THE Right Honourable Sir James Hannen, like another distinguished contemporary judge, whom moreover he in no small degree resembles in strength and clearness of intellect and wide knowledge of the law -we mean Lord Bramwell-springs from a commercial family. He is the eldest son of the late Mr. James Hannen, of Kingswood, Surrey, formerly a merchant in the City of London, and was born in 1821. He received his early education at St. Paul's School, but instead of adopting the at that time almost invariable course for one intending to enter a learned profession of proceeding to Oxford or Cambridge, he resolved to finish his education in Germany, and entered himself as a student in the University of Heidelberg. Returning home he joined the Middle Temple, and was called to the Bar by that Society in 1848, attaching himself to the South-Eastern, or, as it was then called, the Home Circuit. A glance at the list of the members of that celebrated circuit at that period will show that the competition in which young Hannen boldly joined was of the hottest description. Many of the companions of his youth have gone over to the majority, but some still survive, and have gained brilliant reputations and elevated positions. Amongst the leaders we find the names of the veteran Montagu Chambers; of Russell Gurney, late M.P. for Southampton, and Recorder of the City of London; of Serjeants Channell and Shee, who both rose to be judges; of Jones, Gaselee, and Dowling, the author of the Reports which bear his name; whilst the powerful array of juniors with whom he had to hold his own included Addison, the author of the "Law of Torts," Arnould, Hurlstone, Petersdorff, and Prentice, also distinguished in the walk of legal literature: Ballantine, afterwards known to the world as the Sergeant; and Bramwell, Denman, and Keating, jurists and judges whose fame has long been established. To successfully rival such men, was, it will be admitted, no easy task, and yet the subject of our sketch was not long

in obtaining an extensive practice, the amount of commercial business entrusted to him being in especial very large. He proved himself fully equal to its requirements, and was continually retained in complicated and important actions. He was one of the counsel employed by the successful claimant in that mine of evidentiary law, the great Shrewsbury case, in which the House of Lords, after a most lengthy sifting of evidence of the most delicate and peculiar kind, finally determined that Earl Talbot had made out his right to the "title, honour, and dignity" of Earl of Shrewsbury. So great was Mr. Hannen's reputation for ability and industry, that at about this time he was appointed to the post of Junior Counsel to the Treasury, or "Attorney General's Devil," an office for many and obvious reasons never given to any but a man of tried capacity, and carrying with it from time immemorial the reversion to a puisne judgeship. To this he succeeded in August, 1868, when he took the place of Mr. Justice Shee, in the Queen's Bench, and had the usual honour of Knighthood conferred on him. It was considered in those days a remakable circumstance that Mr. Hannen, whose politics were Liberal of a very downright type, should have been raised to the Bench by a Conservative Ministry, and the remarks of a leading journal on the subject are as amusing as interesting. Certainly public opinion advances with giant strides. "The choice," it wrote, "is the

HANNEN.

more creditable to the Government, because Mr. Hannen was not merely a Whig, but an advanced Liberal, and as lately as the last general election had opposed at Shoreham Mr. Stephen Cave, one of themselves. The generosity that could recognise professional merit through the mist that political partisanship often throws about the vision of the best of us is so rare-we might say so unprecedented-that all who hold with us that judicial appointments should never be determined by political party or personal considerations will, we are confident, give to this one the most grateful recognition and thank the Ministry for the good example it has set, but which it can scarcely be hoped that its successors will follow. The last vacant judgeship was offered to Sir Roundell Palmer, a still more distinguished Liberal. It was then said by sour politicians who can see good in nothing that comes from an opponent that the generosity was stimulated by the desire to remove a powerful rival in Parliament. But it would be difficult for the most spiteful of democratic journals to find any evil motive for the promotion of Mr. Hannen." In the Queen's Bench Sir James Hannen had for colleagues Sir Alexander Cockburn, and Justices Blackburn, Mellor, Lush, and Hayes, and no better proof of the golden opinions he won from the profession in his new position can be given than that in November, 1872, he was

chosen to preside over the Court of Probate and Divorce in succession to Lord Penzance. To Occupy with credit the seat of the eminent lawyer and his predecessor, Sir Cresswell Cresswell, seemed an arduous task for so comparatively young a judge, especially as the Court, instituted in 1857, has always been considered to require special qualifications on the part of him who rules over it ever since-to quote the words of Sir Robert Phillimore on a memorable occasion "questions of the gravest and most important character, affecting the nearest and dearest interests of society, hitherto decided by the calm wisdom of a single judge, were for the first time submitted to the very different arbitrament of a jury." The earlier part, therefore, of Sir James Hannen's career in the Divorce Court was watched with close interest. It is sufficient to say that he is now held by common consent to compare favourably with those who have gone before him, and we will venture to say that few abler summings-up than those he delivered in the causes célèbres of Gladstone v. Gladstone, Robinson v. Robinson and Delacour, and Hall v. and Hall Richardson were ever delivered in the little room at Westminster in which he used to sit. Sir James was sworn a member of the Privy Council in 1872. Some years ago it was thought that he would have been made a Lord Justice of Appeal, but he did not leave the post with which he is identified. The able, dignified, and, above all, the firm manner, yet not without tact, with which he has presided at the Commission, have added to his laurels, and events have proved that the selection of the President (and the other judges) was about the only judicious performance of the Government in the matter of the Commission.

THERE were seven "Colonials" in the two University crews competing on the Thames on Saturday. Of this number, three were in the winning crew, and four in the Oxford boat. We are informed that six out of the seven are intended for the glorious profession of the law.

OLD-TIME SWORN BROKERS.

MESSRS. H. HALFORD & CO.

WHEN the universality of the desire for speculation, which seems innate in human nature, is combined with the growing absolute need of making money in more ways than one, the only possible outcome must be an increasing interest, not only in the monetary world and its fluctuations, but in the men themselves who are closely identified with it in the public mind, who live in the midst of the complex but fascinating world in which fortunes are made without labour, who even regulate to some degree by their individual action the ebb and flow of the great tide of finance.

We are all born speculators. How necessary, then -we may soon say how indispensable-the existence of experts in matters monetary-men of wide experience, of clear foresight, of calm nerve, of sound judgment, who may be trusted to clip the wings of imagination for a too sanguine investor, to aid the inexperienced, to fortify the irresolute, to see that when comes that "tide in the affairs of men, which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune," the golden moment is not permitted to slip by unprofitably, for lack of either nerve or knowledge.

The growing taste for speculation in stocks and shares is, after all, a somewhat pardonable weakness.

This being so, the guidance of a reliable mentor, the advice of a qualified monitor is needed, and if a quarter-of-a-century-old firm of sworn brokers are not fair representatives of this class of guide, philosopher, and friend, we confess our inability to discover better. Inspired with this feeling, prompted, I will admit, by the perusal of certain singularly lucid and comprehensive publications emanating from 2, Royal Exchange Avenue, your interviewer set out one morning last week with the intent of interviewing, if possible, that good old firm of brokers, Messrs. H. Halford & Co., and so adding to his own and the public stock of knowledge of the methods and marvels. of the monetary world.

It was pleasant to find that even here, amidst all the whirl and worry of incessant financial calculation and operation, the name of PUMP COURT was once more an "Open Sesame," and I scarcely had time to contrast the cosy comfort of these offices with the pitiless cold outside, before I found myself shaking hands cordially with an oldish gentleman who, from his appearance, might have been a highly respectable family solicitor of the good old school, but who really proved to be Mr. Bedford, the active managing partner in the busy firm.

"Mr. Halford ?" I asked, naturally anxious to go at once to the fountain-head for information.

"Mr. Halford's age prevents him from attending here every day. My name is Bedford, and the bulk of the business passes through my hands now. What can I do for you?

"Tell me something about yourself and your business, if you will.”

"Certainly. Where shall I begin?" "At the beginning-as children say."

"Well, that means going back five-and-twenty years, or, so far as I am concerned, twenty years, for it is just twenty years since I entered into partnership with Mr. Halford, whose record, as does mine, goes back to the time when it was necessary to give security for three or four thousand pounds in order to become a sworn broker, and also to take an oath to be straightforward in all your dealings and to protect the interests of your clients."

"Your combined experience ought to be valuable." "I think it is worth something. It would be odd, indeed, if it were not, for there is no class of security of which we have not carefully watched the course for a couple of decades. But perhaps the best evidence I could offer you on that point will be found here"-and Mr. Bedford pointed to a set of ten large volumes.

"What are those-records of the firm's transactions?" "Yes, and no," said the broker. "As a matter of fact they are bound volumes of original testimonials, if you like to call them so, or letters of congratulation and

"Oh, I see, letters of thanks from every part of the United Kingdom. They all seem to tell the same satisfactory tale, and those I have before me range from 1885 up to to-day, and I observe numerous instances fo letters from the same clients showing that when they once come to you they always seek you again. I should say there were over 3,000 of these letters here?" "About 3,000; but we have thousands more not bound up."

"Well, all I can say is, that there is not a firm in the City in any line of business who could show anything more conclusive as to the highly satisfactory terms they are on with their clients. You ought to be proud of these testimonials."

"So I am," said the broker, emphatically. "May I copy one?"

"Yes, if you don't copy the name."

"Well I'll take the last one bearing to-day's date. It is a fair sample of the rest, and I don't want to go out of my way to select, especially as of my way to select, especially as they all, for larger or smaller sums, breathe the same tone."

"March 29, 1889.-Gentlemen,-Received and am much obliged for your cheque for £25 13s. I must say it is extremely satisfactory to have to deal with such prompt business men as yourselves. I have tried several other brokers besides yourself, and even where I have made money I have had to write several times before I could get it. I have always got it, but it is hardly worth the trouble taken in getting it. As you see, I have returned to you again.-Yours faithfully,"

"There, that will do for me. I may take it for granted, then, that as a rule you make a profit for your clients." "Undoubtedly, but we do not by any means desire to claim infallibility. We make mistakes, sometimes, like other folk, but as a rule our long and varied experience prevents us from going far wide of the mark. then our system of doing business offers an exceptional security to our clients that we shall do our best for them, as in serving them well we are literally serving ourselves."

And

"What is your speciality in that direction, then?" "Why, instead of charging a commission, as most firms do, upon each transaction, quite irrespectively of whether our clients may have been gainers or losers, we charge nothing whatever for our services except in cases where our clients have made a profit, and then our own remuneration is regulated by the success which has followed our efforts in their behalf, as we then deduct a commission of one-tenth of the profit actually made by our clients."

"That seems a particularly fair arrangement; so fair, indeed, to your clients, that surely you must sometimes suffer by it."

"Not to any extent worth consideration, and you can quite understand what a stimulus it must give to the public to repose confidence in us and our advice, when they see that we have sufficient faith in our own judgment to be prepared to stand or fall by the actual results of following our advice."

"What is the amount of 'cover' you you ordinarily require?"

"Our clients are at liberty to place any amount of 'cover' they like on their operations; we only stipulate in their interest as well as ours that it shall not be less than 1 per cent."

"What risk do your clients really take?"

"That also depends entirely on themselves-upon the extent to which they wish to deal. In this kind of business, their liability begins and ends with the amount of 'cover' deposited with us, but as I have already explained to you, we charge absolutely no commission when we are allowed to use our own discretion, unless our clients net a profit. This, I am glad to say, both for their sakes and our own, occurs in the great majority of instances."

"Your literary labours in the shape of your monthy monitor, your annual 'Pocket Book for Investors,' and your Stock Exchange Record,' to say nothing of your smaller and more frequently issued periodicals, must involve great labour and expense."

"Yes, both. But they are worth the trouble and the cost. I venture to say that after steadily consulting them an investor will not only gain much valuable information, but cannot very well fail to feel some confidence in a firm which takes as much trouble as we do to be accurate and comprehensive. That they do appreciate them, and us, is best proved by the fact that our business steadily increases year by year, and bythose ! "

And with a wave of the hand and a gratified look in the direction of the ten formidable volumes of testimonials, Mr. Bedford rose from his chair and shook hands, thanking me for my call with as much courtesy as if I was under no obligation to him for a host of reliable information of a quite exceptional character, upon a subject of peculiar interest, not only to myself but to all who have money to invest and seek a monitor, who can not only point the way to profit, but relieve clients of all but the pleasurable labour of pocketing their gains.

UNDER THE PUMP.

1911

The Railway and Canal Traffic Act, 1888. By W. A. Hunter, LL.D., M.P., of the Middle Temple, Barrister-at-Law, 1889. (Sweet & Maxwell, Limited).-It would be very surprising if the author of the admirable "Treatise on Roman Law," which is so familiar to the and Bar, penned a work deserving at gun aught but praise. We were prepared to find much originality of treatment throwing new light on the subject treated of. And in this volume, Part I as it is called, Ha being an exposition of section 24 ilman on of the Railway Act of last session, we have not been disappointed. The opening chapter is a bright example of simple and comprehensive treatment of difficult and complex questions, and that the research involved in the preparation of the closely condensed matter has been laborious and thorough is obvious. The history, brief as it is, of railway legislation, the reference to evidence extracted from the reports of the Select Committees of the House of Commons between 1838 and 1840, the comparisons of our system with that prevailing in the United States, are all excellent features. The main points of the book, however, are the compendious collection in it of all needful practical information, and the spirit of critical inquiry which pervades the observations made. Railway companies and traders will find here the existing law under the Special Acts of twenty-four principal railways of the United Kingdom with respect to maximum rates, terminal charges, and the new classification of goods and revised schedules of rates, and lawyers will find the principles of law pertaining to those questions as laid down in numerous cases lucidly expounded. The book deserves, and should obtain, widespread recognition for its merits.

The Investment of Trust Funds, incorporating the Trustee Act, 1888. By E. Arundel Geare, B.A., of the Inner Temple, Barrister-at-Law. 2nd edition, (Stevens & Sons, 1889).-That this useful little work has been appreciated is shown by the fact that it has now reached a second edition. It appears to us to have been on the whole carefully compiled and to refer to most recent decisions of importance, but in some particulars, notably for example at page 88, in dealing with the rule of conversion laid down in the great case of Howe v. Earl of Dartmouth, 7 ves. Jr. 137 (White & Tud L. C. Eq.) the treatment has been somewhat scant, that case not being even cited there, though shortly mentioned on page 135; while on the other hand the consideration of (e.g.) Speight v.Gaunt, 9 App. Cas. 1, is spun out at inordinate length.

Investment Hints. By Maurice C. Hime, LL.D. Simpkin, Marshall & Co., 1 vol., 6d. The little volume

now "under the pump" is a practical illustration of the fact that a classical scholar need not necessarily pin his faith blindly to such axioms as ne sutor ultra crepidans. It is a novelty, indeed, to find the headmaster of a college issuing hints as to the investment of money, but it must be admitted that Dr. Hime's suggestions and warnings are for the most part sensible and practical, and the little book may be studied with advantage.

Herbert Severance. By M. French Sheldon. London: Saxton & Co. 1 vol.-There is no dearth of sensationalism in this novel, which, though by no means devoid of faults, undeniably possesses the recommendation of being unconventional alike in theme and style. Love, without which no story was ever yet a popular success, plays an important part in the plot of this singular tale, and never, surely, was its path beset with ruder obstacles. A hero who loves a charming girl only to hear her defamed and spoken of as the illegitimate daughter of his own uncle, is indeed in hard case, and in Herbert Severance this in itself sufficiently sensational condition of things is heightened in effect by the introduction of the villainous French Count, to whom the seduction of Herbert Severance's wife was due in the old days. When we add that after much exciting incident, a lavish allowance of semipsychological speculation, and some curiously sweeping denunciations of the temptations of a professional career, such as that of a prima donna, Hubert Severance and Count de la Rue are simultaneously struck dead by lightning when contemplating a duel to the death, enough has been said to prove that the story will be found exciting enough to satisfy the cravings of the most ardent lover of the sensational in fiction.

THE PEERS' SUMMONS TO

PARLIAMENT.

LORD CARNARVON'S Discontinuation of Writs Bill brings into prominence a curious and obscure question in the history of our Constitution, viz., under what right a peer is entitled to a seat in the House of Lords. The Bill proposes to enact that if it shall appear to the House of Lords that any peer has been guilty of discreditable conduct inconsistent with his position as a peer, and if the House presents an address to the Queen praying that the writ of summons issued to such peer may be cancelled, it shall be lawful for Her Majesty by warrant to cancel the writ, and the peer shall not be entitled to sit in the House of Lords. The Bill evidently regards a writ of summons as necessary to entitle a peer to sit in the House of Lords, and also assumes that Her Majesty has no power to refuse to send such a summons. This is probably correct, but the history of the right to receive such a summons is very curious, and not by any means perfectly free from difficulties. The House of Lords was in its origin the great council without the lesser barons. By the 14th section of Magna Charta the method of holding this Council is described. Archbishops, bishops, abbots, earls, and greater barons are to be summoned by special writ addressed to each of them individually, whilst the tenants-in-chief are to be summoned by writs addressed to the Sheriff. The writs in all cases are to name the day and place of meeting, and the cause of summons. Forty days notice at least is to be given, and on the day named the Council is to transact the business for which it has been summoned, whether or no it is attended by all to whom the summons is addressed. It is not known whether this clause of Magna Charta merely expressed and formulated existing practice or enacted new law. Sir Wm. Huson points out that it was omitted from subsequent confirmation of the charter, which may have been because it was unnecessary, being merely declaratory, or because it was unpopular with the barons who procured these confirmations-or considered by them too stringent-or it may have been

omitted from no special design, but because other matters were more pressing at the time of the confirmations. Peerage does not depend, as some people erroneously suppose, on nobility of blood, which is unknown to English law. In France formerly the son of a nobleman was himself a nobleman, but this of course is not so in England. The eldest son of a peer is only a commoner, although he bears a courtesy title, and would be tried for a crime by a common jury, as indeed was Lord Surrey, son of the Duke of Norfolk, in the time of Henry VIII. It appears clear that about the time of Edward I. the King summoned to his Council those whom he chose, who were usually, though not invariably, tenants of the crown and tenants of baronies. It did not follow that because a man had once received a summons he would be summoned again, or that his sons would receive a writ. The hereditary character of the House of Lords, however, sprang from the hereditary nature of the baronies, and according to Bishop Stubbs, by the year 1295 the baron whose ancestor had been summoned and had once sat in Parliament, could claim an hereditary right to be so summoned. Professor Freeman thinks that Dr. Stubbs fixes the dates a little too rigidly, and says, "One may certainly doubt whether Edward I., when he summoned a baron to Parliament, meant positively to pledge himself to summon that baron's heirs for ever and ever, or even necessarily to summon the baron himself to every future Parliament. . . But the perpetual summons, the hereditary summons,

Bill?

It is, no doubt, better to make the matter quite clear by an Act of Parliament rather than by any attempt to exercise obsolete privileges. How far the Bill, supposing it became law, would be workable, seems doubtful, as it would be very difficult to get the House to agree as to the sort of misconduct which is inconsistent with a man's position as a Peer. In many cases, however, the matter would be only too clear, and if the House of Lords is to be tinkered up, it might possibly be an advantage to have it cleared of men so notoriously bad that even the House of Lords cannot put up with them. On the other hand, however, the Lords might consider some radical Peer a very unfit person to be amongst them, and endeavour to get rid of him by the means provided in the proposed Bill.

ELECTRIC LAUNCHES.

ONE of our representatives viewed the boat race from aboard one of the electric charging stations of Messrs. Immisch & Co., which was moored off Mortlake. He was taken there by one of the firm's electric launches, the Viscountess Bury. A word or two about these launches, now that things aquatic are in vogue, will not be out of place. A more enjoyable mode of progress cannot well be conceived, and we look forward in the immediate future to the practical banishment from the river of the smoky, noisy, screaming steam launches. Just imagine no stoking, no laying in of coals, no

gradually became the rule. . . Things had reached Things had reached a point, when the lawyers were sure before long to lay down the rule that a single summons implied a perpetual and an hereditary summons." In 1673 it was held in the Clifton case that a man to whom a writ of summons is issued, and who, in consequence thereof, takes his seat in Parliament, acquires thereby an hereditary peerage. Incidentally, we may mention that Life Peers were undoubtedly occasionally created from the time of Richard IIto Henry VI. Thomas Beaufort was created Duke of Exeter in 1416, and before that, in 1377, Guichard D'Angle was created Earl of Huntingdon. The dispute on this point in the year 1856 will be remembered by many. Sir James Parke was then created Baron Wensleydale for life by Letters Patent. The opposition to this was so great, on the ground that the Crown's power had not been exercised for 400 years, that the matter was referred to the Committee of Privileges, and in the result it was declared that "neither Letters Patent, nor Letters Patent with the usual writ of summons in pursuance thereof, can entitle the grantee to sit and vote in Parliament." In consequence, Lord Wensleydale was made an hereditary peer.

Supposing the Queen were to refuse a writ of summons to any peer, it does not appear clear what remedy he would have, except by Petition of Right. In 1626, on the refusal of Charles I. to send a writ to Lord Bristol, the peers declined to sit without him, and the King had to give way. But supposing the Peers approved of a writ of summons not being sent to any partic lar Peer, and Her Majesty had refused to send he wit, would not the effect be very much the same as that proposed to be effected by Lord Carnarvon's

smoke, no dirt, no noise, no heat, no smell, and all the space available that in a steam launch is taken up by cumbrous boiler and machinery! You turn on a tap, as it were, and noiselessly but swiftly you proceed on your course; you turn off the tap, and as noiselessly you come to a standstill. You "back her," you "ease her," you "stop her," you "go on ahead," you "go on astern," by turning one or other of the set of handles plainly marked near the helm, which is so placed relatively to them that you can guide and set in motion at

the same time. The power costs a trifle more than steam, but this extra cost is more than counterbalanced by the saving in other directions, as these launches do not require the same constant attention as a steam launch, and their management is so very simple that in most cases the services of a man can be dispensed with. No more expensive engineers at fancy pay, and no more risk of boilers bursting! The wonder is that up to now more electric launches have not been seen on the river. This was no doubt caused by the absence of the necessary stations for supplying or renewing the electrical charge. The energetic firm we have alluded to have, however, met this little difficulty by arranging a number of charging stations along the river sufficiently close together, where launches can be re-charged at any time. We give above an illustration of the Viscountess Bury, which can accommodate from 60 or 70 people, also of a smaller launch for 16 persons.