Papurau Newydd Cymru

Chwiliwch 15 miliwn o erthyglau papurau newydd Cymru

Cuddio Rhestr Erthyglau

7 erthygl ar y dudalen hon

QUEEN ANNE RESURRECTED. ----

Newyddion
Dyfynnu
Rhannu

QUEEN ANNE RESURRECTED. Legal Wrangle at Newtown Over a Montgomery Castrator's Right of New Trial. The arguments of lawyers when strictly legal nre not usually of interest to anyone except the parties concerned, but a debate between » cates before His Honour Judge Evans and the ■Registrar (Mr William Watkins) was evidently enjoyed by the people in Newtown County Court ^r^Ch^es^S. Pryce. of Montgomery, intimated to His Honour that he was appearing to make an application for a new trial in the case 'of .Bphraim Williams v. Pryce, which had been decided by his Honour in the last court. Mr Martin Woosnam briefly intimated that he was nresent to oppose such an application. Mr Pryce said that the case in question » claim for damages for breach of covenant, and also a claim for an injunction against the defendant carrying on the business of a castrator in certain parishes. The defendant Pryce had been aPPren" ticed to Ephraim Williams, and he was forbidden to practice in a district defined in an indenture dated 1892. His articled clerk-Mr J. E. Tomlej had appeared for him in court, and his Honour would probably remember that the action was founded upon the indenture dated 1392 —an ap- prenticeship indenture—and m that the defendant was bound not to practice the business of a cas- trator in certain parishes. During the course of the hearing it transpired that a small considera- tion had passed between the defendant and the plaintiff, and that did not appear in the face of the indenture. HIS HONOUR THEN DISCOVERED on the indenture a note at the bottom, to the effect that the amount of the money or the value of any other matter given or agreed to be given with the apprentice by way of premium must be duly ll- serted in words, or the indenture would bo vow and duly forfeited. He understood that upon that note his Honour decided that the whole of the in- denture became invui: Of course, upon the face of that document with that note there was no ground for supposing that the indenture would be valid, but as a matter ci fact it was the note it- self which was wrong. The note, no doubt, was inserted to meet section o contained in the Stamp Act of 1870. In that Act it was provided that the full consideration in indentures of that kind must be clearly stated in the indenture itself. Under section 40 of that particular statute it became necessary to insert that note for the purpose of precaution, and in addition to the section, he would refer his Honour to the schedule to the same Act, and there he would see that the stamp on an indenture of that kind was 2s. 6d, and was a fixed stamp. In addition to the 2s 6d, a stamp of 5s was required for every additional C5 or faction of P-5 included in the premium. So that was clear- ly the reason why that footnote had been inserted by the printers under the old Act of 1870. His Honoar That point was not raised, I don't think, in court at the last hearing. "TAKEN BY SURPRISE." Mr Pryce No, your Honour, the whole matter came as a great surprise, and I don't think anyone was more surprised than my friend here—Mr Mar- tin Woosnam. His Honour But nothing was raised as to the immateriality of the note Mr Pryce Xo, sir. Everyone was taken by sur- prise, and nothing was argued further. By the Stamp Act of 1891, the whole of the Act of 1870 was repealed with the exception of two sections, and corresponding provisions of course, were in- serted dealing with the question of apprenticeship indentures. Under section 25 of the Act of 1891, every writing relating to the indenture of any ser- vant is to be deemed an instrument of apprentice- ship. In the Act of 1891 there is no provision cor- responding with section 40 of the Act of 1870. That is—requiring that the consideration in ap- prenticeship indentures shall appear as part of the indenture. If that. indenture had been rectified, that note would not have applied or put in. It happened to be one of the old forms. His Honour four point is that it has no operation since the Act of 1891. Mr Woosnam said that his point was ft hat the attention of the learned judge had not been di- rected to the point of law which governed his de- cision. It was the point of law which his friend should have appealed against if he thought his Honour was wrong. There were certain points in practice in the County Court the same as in the High Court, and he submitted that the only ground ûf appeal on which his friend could rely was MISDIRECTION BY THE JUDGE. His Hone-,ir No, it's not quite that i t i; rather a point of omission. Suppose the case is taken on appeal, there would be an objection even if you had not raised the point. Mr Woosnam With regard to this stamp, I don't quite see why the indenture was entered into. It is an unfortunate thing for my friend that the stamp on that indenture happens to be in 1892, so that when he obtained his form he got it stamped. It is unfortunate that he did not take that note out. Mr Pryce The indenture was not stamped by me the form was purchased from the post office. Mr Woosnam The Inlaad fieveiiue authorities must have thought it was necr ary to leave that c!ause in then. It is quite tr:e that in the Act of fc91 the provision of the Act 1, 1370 was re- pealed, but there is one unfortunate position for jny friend in that he has not quoted the mcipal Act relating to apprentices. The particular Act which made it necessary to insert the consideration was passed in the eighth year of the reign of Queen Anne. Mr Pryce I hope that that Act is as dead as Queen Anne, too. Mr Woosnam My friend takes up his position from the Act of 1370. I am reading now from the Act of Queen Anne, which makes void indentures of apprenticeship ill which the full sums of money received or paid are not truly inserted. It does not ayply when the sum actually paid is inserted in the indenture, though it be a sum less than what was actliaiin, agreed on. This was the case here. The Act of 1870 did not repeal that old Act of Anne, neither has the Act of 1391 repealed it. My friend cannot find in the schedule of the Act of 1870 or the Act of 1391 that that old Queen Anne statute which related exclusively to apprentices has been repealed. There is no provision whatever III the schedules repealing it, and in tiip third schedule of the Act of 1891 there is absolutely no reference at all to the Act of Anne. UNTIL MY FRIEND SHOWS that that Act has been repealed, he has no ground at all i or his application. His Honour: lour contention is that this clause has been allowed to remain en account of the ante- cedent Act of Queen Anne. Mr W oosnam It cannot be contended for a moment that because a man pays £ 50 to learn a trade, it has to appear on an indenture. His Honour If the case wholly relied upon the construction oi the Stamp Act, the decision would be wrong, but if the Act of Anne still holds, then the decision holds. Mr Woosnam That indenture really ought to be in the custody of the apprentice. Apart from that, it might have been the means of getting the apprentice a situation. The question is why should no. the sum haVe beC" inSened apart from the sramp coSfdefaUoT^ here about the asMI reSL^' your Honour. As far ties themselves. iegal documents uWnrir* H x>°f ,^awi°S VPI-I Priru-d forms. But this was .,3°' tami as a matter of fact I knew pect 1° should have puTlt'Vp0"' oiheTwia° 1 His Honour: The only questioil is the Act of Anne is still good ian'1 '^cr the Mr Prj ce Mj. friend ha3 not brought the \ct but only a digest here. His Honour Yes. What is thP ,i,t„ <• last case on the Act ? *iZCe }'0ar *°n0V WiiI See th*t this is a most important matter tor ray clie t »T, s tract has been assiduously kept for eight yea°rs and now fcr it to be upset by a meJ mistake of this kind i* technical VERY DISTRESSING FOR MY CLIENT. His Honour: I will not upset it unless I am bound to. am Mr Pryce My friend simply brings a digest. I suggest that if this contract comes under those two Stamp Acts, there is no doubt a new trial would be granted. In order that no injustice be done, I suggest, your Honour, that this matter be new adjourned, and this question should be further and more fully considered. Mr Woosnam: I don't agree to that, sir. His Honour: Have you any decision subsequent to the last Stamp Act ? Mr Pryce: That was just what I was going to suggest. I want to be perfectly fair. I could ■contend that the reason why that provision was inserted in the Stamp Act of 1870 was to provide against the possibility of indentures being executed without the proper payment of dutv. His Honour; I don't think we can argue to advantage in the absence of the material thing. I will adjourn this, and take the opportunity of consulting the Act myself. I should not be in order in consulting any mere text book. If the Act of Anne does apply, then the judgment stands if it does not, then it means a new trial. Mr Woosnam In any case, I should ask your Honour to grant us the costs of to-day. His Honour I will reserve the question of costs. Mr Woosnam This, of course, does not do away with the unreasonableness of the covenant. His Honour No but what is the date of your digest ? Mr Woosnam 1898, sir. Mr Pryce: Of course, that does not make his book any more authentic. His Honour Is any case mentioned there since the passing of the Act ? Mr Woosnam then cited some cases from the digest. His Honour I asked if there was any decision of the High Court, assuming that the Act of Anne is still good law. What is the latest decision upon this Act of Anne ? Mr Woosnam May I point out that in the di- gest there are decisions relating entirely to the stamping. His Honour: I find that in digests that once things are put in, they are left there. Mr Pryce Like the printers, sir (laughter). His Honour: The problem you have to solve is whether the Act of Anne is still in existence.

MONTGOMERYSHIRE HUNTERS SOCIETY.…

CAERSWS GUARDIANS.

Interesting to our Farmer…

RHAYADER.

PARISH COUNCIL ELECTIONS IN…

THE PRINCE OF WALES IN MONTGOMERYSHIRE.