1 vol. 8vo. 
 
 The Third Edition of the Law of Mortgage, and other Securities 
 
 upon Property. By William Richard P’ishek, of Lincoln’s Inn, Esq., 
 Barrister at Law. In 2 vols. royal 8vo. 
 
 A Collection of Mortgage Precedents and Forms of Decrees. By 
 
 W. II. Fisher, Esq., of Lincoln’s Inn, Barrister at Law. In 1 vol. royal 8vo. 
 Oke’s Game Laws. Third edition. ByJ. \V. Willis Bund, Esq., Barrister 
 at Law. In post 8vo. 
 
 Oke’s Fishery Laws. Second edition. By J. W. Willis Bund, Esq., 
 Barrister at Law. In post 8vo. 
 
 Glen’s Law of Highways. Third edition, in 8VO. 
 
 Glen’s Public Health and Local Government. Eighth edition. In 8vo. 
 Clifford and Pickards’ Practice of the Court of Referees on 
 
 Private Bills in Parliament. Vol. III., Part I. In royal 8vo. 
 
 I Imprinted at London, 
 
 I nvmher Setien in Fleie streie ivithin Temple harre^ > 
 
 j whylom the signe of the Hande and starre, | 
 
 I and the Hovse where lined Richard Tottel, 
 
 I printer bn Special patented of t\)t bohcsl of tijc Common lalur 
 
 in the seueral Reigns of 
 
 I Kng EdwJ*VL and of the qvenex Marye and Elizabeth. 
 
 

Ittr. |Wa0i0tertal 
 
 Oke’s Laws as to Licensing Inns, &c. 1874; containing 
 
 .the Licensing Abts of 1873 and 1B74, and the other Acts in force.as to Ale¬ 
 houses, Beer-houses^ Wine and Befreshment-houses, Shops, &c., selling 
 Intoxicating Liquors, and Billiard and Occasional Licences. Systematically 
 arranged, with Explanatory Notes, the authorized Forms of Licences, Tables 
 of Otfences, Index, &c. By George C. Okb, late Chief Clerk to the Lord 
 Mayor of London. Second Edition, with all the Cases decided to the pre¬ 
 sent time. By W. Cunningham Glen, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. Post 8vo. 
 10s. cloth. 
 
 . ‘VThe arrangement in chapters adopted hy Mr. Ok(^ seems to us hettet than the plan pursued 
 by the authors of the rival work; and we think that Mr. Glen ha# done well to leave in many 
 cases a concise statement of the effect of the legislation repealed by the late act. He also gives 
 a useful list of places beyond the metropolitan district, and in the police district.”—jSSj^ictior/ 
 Journal. 
 
 “ Mr. Oke has brought out by far the best edition of the act.”—Zatr Times .. 
 
 “ We are sure that lawyers who have licensing cases and magistrates who have to administer 
 the new act will be very glad to hear that Mr. Oke has published a treatise on the subject.”— 
 Law Jouimal. 
 
 Oke’s Magisterial Synopsis ; a Practical Gnide for 
 
 Mngi^trat^s, theic Clerks, Attornies, and’Constables; Summary Convictions 
 andTndietable-Offences, witluheir Penalties, Punishments, Procedure, &C.,. 
 being qlpJiahetically and tabularly arranged: with a Copious Index. 
 Eleventh Edition, much enlarged. By George C. Oke, late Chief Clerk 
 to the Lord Mayor of London. In 2 vols. 8vo. 63s. cloth. 
 
 “We earnestly recommend to the higher classes of this country Mr. Oke’s Synopsis, not as a 
 • mere reference index or dictionary to be snatched, up at a moment of pressing need, but a 
 subject of quiet study. In conclusion, we beg to tender our warmest thanks to Mr. Oke for the 
 immense boon conferred by him on the legal profession, the magistracy, and the whole com¬ 
 munity by his Synopsis, which now, as on a former occasion, we venture th designate as the 
 standard guide of the magisterial bench, and the indispensable companion of every jusOce of the 
 peace.”— Law,Journal. 
 
 Oke’s Magisterial Formalist; being a Complete Col- 
 
 lection of Forms and Precedents for practical use in all Cases out of Quarter 
 Sessions, and in Parochial Matters, by Magistrates, their Clerks, AttOniies 
 and Constables. By George C. Oke, Author of “ The Magisterial 
 Synopsis,'^ &c. Fifth Edition, enlarged and improved. By Thomas W. 
 Saunders, Esq., Barrister-at-Law, and Recorder of Bath. 8vo. 3Ss. cl. 
 
 Oke’s Handy Book of the Game Laws; containing the 
 
 whole Law as to Game, Licences and Certihcates, Poaching Prevention, 
 Trespass, Rabbits,'Deer, Dogs, Birds and Poisoned Grain'throughout the 
 United Kingdom. Systematically arranged, with the Acts, Decisions, Notes, 
 Forms, Suggestions, &.c. By George C. Oke, Author of The Masris- 
 terial Synopsis,^'' &c. 2'hb'd Edition. By . 1 . W. Willis Bund, Esq., 
 Barrister-at-Law* l*2nio. {In the Press.) 
 
 Oke’s Handy Book of the Fishery Laws. By George 
 
 C. Oke, Author of ‘‘The Magisterial Synopsis.'' By J. W. Willis 
 Bund, Esq, Barrister-at-Law, Author of “The Law of Salmon Fisheries 
 in England and Wales," &c. Second Edition. 12mo. {In the Press.) 
 
 Oke’s Law of Turnpike Roads; comprising the whole 
 
 of the General Acts now In force, including those of 1861; the Acts as to 
 Union of Trusts, for facilitating Arrangements with their Creditors, as to the 
 interference by Railways with Roads, their non-repair, and enforcing contri¬ 
 butions from Parishes, &c., practically arranged. With Cases, copious 
 Notes, all the necessary Forms, and an elaborate Index, &c. By George 
 C. Oke. Second Edition. 12mo. 18s. cloth. 
 
aato SHotKd for :Stuirrnt 6 . 
 
 Mr. Seijeant Stephen’s New Blackstone’s Commen- 
 
 tariGS. Seventh Edition. By James Stephen, Esq., LL.D., Judge of 
 County Courts, &c. 4 vols. 8vo, 4/. 4«. cloth. 
 
 Trower’s Prevalence of Equityunder the 25th Section of 
 
 the Judicatiire Act, 1873, amended by the Judicature Act of 1875. 8v'o.' cl. 
 
 Chute’s Equity in relation to Common Law. 8vo. 9s. cl. 
 
 “Mr. Cl’.ute has a chance of prolonged existence. His book Is not on the Judicature 
 Act.”— Late Journal. ' . 
 
 Pulton’s Cons;titutional History. Post 8vo. 7s. cloth. 
 Underhill’s Law of Torts or Wrongs. Post 8vo. 6.5. cl. 
 
 “ He has set forth the elements of the law with clearness and accuracy.”—Lam THmes. 
 
 Seaborne’s Manual of the Law of 'ITendors and Pur- 
 
 chafers, and Supplement to 1874. Post 8vo. 9#. cloth. 
 
 Kelly’s Conveyancing Draftsman. Post 8vo. 6s. cloth. 
 Goldsmith’s Doctrine and Practice of Equity. Sixth 
 
 Edition. Post 8vo. 185. cloth. 
 
 Mosely’s Articled Clerks’Handy-Book. 12mo; 7s. cl. 
 Benham’s Preliminary Exam. Guide. 12mo. 3s. cloth. 
 Bedford’s Intermediate Examination Guide. 2 vols. i n 1. 
 
 8vp. 145. 6d. cloth. 
 
 Bedford’s Final Examination Guide to the Judicature 
 
 Acts, 1878 and 187-5. 8vo. 7s. 6d. cloth, 
 
 Bedford’s Table of Principal Steps in an Action in 
 
 the Suj'n’cnie Court of Judicature. On a Sheet, I 5 . 
 
 Bedford’s Pinal Examination Guide to the Law of 
 
 Pi-obate and Dis’orce.^ In 8vo. .(/n Preparation.) 
 
 Lewis’s Principles of Equity Drafting; with Forms. 
 
 By Hubert Lewis, Esq., Banister at Law. Post 8vo. 125 . cloth. 
 
 Lewis’s Principles of Conveyancing. 8vo. I 85 . cloth. 
 Barry’s Treatise on the Practice of Conveyancing. 
 
 By W. W. Barry, Esq., of Lincoln's Inn, Barrister at Law. 8vo. I85. cloth. 
 
 Hunter’s Suit in Equity; with Forms. Sixth Edition, 
 
 by G. \V, Lawrance, Barrister at Law. PostSvo. 125 . cloth. 
 
 Cutler & Griffin’s Analysis of Indian Penal Code. 8 vo. 6 . 9 . cl. 
 Nasmith’s Institutes of English Public Law. 8 vo. 12 ^. cl 
 M. Ortolan’s History of Roman Law, translated by 
 
 I. T. Prichard and D. Nasmith, Barristers-at-Law. 8vo. 285. cloth. 
 
 The Bar Examination Journal: containing the Exami¬ 
 nation Papers with Answers of each Bar Examination. By A. D. Tyssen 
 and Sir R. K. \Vilson> Bart., Barristers. 35.each sewed; by post 3.s*, \d* 
 
 The Law Examination Journal and Law Student’s 
 
 Magazine. Edited by Herbert N ewaian Mozley, Esq., Barrister at Law. 
 Containing Uadiiig Articles, Notes of Important Legal Decisions, Intermel 
 mate and Final Examination Questions and .^Inswers, Reviews of Books 
 Correspondence, kc. Published after each Fkiftl Examination for Solicitors 
 m Hil,, East., Trin. & Mich. Terms, 8vo. m Numbers at l 5 ., post I 5 . Id, 
 
 The Preliminary Examination Journal and Student’s 
 
 Literary Magazine. By J. E. Benham. In 18 Nos., now complete in 
 one vol., containing all the Questions and Answers from 1871 to 1875 
 with Indexes, <S:c., price 18s. cloth. •