?y or for whtim it THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 7 was printed ; that no one should set up a printing-office, nor make a press, nor cast letters without first giving notice to the Stationers' Company ; that, besides his Majesty's printer and the printers to the Universities, there should be twenty master printers and no more (the names of the first privileged ones are given), and in case of vacancies the Archbishop of Canterbury or the Bishop of London, with six other High Commissioners, might fill them up ; that all printers should, within ten days, become bound in the sum of £300 not' to print any but licensed books ; that no printer should keep above two presses unless he should have been Master or Upper Warden of his Company, when he might keep three ; and that whereas some printers had already more than this number, the supernumerary presses were to be suppressed ; that there should be four founders of letters only, each of whom should be allowed to have two apprentices ; that founders should employ no one who was not, or had not been, bound to the trade of founding letters, but that each founder might employ one boy who was not so bound to " pull off the knots of mettle hanging to the letters when they are first cast ; " and that one copy of every book should be sent to Stationers' Hall for the Bodleian Library at Oxford. The provisions of the decree of Elizabeth as to the number of apprentices, and as to the inquisitorial powers of the Wardens of the Stationers' Company, were expressly continued. Offences against these decrees were to be dealt with by the Star Chamber or the High Com- mission Court, and the penalties of infringing any of the provisions were very heavy, extending even to whipping and the pillory. One would have thought that in the Long Parliament Pym or some other champion of freedom would have pro- cured that a decree so illegal and so vicious should be declared void, but the exact contrary is the fact, for there are several orders of both Lords and Commons confirming its provisions. One man there was who used his mighty 8 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. pen to urge the expediency of granting full liberty to the Press — John Milton, the poet, whose essay or "speech" on the subject addressed to the Parliament in 1644, under the name of " Areopagitica," is still read as a classic of the English language. But Milton was before his age. Nothing was done in the time of the Commonwealth, and as soon as Charles II. ascended the throne an Act of Parliament (13 & 14 Chas. II., c. 33) was passed, comprising nearly all the provisions of the decree of 1637, and still limiting the number of master printers to twenty. By the 14th clause, which followed the spirit of one in the decree of 1637, provision was made for the constant employment of jovu'ney- men, every master printer and letter-founder being required, under a penalty of £5, to employ all respectable journey- men free of their respective trades and applying for work, " although such master prmter or master founder of letters respectively, with his apprentice or apprentices, be able, without the said journeymen, to discharge his own work," and journeymen refusing or neglecting employment were to suffer three months' imprisonment at the least ; further, no pex'sons were to be employed in the said trades except Englishmen being freemen or sons of freemen or apprentices to the trade. This Act was a temporary one, but it con- tinued by various statutes till 1695. How it came to pass that the Act expiring in 1695 was not renewed we have not space here to tell. The story is graphically narrated by Macaulay in his ' ' History of Eng- land," and succinctly stated in the author's " Short History of Printing ;" but the important fact is that on the 3rd May, 1695, the law which had for so many years subjected the Press to a censorship, and limited the printers of the country to so small a number, expired. The result was remarkable. Immediately many new presses were set up, and a host of little news-sheets began to be published — timidly at first, it is true, for in the reign of Charles II. the judges — then mere creatures of the Crown — had declared it to be a common law misdemeanour to publish political THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. intelligence without the Royal licence, and printers were in doubt how far this would still be held law ; but no prose- cutions taking place, they grew bolder as time went on, and printing presses and newspapers multiplied throughout the land. 10 THE LAVv' AFFECTING PRINTERS. CHAPTER III. THE LAWS OF FORMER TIMES — (continued). The freed Press did not long escai:)e legislative interference ; and, indeed, in a great measure it brought it on itself by its licentiousness. Libelling was so rife in 1696 that a Bill was introduced into the House of Commons to re-impose a State censorship, but it was not proceeded with.^ In 1701 it was proposed to check the scurrilous little newspapers and i^ami^hlets by taxing every sheet, but this Bill was also thrown out. Authors being grievously pirated, a law was necessary for their protection, and accordingly the first Copyright Act was, as we have seen, passed in 1709. ^ Then the exigencies of the great Continental war in which this country became engaged required the raising of large sums of money, and many new taxes were imjiosed, one of them being a duty on paper whether home-made or im- ported. This was in 1711 (by the Act 10 Ann., c. 19). It had been proposed as long ago as 1696 to levy a duty^ on paper, but owing to the remonstrances of the paper-makers the proposal was not then carried into effect. This Act of 1711 accomplished, too, what had been attempted in 1701 : it imposed a tax upon every newspaper and pamphlet in addition to the paper duties ; ■* it also imposed a duty of twelve pence on every advertisement contained in a paper published weekly or oftener. To ensure payment it was provided (by section 113) that every sheet printed should bear on it the name of its printer, the penalty for omission being £20. These taxes had naturally a most repressive efiect on the ' " Pari. Hist.," v. 11C3. ^ 8 Ann., c. 21 (c. 19 Kuflf.). Of twenty per cent. * The duties were one halfpenny for cacli lialf -sheet of paper used, except that in the case of iiamphlcts consisting of more than one wliole sheet, tlie rate was 2s. for every sheet of paper used in a single copy of the work, whatever the number printed. THE LAW AFFECTING TRINTERS. 11 printing trade. They were imposed originally for thirty- two years, but were continued by subsequent statutes. Thus the Paper duty, which was increased in 1820, and reduced again afterwards, was not finally abolished till 1861.^ The duty on pamphlets continued till 1833, when it was repealed by 3 & 4 Wm, IV., c. 23, The Adver- tisement duty was repealed only in 1855. In 1815, by the Act 55 Geo. III., c. 185, it was fixed at no less than 3s. 6d. per announcement ; but in 1833, by the statute before cited, it was reduced to Is. 6d., at which rate it con- tinued till its abolition. The Newspaper duty was increased in 1804 (by the statute 44 Geo, III., c. 98) to 3^d. per copy for newspapers whose size did not exceed one sheet of demy, a further sum of 32d. per sheet being payable in the case of any larger paper. It was also foi-bidden to print newspapers on paper larger than 32 inches long by 22 inches wide. This provision was repealed in 1825 by the statute 6 Geo. IV., c, 119, which permitted the use of paper of any size, and recognised supplements. The duty had in the meantime, by the Act of 1815, been raised to 4d., and so it continued till 1836, when it was reduced to Id. per sheet for newspapers printed on sheets having a super- ficies of letterpress on one side not exceeding 1,530 square inches, an allowance increased to 2,295 square inches in 1853. In 1855 the compulsory duty on newspapers was abolished, the stamp, however, being still continued for postal purposes. It was finally abolished in 1870, when the halfpenny postage rate was adopted. It is to be observed that the Art of Printing was free from taxation until 1712, and has again been so since 18G1. It is scarcely to be imagined that any Government will again impose what have been very justly termed taxes on knowledge. Between the lapse of the Licensing Act in 1695 and the year 1798 there was no registration of printing-oflices, all * From 1836 to 1861 it was IJd. per lb. 12 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. persons having the power to open them as and where they pleased. In 1712, it is true, the House of Commons, owing to the continued prevalence of libels, passed a reso- lution in favour of their registration, but nothing came of it. In 1798, however, in consequence of the disturbances in this country brought on by the French Revolution, an Act was passed (38 Geo. III., c. 78) requiring every news- paper to be registered at the Stamp Office, with the names of its proprietors, printers, and publishers, and the place of printing and publication ; the names and addresses of the printers and publishers of newspapers were required to be printed on every paper issued, and within six days of pub- lication a copy of each issue was to be sent to the Stamp Office to be filed ; provisions were also made for discovering the names and addresses of all concerned in the issue of a newspaper. By a subsequent statute (GO Geo. III., c. 9) the proprietor of a newsjiaper had to enter into a recog- nisance to the extent of £300 (increased by 6 & 7 Wm. IV., c. 76, to £400) to pay any fines imposed. The Act of 1798 was repealed in 1836 by 6 & 7 Wm. IV., c. 76, which, however, re-enacted many of its chief provisions. In 1799 the system of registration was extended. By 39 Geo. III., c. 79, passed to put down sedition then rife, all printers, letter-founders, and makers and sellers of types and printing presses were to be registered with the clerk of the peace ; vendors of types were to keep a list of the persons to whom they sold them, and were to produce such list when called upon to do so ; the name and abode of the printer was to be printed on every book or paper ; printers were to keep a copy of every paper printed by them, and to write thereon the name of the person who employed them to j)rint it ; persons parting with or expos- ing to view a printed paper without the name of the printer thereon became liable to punishment, and justices of the peace might empower an officer to search for and seize sus- pected presses. This Act was amended by subsequent statutcH, but many of its provisicms continued to be law till 18(;!>, and, indited, some i>f them are law to this day. THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTEKS. 13 The penalty for issuing any printed book or sheet -without the name and address of tlie printer thereon was fixed at no less than £20 per copy, and anyone might sue for the same. Some men made a trade of doing so ; one deliberately laid a trap for printers by going about asking them to print a new title-page for an Elzevir, which of course he did not desire to bear the actual printer's name, and so grievous were the penalties hanging over the heads of printers that they procured the passing of an Act in 1811 (51 Geo. III., c. G5) limiting the penalty payable in respect of any one book or paper to £500, and empowering justices to mitigate the penalty to £5 per copy ; it also gave printers a right of appeal." In 1839 was passed a further Act (2 & 3 Vict., c. 12) which, reciting that the law above mentioned had given occasion to many vexatious proceedings at the in- stance of common informers, forbade any prosecution for penalties under it except by the law officers of the Crown, and altered the penalty to one not exceeding £5 per copy — a most mateiial change. Power was given also to put an end to certain proceedings for penalties then pending in the courts. In this way the law continued till 18GD, when it was resolved to consolidate all the enactments thought proper to be kept in force and to repeal all others, and accordingly in that year was passed the 32 & 33 Vict., c. 24, the second schedule to which contains almost all the laws not specially regulating printers. The difference between the conditions under which print- ing is now exercised and those formerly existing may best be brought to mind by considering the legal obligations of a printer, say sixty years ago. Upon commencing business he must make a declaration of his name and abode and of the situation of his printing-office, and file it with the clerk of the peace, who would thereupon grant him a certificate. '' His ^ A previous statute of indemnity to certain printers who had inadvertently incurred penalties had been passed in 1809 (49 Geo. III., c. GO.) ' Tliis was FLiquirod down to 18u9. 14 THE LAW AFFECTING FKINTEKS. type and presses would be purchased from persons similarly cei-tiiicated. Every scrap of paper he used was heavily taxed. If he printed anything (except an address card) without putting his name on it, any man in the street might com- mence proceedings against him, and he would be bound to pay at ledst £5, and possibly £20 per copy, the maximum penalty in respect of each work being the small sum of £500. He was bound to keep a copy of everything he printed, and to write on it the name and address of the person for vdiom he printed it, and must produce such copy to a justice of the peace when called upon at any time within six months. Should he jorint anything libellous or savouring of sedition — and a great many things which are circulated without hindrance at the present day would have been considered seditious — he would find the judges ready to inflict severe punishment upon him. If he printed an Almanack he must pay a duty of Is. 3d. on every copy. For every sheet in eveiy small pamplilet he printed he must pay a duty of 3s., every copy having to be taken to the Stamp Ofiice to be stamped, and woe betide him if he allowed any such things to go out of his custody before they were stamped. Should he purpose starting a newspaper he must make an affidavit of its title, its proprietors, publishers, and printers, with their names, addresses, and descriptions, and file it at the Stamp Oflice, and he must also enter into recognisances in the sum of £300 to pay any fines that might be imposed on him. Then, being at liberty to issue his paper, he must take eveiy copy to the Stamp Office, or print it on stamped paper, the duty being 4d. per sheet. He must also file a copy of each issue at the Stamp Office, and within 30 days pay a duty of 3s. Gd. on every advertisement contained in it ; the penalties payable on any transgression or omission being very severe. Such was the stale of the law in the days of our grand- fathers. THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTEKS. 15 CHAPTER IV. EXISTING LAWS SPECIALLY AFFECTING PRINTERS. We have now to see what are the laws which affect printers at the present day. Some of these concern printers ex- clusively ; others, such as the Factory Acts, concern them simply as members of a certain class of citizens ; while most laws affect them neither more nor less than they affect all other members of the State. In the present chapter we shall consider, first, who may be printers, and then we shall deal with those laws which exclusively or specially have regard to them. Who may be Printers. — Any person, whether man or woman, whether of full age or under age, single or married, native bom or alien, may set up a printing-office in this country. No notice is required to be given to any official, no registration^ is to be effected, nor is there any licence to be taken out. Married women could always set up m business m the City of London by virtue of the City custom ; and now, by the Married Women's Property Act, 1882 (45 & 4G Vic, c. 75), every married woman has the same power of making contracts and incurring debts as a single woman, and a married woman who cariies on a trade separately from her husband may be made a bankrupt. As regards persons under twenty-one years of age, or " infants " as they are called, there is no legal impediment to their setting up in business, as we have stated ; but as such persons are incapable of entering into valid contracts, except for "necessaries," it behoves persons dealing with them to be exceedingly cautious, and it is rarely safe to sell goods to them or to do work for them on credit. Certain duties are imposed on printers by statute. These are comprised in the schedule to the Act of 1869 before * This does not api^ly to the printers and publishers of newspapers, as to whom see post. IG THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. referred to (32 & 83 Vic, c. 24), and relate to (1) Imprint and (2) tlie Preservation of Copies. Imprint. — A printer must place on every work he prints, except such as are hereafter mentioned, a statement of his name and address, on pain of being fined a sum not exceeding £5 per copy. The following works need not bear an imprint, all others must do so : Impressions of engravings, address cards, business cards, price lists, lists or catalogues of goods dealt in or for sale, catalogues of estates for sale and the like, if printed by letterpress,*' bank notes, bills of exchange, pro- missory notes, bonds or securities for the payment of money, bills of lading, policies of insurance, letters of attorney, deeds, agreements, transfers or assignments of stocks or shares, receipts, law proceedings, and papers printed by authority of Parliament, or of any public board or public office. The words of the statutes are as follows : — ' ' Every person who shall print any paper or book whatso- ever which shall be meant to be published or dispersed, and wlio shall not print upon the front of every such paper, if the same shall be printed on one side only, or upon the first or last leaf of every paper or book which shall consist of more than one leaf, in legible charac- ters, his or her name and usual place of abode or business, and every person who shall publish or dis- l)erse, or assist in publishing or dispersing, any printed paper or book on which the name and place of abode of the person printing the same shall not be printed as aforesaid, shall for every copy of such paper so printed by him or her forfeit a sum not more than five pounds : Provided always, that nothing herein contained shall be construed to impose any penalty upon any person for printing any paper excepted out * Apparently, if these jobs (address cards, &c. ) are jirinted by any process otliur tlian letterpress, they must bear imprints. THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. "^ of the operation of the said Act of the thirty-ninth year of King George the Third, chapter seventy-nine, either in the said Act or by any Act made for the amendment thereof." (2 & 3 Vic, c. 12, sect. 2.) "Nothing in this Act contained shall extend or be con- strued to extend to any papers printed by the authority and for the use of either House of Parliament." (39 Geo. III., c. 79, sect, 28.) "Nothing herein contained shall extend to the impression of any engraving, or to the printing by letterpress of the name, or the name and address, or business or profession, of any person, and the articles in which he deals, or to any papers for the sale of estates or goods by auction or otherwise. " (39 Geo. III., c. 79, sect. 31.) " Nothing in the said Act of the thirty-ninth year of King George the Third, chapter seventy-nine, or in this Act contained shall extend or be construed to extend to require the name and residence of the printer to be printed upon any bank note, or bank post bill of the Governor and Company of the Bank of England, upon any bill of exchange or promissory note, or upon any bond or other security for payment of money, or upon any bill of lading, policy of insurance, letter of attorney, deed, or agreement, or upon any transfer or assign- ment of any public stocks, funds, or other securities, or upon any transfer or assignment of the stocks of any public corporation or company authorised or sanctioned by Act of Parliament, or upon any divi- dend warrant of or for any such public or other stocks, funds, or securities, or upon any receipt for money or goods, or upon any proceeding in any court of law or equity, or in any inferior coui't, warrant, order, or other papers printed by the authority of any public board or public officer in the execution of the duties of their respective offices, notwithstanding the whole or any part of the said several securities, instruments, c 18 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTEES. proceedings, matters, and things aforesaid shall have bsen or shall be printed." (51 Geo. III., c. 65, sect. 3.) "Printed at the Pitt Press, Cambridge," "Printed at the University Press, Oxford," are sufficient imprints for any books or papers printed at these establishments. (2 & 3 Vic, c. 12, sect. 3.) It has become tlie fashion of late years to discard the imprint from many jobs, such as programmes, bills of fare, and the like. The omission of it, however, is contrary to law, and renders the printer liable to the penalty above stated. Though there is, for the reason to be mentioned immediately, no risk of the penalty being sued for in ordinarj' cases, there would seem to be no reason why the law should not be observed, and, in fact, instead of the imprint being a hardship on printers, it aftbrds them a gratuitous advertisement, which it might be thought they ■would not willingly forego. The maximum penalty for omitting the imprint from any work on which it ought to be placed, not being an election bill, is £5 per copy. Tliis penalty can only be sued for by or in the name of the Attorney or Solicitor General in England, or the Queen's Advocate in Scotland. (2 »& 3 Vic, c 12, sect. 3.) AVith regard to bills or posters relating to elections, a very serious penalty is incurred by any printer who omits to place his imprint upon them. The 18th Section of the Corrupt Practices Act, 1883 (46 & 47 Vic, c. 51), provides as follows : — "Every bill, placard, or poster having reference to an election shall bear upon the face thereof the name and address of the printer and publislicr thereof ; and any person printing, publishing, or i)osting, or causing to be printed, published, or posted, any such bill, placard, or poster as aforesaid, which fails to bear upon the face thereof the name and address of the printer and publisher, shall, if he is the candidate, or THE LAW AFFECTING PEINTEKS. 10 the election agent of the candidate, be guilty of an illegal practice, and if he is not the candidate, or the election agent of a candidate, shall be liable on sum- mary conviction to a fine not exceeding one hundred pounds." Preserving Copies. — A printer is bound to preserve for six months a copy of every work he prints (except works of the nature referred to below), and to write or print on such copy the name and address of the person who employed him to print it, and he must, during the six months, pro- duce such copy to any justice of the peace requiring to see it. Penalty, £20. The excepted works are parliamentary papers, engrav- ings, address and business cards and circulars, and papers relating to the sale of estates or of goods. The words of the statute are as follows : — "Every person who shall print any paper for hire, re- ward, gain, or profit, shall carefully preserve and keep one copy (at least) of every paper so printed by him or her, on which he or she shall write, or cause to be written or printed, in fair and legible characters, the name and place of abode of the person or persons by whom he or she shall be employed to print the same ; and every person printing any paper for hire, reward, gain, or profit, who shall omit or neglect to write, or cause to be written or printed as aforesaid, the name and place of his or her employer on one of such printed papers, or to keep or preserve the same for the space of six calendar months next after the printing thereof, or to produce and show the same to any justice of the peace who, within the said space of six calendar months, shall require to see the same, shall, for every such omission, neglect, or refusal, forfeit and lose the sum of twenty pounds." (39 Geo. III., c. 70, sect. 29.) The penalty in this case is a fixed one, and it cannot therefore be reduced by the magistrate. It may be re- covered before any justice or justices of the peace of the 20 THE LAW AFFECTING PKINTERS. place where it is incurred, or where the defendant happens to be, but it must be sued for within three months after it is incurred, and further, only the Law Officers of the Crown can sue for it, notwithstanding the existence of a clause apparently permitting any common informer to take half the penalty for his own use. » The words of the statutes are as follows : — "No person shall be prosecuted or sued for any penalty imposed by this Act unless such prosecution shall be commenced, or such action shall be brought, within three calendar months next after such penalty shall have been incurred." (39 Geo. III., sect. 34.) " And any pecuniary penalty imposed by this Act, and not exceeding the sum of twenty pounds, shall and may be recovered before any justice or justices of the peace for the county, stewartry, riding, division, city, town, or place in which the same shall be incurred, or the person having incurred the same shall happen to be, in a summary way." (Sect. 35.) " All pecuniary penalties hereinbefore imposed by this Act shall, when recovered in a summary way before any justice, be applied and disposed of in manner hereinafter mentioned ; that is to say, one moiety thereof to the informer before any justice, and the other moiety thereof to His Majesty, his heirs and successors." (Sect. 36.)"^ " It shall not be lawful for any person or persons to com- mence, prosecute, enter, or file, or cause or procure to be commenced, prosecuted, entered, or filed, any action, bill, plaint, or information in any of Her Majesty's courts, or before any justice or justices of the i^eace, against any })crson t)r jiersons for the re- covery of any fine which may hereafter be incurred '" It is difficult to uiulerstaiul why this clause was retained by tho Act of lyO'J, sceiiiij that the chiuse ucxt following vii'tually repeals it. THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 21 under the provisions of the Act of the thirty-ninth year of King George the Third, chaj^ter seventy-nine, set out in this Act,^i unless the same be commenced, prose- cuted, entered, or filed in the name of Her Majesty's Attorney-General or Solicitor-General in England, or Her Majesty's Advocate in Scotland, and every action, bill, plaint, or information which shall be commenced, prosecuted, entered, or filed in the name or names of any other person or persons than is in that behalf before mentioned, and every proceeding thereupon had, shall be null and void to all intents and pur- poses." (0 & 10 Vict., c. 33, sect. 1.) Apart from the laws specially affecting newspapers, which will be dealt with in the next chapter, the above are the only laws requiring printers, as such, to do anything. There are many enjoining them, in common with others, to abstain from certain acts. Of such of these as closely concern printers, e.cj., the law of libel, copyright, &c., we shall treat hereafter. " I.e., the penalty of £20 imposed by section 29 of that Act, set out above. 22 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. CHAPTER V. THE REGISTRATION OF NEWSPAPERS. The Newspaper Libel and Registration Act, 1881 (44 & 45 Vict., 0. 60), reimposed on newspaper proprietors duties of registering from which they had been free since 1869. It was a kind of compromise with the newspaper proprietors, who were relieved from certain liabilities for libel on con- dition that they submitted to have their names and addresses registered, so that any person wishing to take proceedings against them might have no difficulty in dis- covering whom he ought to sue. The Act, which does not apply to Scotland, consists of twenty sections and two schedules. Section 1 is the interpretation clause, defining for the purposes of the Act the words and phrases "re- gistrar," "registry office," "newspaper," "place of resi- dence," " occupation," and " proprietor." Sections 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 amend the law relating to libels in newspapers, and will be dealt with when we come to consider the Law of Libel. The remainder of the statute relates to the registration of newspapers. What are Nervspcqjers. — There are many journals and magazines which figure in the various newspaper directories as "newspapers" which are not newspapers within the meaning of this Act. It is important to bear in mind that whether as respects the clauses relating to libel or as respects those requiring registration, the only papers to which the Act applies are those that fulfil the definition of the word "newspaper" in Section 1. For the purposes of the Act, then, the word ' ' news- paper" is declared to mean " any paper containing public news, intelligence, or (occurrences, or any remarks or ob- servations therein printed for sale and published in Eng- land or Ireland periodically, or in parts or numbers at intervals not exceeding twenty-six days between the pub- lication of any two such papers, parts, or numbers. Also THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 23 any paper printed in order to be dispersed and made pub- lic, weekly or oftener, or at intervals not exceeding twenty-six days, containing only or principally adver- tisements." It may, perhaps, be thought by the reader that the word "therein" in the above definition is a misprint for "thereon;" such, however, is not the case. The Act in many places displays instances of bad drafting or want of care in the incorporation of amendments in the Bill carried in Committee of either House of Parliament. The words " weekly or oftener, or at intervals not exceeding twenty- six days," are a sufficient justification for this statement. Obviously the'words " weekly or oftener or " ought to have been struck out, though their presence does no harm. The Hegistries. — The registries are the offices of the regis- trars of joint stock companies in England and Ireland respec- tively, or such other as the Board of Trade may from time to time appoint (Sect. 1). At present the Registry for English Newspapers is the Office of the Registrar of Joint Stock Companies, Somerset House, London ; that for Irish News- papers is the Office of the Registrar of Joint Stock Com- panies in Dublin. If any change is ever made it will be notified officially, doubtless in the London or Dublin Gazette, as the case may be. WJiat must be Registered. — The Act (Sect. 9) requires that the following returns shall be made to the Registry annually : — " 1. The title of the newspaper. " 2. The names of all the proprietors (a) of such news- papers, together with their respective occupations (b), places of business (if any), and places of residence." The return is to be made in the form given in Schedule A to the Act, which is as follows : — " Schedule A. "Return made pursuant to the Newspaper Libel and Registration Act, 1881. 24 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTEKS. Title Names of lOccupations Places of Business 1 Places of of the the | of the (if any) of the jResideuce of the Newspaper. ! Proprietors.] Proprietors. Proprietors. Proprietors." (a) "Proprietors." — The word proprietor is by Section 1 defined to "mean and include as well the sole pro- prietor of any newspaper as also, in case of a divided proprietorship, the persons who, as partners or otherwise, represent and are responsible for any share or interest in the newspaper as between themselves and the persons in like manner representing or responsible for the other shares or interests therein and no other person." Although the words of the statute, as quoted above, are " the names of all the proprietors," yet if there be a large number of proprietors or other special circumstances, application may be made through the Registry to the Board of Trade for leave to register some " representative proprietors," Section 7 providing as follows : — " 7. Where, in the opinion of the Board of Trade, in- convenience would arise or be caused in any case from the registry of the names of all the proprietors of the newspaper (either owing to minority, coverture, ab- sence from the United Kingdom, minute subdivision of shares, or other special circumstances), it shall be lawful for the Board of Trade to authorise the registra- tion of such newspaper in the name or names of one or more responsible ' representative proprietors.' " Further, where the newspaper is owned by a company registered under the Companies Acts, 18G2 to 1879, it is not to be registered under this Newspaper Act at all (Sect. 18). (6) "Occupations." — The Interpretation Clause (Section- 1) provides that " the word ' occupation,' " when applied to any person, "shall mean his trade or following, and if none, then liia rank or usual title, as esquire, gentleman." H'^lio mnd Jicfjidrr. — The duty of making the return is past on "the printers and pul)lishers for the time being of THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 25 every newspaper," i.e., prima facie on the persons named in the imprint. When they must Register. — The returns required must bo made every year in the month of July (Sect. 9). If by the end of August the annual return is not made, each printer and publisher of the newspaper in default may be convicted before magistrates in a summary way, and on conviction will be liable to a penalty not exceeding £25, and to an order to make the return within a time to be specified by the magistrates (Sect. 10). There is no provision for the registration of new news- papers, and therefore if a paper be started, say, in Septem- ber, no registration need be made till the following July. Transfers. — "Any party to a transfer, or transmission, or dealing with any share of, or interest in, any news- paper, whereby any person ceases to be a proj^rietor, or any new proprietor is introduced, may at any time make or cause to be made to the Registry Office a return, according to Schedule B hereunto annexed, and containing the particulars therein set forth." (Sect. 11.) Schedule B is as follows : — " Return made pursuant to the Newspaper Libel and Registration Act, 1881. Title of Newspaper. Names of Names of Oecupa- j Places of Places of Persons whoPersons who' tious of iBusiness fif ! Residence cease to be I become new I any) of Newj of New Pro- Proprietors. Proprietors. Proprietors. ' Proprietors, prietors." False Returns. — rAny person wilfully making a false or incomplete return is liable to a penalty not exceeding £100 (Sect. 12). Searches oj the Register. — The returns are to be entered in a book kept at the Registry and called "The Register of Newspaper Proprietors," and any one who pleases may, on payment of the proper fees, inspect the register and obtain certified copies of any entry thei'ein (Sect. 13), 26 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. Fees. — The following fees are payable : — On registering for the first tune ... ... 10s. On every subsequent return 5s. For inspection of Register Is. For a copy of a return Is. and a further fee of fourpence per folio (72 words) if the copy exceeds three folios. For registering for the first time any "Re- presentative Proprietor " 20s. Bules. — The following Rules are now in force, and are annexed to the Schedule of Fees issued at the Registry : — ' ' Where it is desired to make a return of ' Representative Proprietors ' under Sect. 7, a statement should be sent to the Registrar setting forth the circumstances which render it inconvenient to register the names of all the proprietors, and giving such information as will show that the proposed representatives are well able to meet any claims that may arise for libel or otherwise in con- nection with the management of the paper. "The prescribed forms on which the Returns are to be made will be sent, either stamped with the requisite fee stamps or unstamped, on application to the Re- gistrar, Companies Registration Oflice, Somerset House, London, W.C. No charge is made for the forms, but when stamped forms are required a jiostal order for the amount of the fee must accompany the application. A separate return will be required for each paper." Official Cu})ks of Entries are to be received in evidence without further proof, "and every certified copy or extract shall in all proceedings, civil or criminal, be accepted as sufficient prhna facie evidence of all matters and things thereby appearing, unless and until the contrary thereof be shown " (Sect. 15). Procccdinf/s to Recover PcnaUics are to be taken befoi'o magistrates under the Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1870 ; THE LAW AFFECTINa PRINTERS. 27 that is to say, the complainant procures the defendant to be summoned before the bench to answer to the charge alleged. Any one may prefer the charge, the Act not specifying any public prosecutor. There have as yet been but two cases under it — one before the magistrates at Rugby in January, 1884, in which the complainant was Mr. J. W. Kenning, proprietor of the Midland Times, and the defendant was Mr. James Hope- well, printer and publisher of the Bughy Christian Observer. Here the defence was that the defendant's paper had ceased to exist before the end of August, the month of grace allowed by the Act, and that it was useless to register it when it was dead. The defendant was, however, con- victed and fined one shilling. The conviction was quite right, as the paper was issued throughout July, the month when the return ought in strictness to have been made. The other case was that brought on the 2nd of January, 1884, before the magistrates at Maidstone against Mr. A. Simmons, printer and publisher of the Kent and Stissex Times, which is published in that town. Here the objec- tion was taken on behalf of the defendant that a private person could not lay the information — that it was the duty of the Registrar of Newspapers to institute proceedings. The point was not decided, and we have already intimated that we think the objection untenable. Then it was argued that the offence had been committed at Somerset House, and consequently out of the jurisdiction of the Maidstone court ; to which it was replied that application for a summons had been made to the magistrate at Bow Street, within whose district Somerset House lies, and that he had refused it on the ground of want of jurisdiction. The Maidstone justices, notwithstanding this, dismissed the case on the ground that they had no jurisdiction to hear it. The opinion of the writer is that the summons ought to have been granted at Bow Street. 28 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. CHAPTER VI. MISCELLANEOUS STATUTORY PROVISIONS. Besides the Newspaper Libel and Registration Act, there are some few statutory enactments closely concerning newspaper proprietors and printers which may be con- veniently disposed of here. These are the Post Office Acts, and the various provisions concerning Advertisements for the Return of Stolen Property, Betting Advertisements, and Advertisements of Lotteries. 1. The Post Office Acts. By the Post Office Act, 1870 (33 & 34 Vict., c. 79), an end was put to the old newspaper stamps, and certain papers were permitted to be carried through the post at halfpenny rates. We shall give here only those provisions which are now material. Definition of a Neicspaper for Postal Ptirposes: — Sect. C. "Any publication coming within the following description shall, for the purposes of this Act, be deemed a newspaper, that is to say, any publication consisting wholly or in great part of political or other news, or of articles relating thereto, or to other current topics, with or without advertisements ; subject to these conditions : — "That it be printed and published in the United Kingdom ; " That it be published in numbers at intervals of not more than seven days ; " Tliat it he printed on a sheet or sheets unstitched; " That it have the full title and date of publication printed at the top of the first page, and the whole or part of the title and the date of publication printed at the top of every subsequent page. "And the following sliall, for the purposes of this Act, be deemed a supplement to a newspaper, that is to say, a publication consisting wholly or in great part of THE LAW AFFECTING PKINTERS. 29 matter like that of a newspaper, or of advertisements, printed on a sheet or sheets, or a piece or pieces of paper, unstitched, or consisting wholly or in part of engravings, prints, or lithographs illustrative of articles in the newspaper ; such publication in every case being published with the newspajjer, and having the title and date of publication of the newspaper printed at the top of every page, or at the top of every sheet or side on which any such engraving, print, or lithograph appears." (By 44 & 45 Vict., c, 19, so much of this section of the Post Office Act as requires that a publication in order to be a newspaper for the purposes of that Act shall be printed on a sheet or sheets, unstitched, is repealed, but such repeal does not extend to a supplement to a news- paper. The repealed part has been printed above in italics.) Registration at the Post Office : — Sect. 7. "The proprietor or printer of any newspaper within the description aforesaid, and the proprietor or printer of any publication which, regard being had to the proportion of advertisements to other matter therein, is not within the description aforesaid, but which was stamped as a newspaper before the passing of the Act lastly mentioned in the first schedule to this Act, ^2 may register it at the General Post Office in London at such time in each year and in such form and with such particulars as the Postmaster-General from time to time directs, paying on each registration such fee not exceeding five shillings as the Postmaster- General, with the approval of the Treasury, from time to time directs. " The Postmaster- General may from time to time revise the register and remove therefrom any publication not being a newspaper. "The decision of the Postmaster-General on the admis- '- I.e., before the 15th June, 1855. 30 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. sion to or removal from the register of a publica- tion shall be final, save that the Treasury may, if they think fit, on the application of any person interested, reverse or modify the decision, and order accordingly. Any publication for the time being on the register shall, for the purposes of this Act, be deemed a registered newspaper." Rates of Postage : — Sect. 8. " From and after the 30th day of September, 1870, registered newspapers, book packets, pattern or sample packets, and post cards may be sent by post between places in the United Kingdom at the following rates of postage : — "On a registered newspaper, with or without a supple- ment or supplements — one halfpenny. " On each registered newspaper in a packet of two or more, with or without a supplement or supplements — one halfpenny. " On a book packet, or pattern, or sample packet, if not exceeding two ounces in weight — one halfpenny. If exceeding two ounces in weight, for the first two ounces and for every additional two ounces or fractional part of two ounces — one halfpenny. " On a post card — one halfpenny. * ' Provided that a packet of two or more registered newspapers with or without a supplement or supple- ments shall not be liable under this section to a higher rate of postage than the rate chargeable on a book packet of the same weight." Powers of the Postmastcr-Oeneml : — Sect. D. " The Postmaster-General may from time to time, with the approval of the Treasury, make, in relation respectively to registered newspapers, book packets, pattern or sample packets, and post cards, sent by post, such rcgvdatiuns as ho thinks fit, for all or any of the following purposes : — THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTEES. 31 " For prescribing and regulating the times and modes of posting and delivery : " For prescribing prepayment and regulating the mode thereof : *' For regulating the affixing of postage stamps : " For prescribing and regulating the payment again of postage in case of redirection : " For regulating dimensions and maximum weight of packets : " For regulating the nature and form of covers : " For prohibiting or restricting the printing or writing of marks or communications or words : "For prohibiting inclosures ; and such other regula- tions as from time to time seem expedient for the better execution of this Act." ^^ Sect. 14. " If a question arises whether any publication, not being a registered newspaper, is a newspaper or a supplement, or whether any packet is a book packet or pattern or sample packet, within this Act or any Treasury wari^ant or Post Office regulations, the decision thereon of the Postmaster-General shall be final, save that the Treasury may, if they think fit, on the application of any person interested, reverse or modify the decision, and order accordingly." Sect. 20. " The Postmaster-General may from time to time, with the approval of the Treasury, make such regulations as he thinks fit, for preventing the send- ing or delivei'y by post of indecent or obscene prints, paintings, photographs, lithographs, engravings, books, or cards, or of other indecent or obscene articles, or of letters, newspapers, supplements, publications, packets, or post cards, having thereon, or on the covers thereof, any words, marks, or designs of an indecent, obscene, libellous, or grossly ofi'ensive character." '^ These regulations are to be found in the "Post OflBce Guide," an official publication issued quarterly, and purchaseable at post offices or of Her Majesty's Printers. 32 THK LAW AFFECTING PBINTEKS. Other existing Post Office Acts affecting i^rinters and newspaper proprietors are : — 7 Wm. IV. and 1 Vict., c. 3G, sect. 5, whereby persons enclosing in newspapers, letters, papers, or things, or wri- ting unauthorised communications or marks on them or their covers, are liable to treble postage, the packet being considered as a letter, or at the option of the Postmaster- General, to be prosecuted as for a misdemeanour, and to suffer punishment accordingly. 3 & 4 Vict. , c. 96, of which section 12 authorises the use of stamped covers, and section 43 allows newspapers to be sent by post, but does not make it compulsory so to send them. 31 & 32 Vict., c. 110 (The Telegraph Act, 1868), of Avhich section 16 empowers the Postmaster-General to make special contracts with newspaper proprietors, &c., for the transmission of telegraphs at low rates, and for the use of private wires. 38 Vict., c. 22 (The Post Office Act, 1875), which autho- rises the Postmaster-General to fix rates and to make regulations. 2. Advertisemods for Stolen Property. By the Larceny Act, 1861 (24 & 25 Vict., c. 96), s. 102 : ' ' Whoever shall publicly advertise a reward for the return of any property whatsoever which shall have been stolen or lost, and shall in such advertisement use any words purporting that no questions will be asked, or shall make use of any words in any public advertisement purporting that a reward will be given or paid for any 2)ropcrty which shall have been stolen or lost, without seizing or making any inquiry after the l)ors(jn producing such pr(_)perty, or shall promise or oiler in any such public advertisement to return to any pawnbroker or other person who may have bought or advanced money by way of loan upon any property stolen or lost the money so paid or advanced, or any THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 33 other sum of money or reward for the return of such property, or shall print or publish any such advertise- ment, shall forfeit the sum of fifty pounds for every such offence to any person who will sue for the same by action of debt to be recovered with full costs of suit." It will be observed that the printer of the advertisement is liable for the penalty to the same extent as his employer, and so is the publisher. So that if A gets B to print such an advertisement and C to post it on a hoarding, any per- son who reads it may sue A, B, and C in separate actions, and recover from each £50, with full costs of suit. It will also be observed that the sum of £50 is fixed, and that there is no power in the Court to reduce it. Printers and publishers of neivspapers are protected from vexatious actions under the above statute by the 33 & 34 Vict., c. 66, section 3 of which enacts that "every action against the printer or publisher of a newspaper to recover a forfeiture under s. 102 of the Larceny Act, 1861, shall be brought within six months after the forfeiture is incurred, and no such action against the printer or pub- lisher of a newspaper shall be brought unless the assent in writing of Her Majesty's Attorney-General or Solicitor- General for England, if the action is brought in England, or for Ireland, if the action is brought in Ireland, has been first obtained to the bringing of such action." Sect. 2 of the same statute provides that the term "newspaper " in the Act ' ' means a newspaper as defined for the purposes of the Acts for the time being in force relating to the carriage of newspapers by post," i.e., at present, as defined by the Post Office Act, 1870, sect. 6, supra. Unless, therefore, a periodical publication comes within that definition, its printer and publifsher are at the mercy of any plaintiff, however innocently the advertisement may have been inserted. 3. Betting Advertisements. The statute relating to Betting Advertisements is the 37 Vict., c. 15, sect, I of which provides that it shall be 84 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. construed as one with the IG & 17 Vict., c. 119, entitled " An Act for the Suppression of Betting Houses," therein- after called " the principal Act." Sect. 3 provides as follows : — "Where any letter, circular, telegram, placard, handbill, or advertisement is sent, exhibited, or published — ** (1.) Whereby it is made to appear that any person, either in the United Kingdom or elsewhere, will on application give information or advice for the purpose of or with respect to any such bet or wager, or any such event or contingency as is mentioned in the prin- cipal Act, or will make on behalf of any other person any such bet or wager as is mentioned in the principal Act ; or, "(2.) With intent to induce any person to apply to any house, office, room, or place, or to any person, with the view of obtaining information or advice for the purpose of any such bet or wager, or with respect to any such event or contingency as is mentioned in the principal Act ; or, *' (3.) Inviting any person to make or take any share in or in connection with any such bet or wager ; every per- son sending, exhibiting, or publishing, or causing the same to be sent, exhibited, or published, shall be sub- ject to the penalties provided in the seventh section of the principal Act with respect to oflfences under that section." The penalties are : On prosecution before justices of the peace, to be fined a sum not exceeding £30, and made to pay the costs of the prosecution ; and in default, or in the first instance if the justices shall think fit, to be imprisoned, with or without hard labour, for a maximum period of two calendar UKJUths. Tlio only advertisements struck at by this Act are adver- tisements of bets and wagers made in a house, office, room, or otlier ])laco kept for the purpose of betting. This THE LAW AFFECTING PKINTERS. 35 was so decided by Mathew and Day, J.J., in Cox v. Andrews, 12 Q. B. Div., 12G. In that case, which was heard in 1883, Cox was proprietor of the Licensed Victual- lers' Gazette, and in an issue of that paper had appeared the following paragraph: "To our Readers. — 'Centaur' scored his first success of the season when he gave Knight of Burghley for the Lincoln Handicap last Tuesday. Our correspondent will use every effort to follow up his success, and those of our readers who want the most reliable and latest news from Northampton next week should not fail to avail themselves of ' Centaur's ' wire finals, sent direct from the course. They may rely on having something as good for the two principal events next week as they had in Knight of Burghley last Tuesday. ' Centaur's ' finals cost but half-a-crown each, or the two days' racing 5s. , for which post-office orders or stamps must be sent to Mr.W. H. Cox," &c. Cox was convicted, and fined 10s. ; but on appeal the conviction was quashed on the ground above stated. 4. Lottery Advertisements. Lotteries are, by many statutes, made illegal in this country, and there are still in force two containing provi- sions against publishing information concerning them. These are set out below, and it is to be remarked that they apply to all lotteries, foreign as well as British. Art Unions, licensed under the 9 »fc 10 Vict., c. 48, are excepted from the general law, and newspaper proprietors will incur no penalty by inserting advertisements of them. 4 George IV., c. 60, sec. 41, provides : — "That if any person or persons shall sell any ticket or tickets, chance or chances, share or shares of any ticket or tickets, chance or chances in any lottery or lotteries authorised by any foreign potentate or state, or to be drawn in any foreign country, or in any lottery, or lotteries, excej^t such as are or shall be authorised by this or some other Act of Parliament to be sold, or shall publish any proposal or scheme for the sale of 36 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. any ticket or tickets, chance or chances, share or shares of any ticket or tickets, chance or chances except such lottery or lotteries as shall be authorised as aforesaid, such person or persons shall, for every such oflence, forfeit and pay the sum of fifty pounds, and shall also be deemed a rogue and vagabond, or rogues and vaga- bonds, and shall be punished as such in the manner hereinafter directed." 6 & 7 William IV. , c. 66, after reciting that " The laws in force are insufficient to prevent the advertising of foreign and other illegal lotteries in this kingdom, and it is expedient to make further provision for that purpose": enacts, "that from and after the passing of this Act, if any person shall print or publish, or cause to be printed or published, any advertisement or other notice of or relating to the drawing or intended draw- ing of any foreign lottery, or of any lottery or lotteries, not authorised by some Act or Acts of Parliament ; or if any person shall print or publish, or cause to be printed or published, any advertisement or other notice of or for the sale of any ticket or tickets, chance or chances, or of any share or shares of any ticket or tickets, chance or chances, of or in any such lottery or lotteries as aforesaid, or any advertisement or notice concerning or in any manner relating to any such lottery or lotteries, or any ticket, chance, or share, tickets, chances, or shares thereof or therein ; every person so offending shall for every such oflence forfeit the sum of fifty pounds, to be recovered, with full costs of suit, by action of debt, bill, plaint, or informa- tion in any of his majesty's courts of record in Westmhister or Dublin respectively, or in the court of session in Scotland ; one moiety thereof to the use of liis majesty, his heirs and successors, and the other moiety thereof to the use of the person who shall inform or sue for the s^,me," THE LAW AFFECTING PKINTEBS. 37 A subsequent statute (8 & 9 Vict., c. 74), passed because of some vexatious prosecutions of newspaper proprietors, provides that all penalties under the statute of William IV. shall go wholly to the Crown and shall be sued for in the name of the law officers of the Crown only." " In 1883 the proprietors of the Nottingham Evening Post were prosecuted for having pviblished an advertisement of a Christmas Lottery, but it being shown that it had been inserted by inadvertence, they were ordered to pay the costs only. {Printirs' Register, February, 1883, p. 144.) 38 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. CHAPTER VII. Master and Servant. 1. The Contract of Hiring and Service generally. The relation of master and servant is formed by contract. The contract may be either express or implied. It is ex- press when the terms of it are specifically arranged between the parties, whether by word of mouth or by reduction into writing. It is implied when there is no express contract and the circumstances are such that the law Avill presume it. A contract of hiring and service may be partly express and partly implied, inasmuch as every such contract is con- sidered to be made subject to the customs of the trade, unless such customs are expressly excluded. It is not necessary that the parties themselves should enter into the contract, they may make it by their agents duly authorised ; and in practice workmen in large establish- ments are generally engaged by the overseers and not by the principals. A contract of hiring and service need not be in writing, except it be a contract not to be performed within a year from the time of making it : in this case it nmst be in wri- ting. ^^ If, therefore, a person be engaged for a year com- mencing with the day on which the engagement is made, no writing is necessary ; but if he be engaged for any term exceeding a year, the contract must be in writing or it will be of no effect. So, too, it must if he be engaged for a year from to-morrow, or any other day subsequent to that on which the contract is made. But if the contract can be performed within the year, it is not necessary to reduce it into writing, notwitlistanding that in fact it may not actu- ally be BO performed. ^^ " Statute of Frauds (21) Ch. 2 c. 3), s. 4. '■■' See Leake on Contracts, p. 255 ; Britlain v. Ituaaikr, 11 Q. 13. D. 123. THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 39 An agreement in writing for the hiring of any operative printer requires no stamp, but if the person engaged is to occupy a position other than that of a " labourer, artificer, manufacturer, or menial servant," the contract must bear a sixpenny stamp. ^'' This may be denoted by an adhesive stamp cancelled by the person by whom the agreement is first executed i"" (it is usual to sign over the stamp), or by a stamp impressed on the paper or parchment containing the agreement. This may be impressed either before signature or after. If the agreement is not stamped before it is executed, it may be stamped at any time within a fortnight of its date on payment of sixpence only ; but if the fort- night is allowed to elapse, it cannot be stamped without paying a penalty, which may amount to as much as £11. In proper cases the Commissioners of Inland Revenue will, on being memorialised, reduce the penalty, but they very seldom remit it altogether. Agreements and other docu- ments are stamped at Somerset House, London, and at some of the Inland Revenue oflices in important provincial centres. If a man engage another as his servant, and nothing be said as to the duration of the engagement, in the absence of any custom to the contrary and of any circumstances giving rise to a different presumption, the engagement is by law implied to be for a year.^^ But there are very few cases in which custom or the surrounding circumstances do not limit the term. Thus, if a person be engaged as servant for an indefinite period at so much per week, the hiring is a weekly one. Here the payment of wages weekly is the circumstance inducing the inference that the engagement is by the week. As an instance of the term being limited by custom, we may mention the case of a domestic servant. It is well known that if a domestic servant be engaged, and i« Stamp Act, 1870 (33 & 34 Vict., c. 97), Schedule. »' Stamp Act, 1870 (33 & 34 Vict., c. 97), s. 36. " See Smith's Mercantile Law, ch. 8. 40 not! for I end peri( mom or fo So prov( them a gen witnc print] not bi notice are co In] and 0] wages and c( and a! mastei these : pressb maste] in a ] that t little-li posito] unless the ti recogn The bindin they si be eitl master accordi {SiUhigs iff Bail h-iivf(ll,^ff ore Mr. JtrsTiCE C>v=E.) /EX PAJ'.TE HUGHES ANU KUTBEK (LIM1TED),RE THACKRAH. This case, which inrolved a question of JmportaDce to i the jiriiiting trade, was brought before the Court upon the hearing of an application by Messrs. Hughe.s and Kimber (Limited), of West Harding-street, Fetter-lane, for an order that the Official Keceiver, the trustee under the bankruptcy of Joseph Henry Thackrah, should pay to the applicant the proceeds of the sale of machinery and type lent on hire by the applicant to the bankrupt. Mr. Arthur Powell appeared in support of the applica- tion ; and Mr. Muir Mackenzie for the Official Receiver. On March 31, 1887, the applicant dupplicd the bank- rupt, a printer and stationer in Aldersgate-street, with prrinting machines, a gas engine, shafting, type, and mndries on the hire system. In October following the bankrupt, through his accountants, issued a circular to his creditors, and a, receiving order followed. On May 28 last the Official Eeeeiver sold the bankrupt's stock-in-trade with the machinery and type lent to him by the applicant, and the question to be determined by the Court was whether there existed in the printing trade such a universal custom of lending machinery and type on hire as to exclude the doctrine of reputed owner- ^bip in the event of the bankruptcy of the borrower. The Ofhcial Eeeeiver claimed the proceeds of the machinery and type on the ground that they were in the order and disposition of the bankrupt at the date of the receiving order. Mr. Powell having briefly opened the case, called Mr. R.G. Kimber, who stated that he was secretary to the claimant conapany, and supplied the goods in question ©n the hire purchase system. The company had been in the habit since 1875 of lending goods on that system,aDd the custom was well known in the trade. Cross-examined. — He thought the company let machinery before 1875. Type was not much in his way, but the company lent all kmds of printing materials. Mr. Powrie, manager of the London business of Fuxnival and Co., Charterhouse-street, and Reddish, near Stockport, stated that he had been '20 years in the trade. His employers were in an extensive way of business, and were in the habit of letting out machinery on the hire system. His experience of the custom in question dated back about 11 years, when he beeanse manager. Fumival nnd Co. dealt verj' little in type. Mr. J. C. Hole, in the employ of Messrs. H. S. Cropper and Co., of Aldersgate-street, and Nottingham, and seven other witnesses also gave evidence in support of the custom in reference to machinery, but one witness only spoke of a custom to let type on hire. Mr. Mackenzie, for the Oliicial Receiver, snbmitted that with regard to the type he had no case to answer. As to the machinery, ho called Mr. Izard, of the firm of Izard, Dawe, and Izard, auctioneers, who stated that he had opportunities of making himself acquainted with the customs in different trades. He had cflFected many sales of printers' stock-in-trade. He had heard of a custom, to a limited extent, of hiring printing machinery, but the custom was not general. Otto gas cngincf? were known to bo on hire. 'With regard to these, there was a general custom. Mr. H. E. Boot, printer,01d Bailey, and Mr. H. Hairild also gave evidence in opposition to the alleged custom, rhey admitted, however, tnat in isolated cases machinery (vas lent on tho hire system. Mu. .Jir.HTinE (yA.VK, in giving judgment yesterday, said ne thought it wa-s established by tho evidence thart there pxisted n practice in the tr.ado of letting printing machinery on hire, b\it that the custom lunl not been proved with reference to the typo. It was remarkable that every witness for the respondent knew that the rustom existed. The evidence tor tho applicant wa.s v County Court Kules, Ord. xvi., r. IG. THE LAW AFFECTING I'KINTERS. 49 runs this risk : If the man brings an action for the balance of his wages, then, unless the master shows that the amount of his damage is fully e(]ual to the amount retained, the plaintiff may recover the difference, and will, unless the judge otherwise orders, be entitled to the costs of the action. A master is entitled to the best services of his workman during all the ordinary working hours of a day. The workman must keep to the regular hours. Coming late in a morning has been held a sufficient justification for instant dismissal of a man, as will be seen hereafter. 2*^ No printer (not being a Jew employed by a Jew-'') can be required to work on Sundays against his will, and in America it has been held that a servant forced by his master to labour on a Sunday may leave his service at once. So, too, in the case of Pliill'qys v. Innes (4 Clark and Finelly 234) it was held by the House of Lords that a barber's apprentice, who by his indenture was bound not to absent himself from his master's business on holidays or week- days, late hours or early, without leave, and who went away on Sundays without leave, although his master ordered him to stay and shave his customers, had committed no wrong, and that he could not lawfully be required to attend his master's shop on Sundays. But a servant who has charge of animals may be required to give them proper attention on Sundays, and the Court of Session in Scotland held in 1844 that a farm labourer who, when requested by his master to stay at home to attend the cattle, which were ill, in order that the other servants might go to church, refused to do so, might properly be dismissed without notice. And probably in all cases of absolute necessity a servant may be required to perform his work on a Sunday. When, however, there is no necessity, nor any work of charity to ^" Infra, p. Gl. =" See the Factory Act, 1878, s. 51. 50 THE LAW AFFECTIXG TRINTERS. be done, it is illegal for a workman to work at his ordinary calling on a Sunday, the 29 Chas. 2, c. 7, providing "that no tradesman, artificer, workman, labourer, or other person whatsoever shall do or exercise any worldly labour, business, or work of their oxxlinary callings upon the Lord's Day, or any part thereof (works of necessity and charity only exce^ited) ; and that any person being of the age of fourteen years or ujiwards offending in the premises, shall for every such offence forfeit the sum f)f five shillings, ""- Sunday labour on daily newspapers is no doubt esteemed a " necessary " work ; at any rate, the writer is aware of no prosecution for performing it. Special rules concerning pay- ment for Sunday work have been framed for the London trade. (See Addenda to London Scale, agreed to Novem- ber, 1806, rule 5, and Rules aftecting Compositors working on Weekly Newspapers, 1874, rule G.)^^ As regards work on Christmas Day and Good Friday, there is no rule of law, either statute or common law. The customs of the trade are Avhat have to be looked to. In daily newspaper ofiices printers must work on these days as on others ; on Aveekly newspapers there is no definite rule, and in bookwork and jobbing offices it is usual to close. Whether in an office of the last class a compositor who absented himself after being requested to attend could be dismissed summarily or be made liable to damages is, perhaps, doubtful. Much would depend upon the circum- stances of each particular case.-'^ ^^ Prosecutions under this Act are regulated by 34 & 35 Vict., s. 87. a statute passed for a year only, but continued till now by tbe annual Act to continue certain expiring laws. •" See also Priiitiv(j Times for February, 1SS2, p. 52. In i\Ian- cliester, Sunday work is paid for at double rates. " See a case of Cooli v. Potter, reported in the Printing Times for June, 1S78, p. 125, where a workman luisuccessfully claimed wages for (jiood Friday, on which day tlie ofVice was closed. In Manchester jobhin^ offices, work on Cliristmas Day and (Jood Friday is paid for lit doidjle rates. In Glasgow, work on fast days and general holidays THE LAW AFFECTING FRINTEKS. 51 Bank lioliclays arc in London and other large cities now observed as general holidays ; but if a master requires his men to work on such days it would seem that they must do so. In 187C, Messrs. Letts and Co., printei's, of New Cross, summoned Richard Lee, one of their machine-boys, before the magistrate at Greenwich, for absenting himself from work without leave. On the August Bank holiday he had asked to stay away in the aftenioon, but had been refused. He, however, left work at dinner-time, and did not return, thus stopping a machine for three hours. The defendant expressing sorrow, he was ordered to pay only the cost of the summons. ^^ If a printer closes his establishment on a general holiday, such as a Bank holiday, he is not bound to pay his workmen wages for that day.-**^ But if he closes it on a day which is not recognised as a general holiday, such as the day after Good Friday, a non-consenting workman is entitled to be paid, provided lie was ready and willing to work on that day. ^7 Can a workman be retjuired to work overtime against his will ? There is no direct decision of a Superior Court on this important question, but it would seem that he can, provided is paid foi- at ovei'time rates. In many offices in London, work proceeds as usual on Good Fridays ; in fact, it is only the purely commercial and book houses that close entirely. As regards Christmas Day, when it falls on a Friday it is customary for houses printing weekly papers issued on Saturdays to keep open, and for the men engaged on such papers to work as usual on them. ^' Reported in the Printers' Register for September, 187G, p. oG. •"^ So held in several cases. See Printers' Register for November, 1882, p. 89. Printing Times for March, 1877, p. 02; for June, 1878, p. 125, and for 1882, pp. .52, 123, and 2G4. See, however, a case reported in the Printers' Register for October, 1883, p. 84, where the master was ordered to pay for the Bank holiday, ^' See Heath v. ffead and Mark, reported in Printers' Register for August, 1882, p. 34. 52 THE LAW AFFEC'TI-\G PllINTEES. the demand upon him be not unreasonable. In the case of Rex V, St. Jolui, Dcvbes, decided in the King's Bench in 1829, and reported in 4 Barnewell and Cresswell's Reports, p. 900, Mr. Justice Bayley made use of these words, "In every contract of hiring the law will imply that the party hired shall work at all reasonable hours when required. Generally speaking, the ordinary working hours in a. manufactory are twelve hours per day ; but it does not, therefore, follow that the master may not on extraordinary occasions require his servants to work at other hours, and whether he does so or not, the relation of uiaster and servant continues during the whole day." Lord Fraser, in his work on the ' ' Law of Master and Servant, " says, ' ' Even where there is a special agreement to work so many hours each day, the servant would not be justified in refusing, on a case of special emergency, to work an hour or two longer." Mr. Wood, in his book, adopts this view also ; but Mr. Macdonell, the latest writer on the subject, doubts whether this can be so, and says there is no case supporting it, except li. V. St. Julia, cited above. In 1882 the judge of the Clerkenwell County Court held that a master printer was justified in instantly dismissing a stereotyper who refused to work overtime on a Saturday afternoon when requested. S'^ On the other hand, in July, 1881, Mr, Commissioner Kerr held that a compositor who was required to work <.>vertime on a Saturday afternoon, and who, after working one hour overtime, refused to go on any longer, could not on that account be summarily dismissed. -^^ In the printing trade, however, it has always been usual for the men to work overtime when reasonably required, and they have no valid excuse, such as sickness, for not doing '^ Matthews V. BlacUock and Co., reported in Fr inters' Register iov July, 1^82, p. 10. '" Ecathmun v. Watcrlov: and Sons, Limited, tried 27th July, 1S81. THE LAW AFFECTING TRINTEKS. b'.i SO. The rate of pay per hour for overtime is generally more than that for work in ordinary hours. ^^ It being the custom to pay for overtime, it is also the custom to deduct from a man's weekly wages payment, at a proportionate rate, in respect of any time during ordinary hours he may have been absent from his work, and this although the wages be calculated and paid at a certain rate per Aveek. Thus, if a man's wages are 3Cs. a week (of 54 hours), and he loses two hours, a deduction of Is. 4d. is made. Many firms give their men a certain allowance, such as a total amount of half an hour a week, any time lost beyond this being deducted from the wages at a pro- portionate rate. When a compositor has lost time in the ordinary v^'orking houi"s, he niay be required to make it uj) by working over- time. This rule, however, is subject to some modifications. In London Society houses, where the usual hours are from 8 a.m. till 7 p.m. (2 p.m. on Saturdays), if a compositor has lost time on any day, he may, on the same day (but not on any other day^i), be required to make it up after ordi- nary hours, but should he work after 8 p.m., all time after that hovxr must be paid for at an additional rate of 3d. per hour, even though the lost time may not have been made up before 8 o'clock. If a printer b3 detained from work by sickness, he is, by the custom of the trade, unable to claim any wages for the time during which he has been absent. A clerk or other such servant may be dismissed, if from sickness or any other cause he becomes permanently or for a con- siderable time unable to perform his duties ; but until he is dismissed, his wages must be paid. ■■*' See the London Scale for Overtime agreed between masters and men in ISGG ; also the Table of the Typographical Association. ^1 Each day stands by itself. (See answers of the Committee of Master Printers, ISGG.) Therefore, if a compositor loses time on Monday, he may be required to make it up on Monday evening, but not on any other evening. 54 THE LAW AFFECTING PKIXTEES. The important question of the right of the servant of one man to do work for another out of business hours, and to recover payment for it, was raised in the case of Wallace V. De Young,*- decided by tlie Supreme Court of Illinois in 1881. De Young was employed by F. and R., insurance agents, as their clerk and cashier, at a salary. After busi- ness hours he did clerk's work for Wallace, and sued to recover payment therefor. Wallace defended, alleging that as De Young was F. and 11. 's clerk, it was they, if anybody, who would be entitled to sue. The following extracts from the judgment of Judge Walker are of interest : ' ' It is claimed that the services of which the defendant in error (i.e., De Young) rendered Wallace were within the scope of the business of F. and R., and were consec^uently paid for by them, and that he has no legal right to recover from Wallace's estate. It is believed that no one will contest the proposition that F. and R. were entitled only to his labour and skill in pursuit of the business which he had been employed to transact during business hours. They could have no possible claim to his earnings or labour after or before business hours. They only had a right to appropriate his labour and skill during the time devoted to the business which he was employed to transact. All that the defendant in error earned by labouring for Wallace out of business hours surely, on every principle of reason, justice, and law, belonged to him. He was clearly entitled to recover for all labour thus performed at the request of Wallace. . . . F. and II. could not require him to perform such services for Wallace, unless it was within the terms and scope of the agreement when his services were hired. They had no legal right to employ him to perform one kind of service, and require him to do another kind." There has been no reported case of this kind in the Eu'dish Courts, but it is believed tliat the opinion of Jud^e Walker <»n all points above recorded would l)o unstained here. '- 3S Ainericiui Reports, lOS. THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS, 55 A master may make x'ules for the conduct of his establish- ment, and all persons engaged in it will be bound by such rules, so far as the same are applicable to them. Unless the rules are such as any master may properly i-equire his servants to conform to, persons who were engaged prior to the promulgation of them will not be bound by them, except they assent to them ; but they will in general be held to have assented, if the rules have been brought to their knowledge, and they have afterwards received wages without raising objection to the rules. If a conspicuous notice be posted up in a place where a person must of necessity see it, this will in general be equal to giving special notice to such person. 3. Terminatiun of the Service. Where the hiring is for a certain fixed period, at the end of such period the servant may leave, or the master may require him to leave, without giving any pi-evious notice.^-' If after the end of the fixed period the service is con- tinued, it will, as a rule, be construed to be on the same terms as nearly as may be as before, and either party may put an end to it on giving the proper or customary notice. Where the pei'iod of hiring and service is indefinite, either party may put an end to the contract by giving to the other the customary notice. The length of notice required in the case of any servant is a matter not of law, but of custom, and the custom must be proved, unless it be so well known that the Courts will take judicial cognisance of it. Generally, whenever the contract can be determined by notice, the master may put an end to it at any moment on *" A compositor engaged foi- a particular job, e.g., a list of voters, clirectoi-y, &c., can be dismissed without notice at the termination of such job, but if during the engagement he be called upon to perform any other description of work, the special contract become»i broken, and he is then entitled to receive a fortnight's notica previous to dismissal. 56 THE 1-AW AFFECTING PRINTERS. paying to the servant a sum equal to the amount of the latter's salary or wages for the period during v/hich the notice should run. The servant, however, has not always the same privilege. The rule would seem to be that he has it where his immediate quitting Avill entail only inconvenience upon the master, and that where it will cause loss he has no such right, but must, if he quits without notice, pay what- ever damage the master suffei's. Tlius, a domestic servant may leave at any time on paying or forfeiting a month's wages, but a machine-minder cannot do so, as thereby his machine and the machine-boys would be rendered idle and the master would suffer pecuniaiy loss. The following have been proved by evidence in various cases to be the lengths of notice to which each servant of the class named is by custom entitled : — Compositor,^- pressman or machine-minder ^^ two weeks*"* Clicker'*'' two w^eeks Header*'' two weeks Overseer, foreman, or printer*" ... ... one month Head of department (according to status) one to six months*^ ■•- " Compositors to receive and give a fortnight's notice previously to tlieir engagement being terminated." (Scale agreed between Masters and Men, 1847-) 43 fiee Hales v. London Co-operative Printing and Stationcrii Co., Printers' Peyistcr, Dec, 1875, p. IIC ; Printing Times, Dec, 1875, p. 2C4. ■•< The notice is usually given on the weekly pay-day, but it can be given or received on any day during the week. •<•'' A clicker stands in tlie same position as an ordinary compositor. •'" Readers are not litigious, and the writer can find no case in which the question of length of notice arose. Two weeks is, however, well recognised as the proper notice. '" ^ce Hales V. London Co-operative Printing and Stationery Co., Printers' Register, Dec, 1875, p. IIG; Printing 2'imcs, Dec, 1875, p. 204; Bestv. Empire Printing Co., Printers' Register, May, 1884, p. 24 1. " Sometimes even more. In liuckinghum v. Surrey and Hants I THE LAW AFFECTING miNTERS. 57 Clerk''^ one month Clerk, junior, paid weekly ... ... one or two weeks Lad, paid weekly one week Reporter ^" ... ... ... ... ... one month Sub-editor '^^ ... ... ... ... ... thi'ee months Editor^^ (according to status)... ... three or six months It is a custom in the London Printing Trade that a compositor may, at any time within the first fortnight of his engagement, leave his situation or be discharged therefi'om without notice. In such case he receives pay for the time actually worked, save that if the man be employed on the establishment, and the master discharge him on the first day, he must -pay him a full day's wages, however short a time he may have worked. ^^ The death of either master or servant terminates a con- tract of hiring and service ; except that where a servant has contracted to serve the master and his executors or Canal Co. (1882), 4G L. T. 885, the plaintiff, who had been engaged as engineer at £500 a year, was dismissed within the year on three months' notice. Held, that in the absence of any custom to the contrary, a hiring at such a salary was in'ima facie a hiring for a year certain, and that the plaintiff could recover his salary for the portion of the year remaining unexpired. w In Vihert v. Eastern Telegraph Co. (1883), 1 C. & E. 17, a stationery clerk in a telegraph office at £135 a year, payable fort- nightly, was found to be entitled to a month's notice. ^ Griffin\.Hoioe, Printers' Register, Feb., 1878, p. 1.53. As to Parliamentary Reporters, see 71/ars/i v. Press Association, Printers^ Register, Sept., 187C, p. 55 ; Latimer v. Hansard, Printing Ti>nes, March, 1882, p. 72; Printers' Register, April, 1882, p. 195. *' Mitchell V. Proprietors of Liverpool Mail, Printers' Register, Feb., 1883, p. 131 ; Printing Times, Jan., 1883, p. 19. *2 See Hollings v. Robinson, Printers' Register, March, 1884, p. 198 ; Printing Times, March, 1884, p. 70 ; Hunter v. Henchman, Printers' Register', July, 1883, p. 15 ; Printing Times, July, 1883, p. 183. '^ Chaplain v. Metropolitan Printing Co., Printing Times, July, 1882, p. 175 ; Printers' Register, Aug., 1882, p. 34. 58 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. administrators, he must continue to serve, and the executors or administrators must continue to employ him. Bankruptcy does not operate as a dissokition of a con- tract of hiring and service. ^^ As to its eifect on a contract of apprenticeship, see 2^ost. The trustee of a bankrupt master cannot compel the servant of the latter to fulfil his contract of service. ''■" The effect on the contract of the assumption of a partner by the master is not quite certain. Some contend that tli£ servant is not bound to obey the orders of the partner, while others deny this.^° So, too, where the hiring is by a firm, and there are afterwards changes in the firm, it is asserted by some, and denied by others, that the servant is not bound to continue his service.-^'' Contracts of hiring and service cannot be assigned with- out the consent of the parties. -^^ Thus, if A contract with B for his services in any capacity for a year, and during the year A sells his business to C, B cannot be required to work for C ; unless indeed B have contracted to serve A and his assigns, when he can be so required.^'-' So, too, a servant is not at liberty to find a substitute to perform services due by himself. The circumstances under which a master may instantly terminate the contract will be discussed when treating of the master's rights against his servant. A contract of hiring and service may, of course, be dis- solved at any time by consent of all parties thereto, and in ^' Thomas v. Williams, 1 A. & E. G85. " Per Lord Abinger in Gibson v. Carruthers, 8 M. k W., at p. 343. ^'' See Macdonell, Master and Servant, p. 237. ■'• Macdonell, p. 23G, Tasker v. Shepherd (18G1), 30 L. J. Kx. 207 ; Uobson V. Cowlcij (1858), 27 L. J. Ex. 205. '■""^ Macdonell, p. 242. rdlock on Contracts, 3rd edition, ji. 410. " Cooper V. Simmons (18C2), 31 L. J. U. C. 138 ; Bcnivell v. Innn (1857), 2G L. J. Ch. GG3. THE LAW AFFECTING I'lUXTERS. 59 the printing trade it is not an uncommon thing for a master to permit a servant to leave his employ without notice upon application, where the servant has an oj)portunity of bettering his condition. 4. The Master's BigJtfs against his Servant, We have already ^^ seen that a master has the right to require of his servant : 1. Obedience to his lawful and reasonable orders. 2. Respectful behaviour. 3. Moral conduct. 4. Diligence, fidelity, and mindfulness of the master's interests. 5. Competence to pei'form the duties for which he has been engaged. For the infringe- ment of any of these rights a master has the right to dismiss his servant summarily. We will consider each separately. 1. It is not all orders of his master that the servant is bound to obey ; it is only such as are lawful and reason- able.*'^ No man is bound to obey an unlawful order, and every servant is entitled to disregard an unreasonable one. A man may not be dismissed without notice because he refuses to jeopardise life or limb, and a servant engaged for one kind of work cannot be required to perform another jutside the scope of his proper business — e.g., a man engaged as a compositor cannot be required to do duty as clerk in the counting-house. As to orders to work over- time, see ante, p. 51. The orders of the master's deputy, such as his manager, ovei'seer, or foreman, under whom the servant is placed, are, when given within the scope of the deputy's authority, equivalent to the direct oixlers of the master himself. Where by the rules of an establishment, so promulgated as to form part of the contract of hiring and service (see ante, sect. 1), an infringement of any of such rules is made punishable by summary dismissal, the offender may be dismissed accordingly. *' Page 45. ^^ On this head see also section 2 of this chapter. GO THE LAW AFFECTING PKINTERS. 2. Respect is due not only to the master himself, but to all who are in authority over the servant ; and insolent behaviour is a sufficient cause for summarj' dismissal. The degree of insolence justifying such a dismissal varies according to the jjosition of the parties, their habits, manners, and customary language. Each case rests upon its own facts. "^ " Any angry word spoken under provoca- tion, or a disrespectful expression or action apologised for, will not be held sufficient to sanction a dissolution of the contract.""^ 3. A servant who commits a crime, or otherwise grossly misconducts himself in any way to injuriously affect his employer, may be dismissed. Assault or riotous conduct on the master's premises, or in immediate jiroximity thereto, may justify instant dismissal. Misbehaviour not affecting the master is not a ground for dismissal. Unchastity in an indoor servant (a member of the master's household) is a sufficient ground, and possibly in some offices and work- shops unchastity on the part of a female servant, although not a member of the household, would be so also. It would depend upon the circumstances of the case. The use of obscene language in a printing-office before female employees has been held a good cause for instant dis- missal.''* Drunkenness is also often a sufficient justification for dismissal,''^ but it is not every act of drunkenness that is so. Much depends on the position of the servant, and the degree in which the master is injured, either in pocket or reputation. In all such cases it is for the jury to say, in view of the position occupied by the servant and the par- ticular circumstances, whether his discharge is reasonable. A minister who should become intoxicated on any occasion « See some cases reported in the Printing Times for Jan., 1879, p. 19, and Aug., 1880, p. 203. "^ Fraser, Master and Servant, p. 405. '■' In FitzjKitrirk v. Otto PrintiiKj Co., rriiiUrs' Jlejbitr, October, 1883, p. 49 ; I'rintuif/ Times, 1883, p. lOS. " Sec BcH V. WilUwiui, Priidinj Tiine,s, June, 1878, p. ]2r). THE LAW AFFECTING I'lUNTEKS. 61 would, of course, be subject to instant dismissal, because inconsistent with his position ; but a farm-labourer or a clerk, when oif from duty upon a holiday, would not.^" And a printer is in the same category as the farm-labourer or clerk. Habitual drunkenness has been held suflicient to justify dismissal wherever it interferes with the due dis- charge of the servant's duties.^'' 4. Diligence and fidelity are essential qualities in a servant, but "it is not every failure in faithful service which will warrant a master in discharging his servant, and, if he does so, he must discharge him on the occasion of his misconduct, and not at any time after, at the master's option. " •'^ Absenting himself at a time when he knew or ought to have known that his services would be wanted would be suflicient cause for instant dismissal. " A printer who quitted his work shortly before a newspaper went to press might, no doubt, be at once dismissed."*^'' Habitually coming late in the morning has on several occasions been held a sufficient cause for instantly dismiss- ing printers. "° and in the case of Messrs. Hazell and Watson's men it was so held, although they were piece hands. '^ It is, however, usual to warn the men that dis- missal is the penalty of being late. A workman who absents himself without leave may not only be dismissed, but may be made to pay damages to his master, on the principle that if a man breaks a contract he has entered into, he must jiay the damage naturally result- ing from the breach. In a case of Smith v. Hophins, heard "'' Wood on Master and Servant, p. 212. "' Speck V. PhilUps, 5 M. and W. 279 ; Wise v. Wilson, 1 C. and K. 662. "' Per Baron Bramwell in Ilorton v. McMnrtri/, 5 H. and N. 6G ; 29 L. J. Ex. 260. ra Macdonell, Master and Servant, p. 209 ; Blore v. Leech, rrinters'' Eegister, Oct., 1882, p. 70. '" See Glasfjow News case, Printers' Register, Dec, 1879, p. 104 ; llashden v. Howard and Jones, rriuttrs' Hegister, Dec, 1884, p. 121. " Matthews v. Watson, Printing Times, May, 187G, pp. 104 and 109. 02 THE LAW AFFECTING PKIXTEKS. at jMaidstmie Petty Sessions,"^ tlip. plaintiff claimed from the defendant, an apprentice in his employ, 7a. 6d. damages for absenting himself from his work from Thursday, 3rd August, to the following Monday morning. Defendant had asked for a holiday and had been refused owing to press of business. He was ordered to pay the 7s. Gd. and costs, but the plaintiff, having obtained a decision in his favour, forewent his right to recover. If a servant, without sufficient cause, goes away altogether from his master's emplojanent, the master is entitled to recover damages against him, and the measure of damage is usually the amount of wages the servant would have earned for the period during which notice should have run, and Avhere the claim does not exceed £10 it may be sued for in a police court. Thus, in November, 1884, a machine-boy named King Avas summoned to the Guildhall Police Court by Mr. Straker, his employer, for a Aveek's Avages, he haA'ing left his employment Avithout notice, and an order for the payment of 10s. and costs was made against him.'^'^ But the amount of Avages above mentioned is not the limit of the master's claim ; if he has sustained more damage he may sue for it. Thus in Lulcr v. WanUair, heard by Mr. BarstoAv on Ajiril 5th, 1882, "•> the defendant was a machine-minder at Messrs. WaterloAV and Sons, Limited, at 38s. a Aveek Avagcs ; in consequence of a trade dispute he left on a Saturday without notice, and never returned to Avork ; he ought to have given a fortnight's notice ; by reason of his abrupt leaving the machine he tended Avas idle nine days, and so were the tAvo boys who assisted at it, moreover Messrs. WaterloAV alleged that they Avere put to considerable loss otherAvise. INIr. BarstoAV, in giving his ■' rrinters' Register, Sept., 1876, p. 50. •■' Printers' llojister, Dec, 1884, p. 121. ■^ A vcrbiitim report of this case, unci others arising out of the name dispute, appeared in the Bri(i 3:{ L. T. 81G ; 24 W. R. 40G. »' 34 L. T, 143. w 6 Q. B. D. 1 ; 50 L. J. q. E. 157. "■ ]iy Act of 1SS3 (40 & 47 Vict., c. 31). '* He vmi/ bring his ftction in the High Court, but he will recover no costs of unit. THE LAW AKFECTINCi PRINTEKS. 69 full age." A married woman may (by virtue of the Married Women's Projierty Act, 1882, s. 12) take pro- ceedings in her own name without joining lier husband as a party. Should a master become bankrupt, his clerks, servants, and workpeople are entitled to be paid in full all their wages or salaries in respect of services rendered to, or work done for, him (whether time or piece work) during four months before the date of the "receiving order" in the bankruptcy; but no claimant in respect of wages or salary can receive in full more than £50 : if he has any further claim, he must as to that rank with the ordinary creditors."^ It is doubtful whether the bankruptcy rule applies when the employer is a joint stock company and it is wound up.^° If the receiver, trustee, or liquidator continues the employment of any servant of the bankrupt or company, he must pay him in full for his services since the bankruptcy or winding uji order. The wages of servants, labourers, or workmen cannot be attached.'-'" In other words, creditois of the persons earning the wages cannot require the masters to pay such wages to them to satisfy their debts instead of to the persons who earned them. Wages or salary not sued for within six years of the date when due, or within six years of the last date when the defendant admitted that they were due, cannot be re- covered : the claim is barred by the Statute of Limitation (21Jas. I., c. 16). A master is not bound to supply a piece hand with work. This is well recognised in the printing trade in London and other large towns. "Where the contract of hiring *' Bankruptcy Act, 1883, s. 40. If tbe estate is not sufficient to pay the taxes, rates, wages, and salaries in full, each must abate, pai'i passu. ^ See Buckley on the Companies Acts, 4th Ed., p. 313. <" By Act of i870 (33 & 34 Vict. , c. 30). See Gordon v. Jennings, y Q. B D. 45 ; 51 L. J. Q. B. 417. 70 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. merely contains an undertaking to pay stipulated wages in proportion to the work done, there is no implied obligation on the master's part to find work, though the disposition is to construe contracts of doubtful significance as to this into an agreement on the master's i>art to enable the servant to earn regular wages. On this subject the words of Cockburn, C.J., in Churchward v. The Queen''^^ are of value : ' Where the act to be done by the party binding himself can only be done upon something of a corresponding character being done by the opposite party, you would there imply a corresponding obligation to do the things necessary for the completion of the contract.' So if a man engages to work, and goes to great expense, and he is only to be paid by the measure of the work he has performed, the contract presupposes and implies an obligation to supply the work."'-"^ If a master, without legal justification, refuses or neglects to emjiloy his servant, the latter may bring an action for his wages or for damages. Giving up business is not a legal justification. If the servant sue for wages, he must show that he was always ready and willing to serve, and tendered his services to his master. If he pleases, however, he may treat the refusal to employ him as a dismissal, and he then must sue for damages. "Where a servant is wrongfully dismissed, he is not at liberty to remain idle during all the time his master should have employed him and recover the full amount of his wages for such time. It is his duty to seek fresh employ- ment, and he will be entitled to I'ecover from the master only the actual loss incurred by reason of the dismissal, which, where another employment may be easily obtained, may be much less tlian the wages for the unexpired period of service.^ Thus, in the case of a compositor or machine- »* L. K. 1 Q. B. 195 ; 35 L. J. Q. B. ** Macdonell, Master and Servant, p. 120. ' Mayne on Damages, 3rd Edition, p. 197 ; Goodman v. Pocock, 15 (I ]}. .570. THE LAW AFFKC'TING PRINTERS. 71 minder wrongfully dismissed, lie is entitled to recover u full fortnight's wages only where he has during the fort- night following the dismissal sought other employment and been unable to obtain it. But if the person has made an effort to obtain employment and has failed, it is the usual thing to award as damages the amount he would have earned as wages during the period that would have elapsed had the hiring been terminated in the proper way. Where a person was engaged as managing clerk for two years with a fixed salary and a share of the profits, and was dismissed at the end of four months and a half, the jury gave him a year s salary and his share of profits for twelve months, and thi& was held not to be excessive.^ In Yelland's Case,^ Lord Hatherley (then A^ice -Chancellor Wood) laid down a rule for the calculation of damages in such cases. There the claimant had been engaged as manager to a company for a term of years, before the expiration of which the company was wound up. It was held tliat he was entitled to claim for the pi'esent value of an annuity for the unexpired term of a sum equal to his full yearly salary, less deductions in respect of risk to health and life, and of the chance of getting fresh employment within the term. Menial servants improperly dismissed always recover a month's wages. The circumstances under which a servant is dismissed cannot be taken into account in awarding damages in an action for wrongful dismissal simply ; the plaintiff can recover only his pecuniary loss.^ A master is bound to indemnify his servant in respect of all expense or loss incurred or sustained in executing his lawful orders. If the servant execute an unlawful order, he cannot obtain indemnity, although the master may have expressly promised to indemnify him. A person who has been employed by another to make up, repair, or otherwise work upon certain materials or 2 Smith V. Tlmnp^on (1849), 8 C. B. 44. 3 (1867) L. E. 4 Eq. 350. 4 Walton V, Tucker, 45 J. P. 23 ; T!m?', Dec. 9, 1880. 72 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. things, and has expended labour or money upon them, has a lien on such things till he is paid. But a servant has no lien upon the property of his master which he has as a servant got into his possession. Thus a compositor who sets up type in his employer's office has no lien on the type for his wages ; ^ but if a forme and paper should be sent to a printer to work off, or to a hot-presser to be pressed, he will have a lien on them, and need not part with either till he is paid, unless there be a contract or usage to the contrary. A servant's right to terminate his engagement at a moment's notice is very limited ; in fact, it may almost be said to be limited to cases where the master attempts to commit some criminal offence against him, e.g., murder. There may, however, be other circumstances which will justify a servant in immediately quitting his employment. Unjust accusations of a serious nature may be such. But mere disputes, or arbitrary, and even unlawful conduct on the part of the master will not give the right. A servant, indeed, as a general rule, must always give his master the customarj' notice before leaving him. A female servant who marries is not thereby justified in quitting her employment.'' A servant has a right to belong to a trades -union, even though his master disapproves thereof." (6) In respect of Injuries Sustained. As a general rule a servant has the same right against his master in respect of injury to his person, his property, or his reputation, caused to hiin by his master personally, as he would have if he Averc a stranger. Thus, a servant assaulted, slandered, or libelled by his master may maintain an action against him. A servant, too, who receives injury » See Franllm v. Uodcr (1821) 4 Barn, and Aid., 341. « Macdonell's Master and Servant, \). 103. ' Sec Chapter on Trades-Unions, pr>ft. THE LAW A.rFECTING PRINTERS. 73 by reason of the personal negligence of his master may recover damages against him. A servant injured by the personal negligence of one member of the firm employing him may recover against the firm if the negligent partner acted, or omitted to act, in his capacity as a member of the firm, otherwise the member ofi'ending is alone responsible. Prior to the passing of the Employers' Liability Act, 1880, a master was not liable to his servants for the acts or omissions of their fellow-servants in the course of their employment,* and he is still not liable unless the case is within that Act. Therefore, where a machine-boy was injured by reason of the negligence of the machine-minder, he could not, before the Act, recover compensation against the master, nor could any workman employed in a factory recover against the master in res2:)ect of any injuries caused by the negligence of any other workman in the same establish- ment, or even the superintendent thereof. Who are fellow- servants has often been considered by the Courts. For the purposes of this work we need not go into the cases, but may say that all the compositors, machine-minders, pi'essmen, apprentices, machine-boys, engineers, stokers, warehousemen, binder's, porters, labourers, messengers, drivers of carts, and other workmen, whether foremen or of ordinary grade — and jjossibly also the clerks — engaged in and about the same establishment, and working for a common employer, are fellow-servants. " The duties of two servants may have little connection, and may rarely bring them together. They may be of different grades ; they may belong to diflferent departments of the same factory, workshop, or establishment ; their occupation may lie far apart, and they may be scarcely aware of each other's existence ; and yet they may be not the less fellow- servants."^ 8 Priestley v. Fowler (1837), 3 M. & W. 1. " Macdonell, Master and Servant, p. 306, quoting Shaw, J., in Farwell v. Boston Bail. Co., 4 Met. (Mass.) 49. 74 THK LAW AFJFECTING PRINTERS. A master is bound to use reasonable care in selecting his servants, and if he appoint a man to a post requiring skill without troubling whether he possesses that skill or not, and a fellow-servant is injured through the negligence of such person, the master will be liable. Thus, in America, a railway company who employed an habitual drunkard as a pointsman were held liable for injuries received by one of their servants through his negligence. A master is liable to his servant for personal injury sustained by the latter, and resulting from the unsafe state of the premises upon which the servant is employed, when- ever the danger is at the time of the accident known to the master and unknown to the servant. If the servant knew of the danger, or if the master did not know of it, in either case the master is not liable. ^° By the Common Law — apart altogether from the Employers' Liability Act — a master is liable for injuries his servant has sustained by reason of defects in machinery or plant, which defects were known to the master, or might have been discovered by him had he exercised reasonable care, and were not known to the servant. If the servant knew of them, he cannot (save under the Employers' Liability Act) recover against his master, although the latter also had knowledge of them ; and so, too, if the defects were unknown to the master, and unknowable to him by the exercise of reasonable care, the servant cannot (save under the Act) succeed. But a master cannot escape merely by reason of his ignorance. " Where a master is employing a servant in a work, particu- larly work of a dangerous character, he is bound to take all reasonable precautions that there shall bo no extra- ordinary danger incuri'cd by the workman. ... A master cmi)loying servants upon anj' work, particularly a dangerous work, is bound to take care that he does not induce them \^work under the notion that they arc working with good Griffiths V. London and St. Katherine's Docks Co. (1884), 12 (^. 1). D. 2.59 (C. A.), THE LAW AFFECTING PKINTERS. 75 and sufficient tackle, while he is employing improper tackle. "^^ But an employer who invites a man to work with certain machinery does not thereby warrant that it will not fail. "I take it to be perfectly clear," said Lord Wensleydale,^- " that in these cases there is no warranty. All that the master is bound to do is to provide machinery fit and proper for the work, and to take care to have it superintended by himself or his workmen in a fit and proper manner ; " and, by the Common Law, a master wlio selected proper and competent persons to superintend and direct the work, and furnished them with adequate materials and resources for the work, was not liable, if the persons so selected were guilty of negligence. ^^ But by the Employers' Liability Act ^"' the law has been materially altered. Before considering that Act, however, we will draw attention to a rule of law which applies to all actions for negligence. It is that although negligence on the part of the defendant may have been proved, yet if it be shown that the plaintiff has himself been guilty of negligence contributing to the injury complained of — usually called "contributory negligence" — he cannot re- cover, and this though the negligence of the defendant have been much greater than that of the plaintiff. What is negligence in a man may not be such in a child ; and, accordingly, children have sometimes recovered damages under circumstances which, had they been grown up, would have barx'ed their right. ^'^ A servant who knows his employment is dangerous, and yet elects to enter upon or continue in it, has not, as a rule, any claim against his master for injuries sustained in '1 Per Lord Cranworth in Paterson v. Wallace (1854), 1 Paterson's Scotch Appeals, 389. 1- In Weenes v. Mathieson, 1 Pat. 1044. " Per Lord Cairns in Wilson v. 3Ierri/ (1868), L. E. 1 So. & Div. App., 326. " 43 and 44 Vict., c. 42. »= Woodley v. Metropolitan Railicay Co. (1877), 2 Ex. D. 384. 70 THE LAW AFFECTIXa PRINTERS. it.^" So if a servant knows that machinery is dangerously defective, and yet chooses to use it, he has, as a rule, no claim if he is injured.^'' But if he is induced to continue woi'king with defective machinery by a promise on the part of the master that it shall be rectified, ^'^ or if the master is guilty of a breach of statutory regulations for the protection of his workpeople (e.^., those under the Factory Act), and one of them continues to work with the know- ledge of this fact, and is injured, he will not necessarily be disentitled to recover damages.'^ The Employers' Liahllitij Ad, 1880. We will now consider the Employers' Liability Act,-'' which considerably enlarges the rights of servants against their masters, but out of which it is competent for them to contract themselves.-^ By Sect. 1 of this Act it is enacted, " Where after the commencement of this Act-^ personal injury is caused to a workman -^ " (1) By reason of any defect in the condition of the ways, works, machinery, or plant connected with or used in the business of tlie employer ; or "(2) By reason of the negligence of any person in the service of the employer who has any superinten- dence entrusted to him whilst in the exercise of such superintendence ; or "(3) By reason of the negligence of any ]-)erson in the service of the employer to whose orders or direc- tions the workman at the time of the injury was i« See Griffiths v. Gidhw (1858), 3 H. h N. 048 ; 27 L. J. Ex. 405; and Senior v. Ward (1859), 1 E. & E. 385 ; 28 L. J. Q. B. 139. 1- .See Grizzle v. Frost (1803), 3 F. & F. 023. i» Holmes v. Clark, 31 L. J. Ex. 350. i» nritton V. G. W. Cotton Co. (1872), L. IX. 7 Ex. 130; 41 L. J. Ex. 99. *• 43 and 44 Vict., c. 42. »' Griffiths V. Lord Dudley, 9 Q. B. D. 357 ; 51 L. J. Q. B. 543. « January Ist, 1881 . " See Sect. 8 for defuiitiou of " workiiian." THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 77 bound to conform, and did conform, where such injury resulted from his having so conformed ; or (4) By reason of the act or omission of any person in the service of the employer done or made in obedience to the rules or byelaws of the employer, or in obedience to particular instructions given by any person delegated with the authority of the employer in that behalf ; or "(5) By reason of the negligence of any person in the service of the employer who has the charge or control of any signal, points, locomotive engine, or train upon a railway ;-* the workman, or in case the injury results in death, the legal personal representatives of the workman, and any persons entitled in case of death, shall have the same right of compensation and remedies against the employer as if the workman had not been a workman of nor in the service of the employer, nor engaged in his work." Sect. 2. Exceptions. — "A workman shall not be entitled under this Act to any right of compensation or remedy against the employer in any of the following cases ; that is to say, "(1) Under sub-section one of section one, unless the defect therein mentioned arose from, or had not been discovered or remedied owing to the negli- gence of the employer, or of some person in the service of the employer, and entrusted by him with the duty of seeing that the ways, works, machinery, or plant were in proper condition. "(2) Under sub-section four of section one, unless the injury resulted from some impropriety or defect in the rules, byelaws, or instructions tlierein mentioned ; provided that where a rule or byelaw has been approved or has been accepted as a ''• This sub-section is inserted for the sake of conapletene«g, but it lias no bearing upon printert. 78 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. proper rule or byelaw by one of Her Majesty . Principal Secretaries of State, or by the Board of Trade or any other department of the Govern- ment, under or by virtue of any Act of Parliament, it shall not be deemed for the purposes of this Act to be an improper or defective rule or byelaw. "(3) In any case where the workman knew of the defect or negligence which caused his injury, and failed within a reasonable time to give, or cause to be given, information thereof to the employer or some person superior to himself in the service of the employer, unless he was aware that the employer or such superior already knew of the said defect or negligence." Sect. 3. Limit of compensation. — " The amount of com- pensation recoverable under this Act shall not exceed such sum as may be found to be equivalent to the estimated earnings, during the three years preceding the injury, of a person in the same grade employed during those years in the like employment and in the district in which the workman is employed at the time of the injury." Sect. 4. Limit of time for recovery of compensation. — " An action for the recovery under this Act of com- pensation for an injury shall not be maintainable unless notice that injury has been sustained is given within six weeks, and the action is commenced within six months from the occurrence of the accident causing the injury, or, in case of death, within twelve months from the time of death : Provided always, that in case of death the want of such notice shall be no bar to the main- tenance of such action if the judge shall be of opinion that there was reasonable excuse for such want of notice." Sect. 5. Money payable under venalty to be deducted from THE LAW AFFECTING TRINTEKS. 79 compensation under Ad. — " There shall be deducted from any compensation awarded to any workman, or representatives of a workman, or persons claim- ing by, under, or through a workman in respect of any cause of action arising under this Act, any penalty or part of a penalty which may have been paid in pursuance of any other Act of Parlia- ment to such workman, representatives, or persons in respect of the same cause of action ; and where an action has been brought under this Act by any workman, or the representatives of any workman, or any persons claiming by, under, or through such workman, for compensation in respect of any cause of action arising under this Act, and pay- ment has not previously been made of any penalty or part of a penalty under any other Act of Parliament in respect of the same cause of action, such workman, representatives, or person shall not be entitled thereafter to receive any penalty or part of a penalty under any other Act of Parlia- ment in respect of the same cause of action." Sectiox 6 provides that all actions under the Act shall be brought in a County Court (in Scotland, Sheriff's Court ; in Irelaiid, Civil Bill Court), with power to remove them to a superior court as in other County Court actions. It also provides that the judge may have assessors, and empowers the making of rules, ttc. Sect. 7. Notice of injury. — "Notice in respect of an injury under this Act shall give the name and address of the per- son injured, and shall state in ordinary language the cause of the injury and the date at which it was sustained, and shall be served on the employer, or, if there is more than one employer, upon one of such employers. " The notice may be served by delivering the same to or at the residence or place of business of the person on whom it is to be served. 80 THE LA"W AFFECTING PRINTERS. ' ' The notice may also be served by post by a registered letter addressed to the person on whom it is to be served at his last-known place of residence or place of business ; and, if served by post, shall be deemed to have been served at the time when a letter containing the same would be de- livered in the ordinary course of post ; and, in proving the service of such notice, it shall be sufficient to prove that the notice was properly addi'essed and registered. " Where the employer is a body of persons corporate or unincorporate, the notice shall be served by delivering the same at or by sending it by post in a registered letter addressed to the office, or, if there be more than one office, any one of the offices of such body. "A notice under this section shall not be deemed invalid by reason of any defect or inaccuracy therein, unless the judge who tries the action arising from the injury men- tioned in the notice shall be of opinion that the defendant in the action is prejudiced in his defence by such defect or inaccuracy, and that the defect or inaccuracy was for the purpose of misleading." Sect. 8. Definifions. — " For the purpose of this Act, un- less the context otherwise requires, " The expression ' person who has superintendence entrusted to him ' means a person whose sole or principal duty is that of superintendence, ancT who is not ordinarily engaged in manual labour : " The expression ' employer ' includes a body of per- sons corporate r>r unincorporate : " The expression ' workman ' means a railway servant and any person to whom the Employers and Workmen Act, 1875, applies." Sects. 9 and 10 pi'ovide that the Act shall come into operation on the 1st Jan., 1881, and shall continue in force till the Slst December, 1887, and to the end of the then next Session f)f Parliament, unless Parliament shall other- wise determine. Actions commenced before that period to be continued as if the Act had not expired. It is also pro- THE LAW AFFKCTING PRINTEKS. 81 vided that the Act may be cited as the Eiiipluycrs' Liability Act, 1880. Having thus set out verbatim all the principal clauses of the Statute, which, from the complexity of their provisions, has been deemed to be almost necessary, let us deal with the subject in a different manner, and so help to elucidate it. 1. Who may have the benefit of the J.c^.— Every person has the benefit of the Act who comes within the words "railway servant," and "workman" as defined by the Employers and Workmen Act, 1875, Section 10 of which enacts that "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 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, 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 personally to execute any work or labour." The question has several times been raised as to whether a i:)articular servant is a " workman " within the meaning of the Act, and the test seems to be, " Was the person employed for manual labour?" If he was, he is a " workman." ^^ A man whose "'' Per Lindley, L. J., in Graiiifjer v. Aynsley (1880), Q. B. D. 182. In Morr/an v. Loml. General Omnibus Co. (1884), 14 B. D. 832, an omnibus conductor was held by the Court of ^ _ ^ _ K Appeal not to be a " workman ;" and in Jackson y. Hill (1884), ^^ hf^" /C-J^^" 13 Q. B. D. 618, a person having a knowledge of mechanics and •**-'*» v / O D *J engaged to assist his employer as a practical working mechanic in / -p, ^ yVT7^ /iirirjx developing ideas and inventions suitable to tlu; business of the firm was also held not a "workman." In Stuart v. Ecans (1883), / • ..^ 49 L. T. 138 ; 31 W. R. 706, a slater paid by the piece and txlLUXjX employed by the defendant to slate a house was held to be a /T'/> -*•" ' "workman." But persons, such as jirinters and builders, who con- rt« tract to do work for others are not "workmen." Ut.rdij v. Ryh ;v7j (1829) ; 9 B. & C. 603 ; Lancaster v. Greaves, 9 B. & C, 628 ; Exp. JoJmstonc (1839), 7 Dow. 702. G 02 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERtS. ordinary work is not manual labour, but who "lends a hand " when required, is not a " workman."^® It may be gathered, therefore, that working overseers, compositors, pressmen, machine-minders, laying-on and taking-otf boys, binders, persons who work cutting and other machines, engine-men, stokei's, and labourex's, and gene- rally all persons who may be called the " operatives " in a printing-office are "workmen" within the Act; but superintendents and managers not usually engaged in manual work, readers, clerks, and errand-boys are not " workmen " within the Act. 2. JFlio are liable iiiulsr the Act. — All employers, includ- ing companies.-^ 3. When they are iiafe^c— Employers are liable only when all the following things combine ; — 1. A workman employed by them has sustained injury ; 2. The injury has been sustained by reason of one or more of the causes set out in Section 1 of the Act, such section being read together Avith Sec- tion 2 ; 3. Due notice of the injury has been given as re- (juired by Sections 4 and 7 ; 4. The action has been brought within six or twelve months of the date of the injury (as the case may be) as provided by Section 4. 5. The facts are such that the plaintiff could liave recovered at connnon law had he not been a ser- vant of the defendant, and had the common law been amended by i)rovisions such as those implied in Sub-section 3 of Section 2 of the Act.^** ■■»• JJai-lf's V. Ihrtcick (18(51), 30 L. J. Mag. Cas. 84. "" See Morrison v. Jiwrd and Co. (1883), 10 Ct. of Se.ss. Cas. 271, a case where tlicrc were super-employers and a sub-employer, and the Rupcr-cinployers were held liable. " It is difficult to say how far the meaning of the last part of Sec- tion I is conlrulled l>v thio siih- section. Section 1 would Beeni to THE LAW AKlECTlNt; PKINTEK.S. 83 If any one of these is not proved tlie plaintill' fails in liis action. To what ej-tent the einploijer is liable. — The plaintiff can- not recover more than a sum equivalent to earnings for three years immediately preceding the accident. (Sect. 3.) This does not mean necessarily the wages the person actu- ally received during the three years prior to the accident, but wages which persons in a similar position to his were ordinarily getting in the neighbourhood during that period. These may in some cases be more and in others less than the plaintiff earned. It does not do in all cases to take the wages ordinarily earned at the time of the accident, and then multiply by the three years. This would answer well enough in the case of an ordinary compositor employed in London and aged thirty, where the maximum sum could be readily shown to be three years' wages at thirty-six shillings a week. But suppose the person injured to be a London machine-boy aged seventeen. We should have to take the average yearly earnings of a London machine-boy at the ages of fifteen, sixteen, and seventeen, and it is well known that machine-boys of fifteen do not earn such high wages as others over sixteen years of age, for what may be called Factory Act reasons among others. Classes of Accidents. — The Act, it will l)e seen, provides for accidents arising from three main causes, viz., 1. Defects in the condition of the ways, works, machinery, or plant ; 2. Rules or bye-laws or particular inst^ actions ; and 3. Negligence of certain classes of persons. mean that the workman should have the sane right as a stranger, or, in other words, that, in the cases specified, the doctrine of com- mon employment (as to which see p. 73) shoukl cease, but the last clause of Sect. 2 would seem to confer on the workman greater rights than a stranger has. See Stuart v. Eimis (18S3), 49 L. T. 138 ; 31 W. E. 706, where it was held that the defence of contributory negligence was not done away with by the Act, and McGiffm V. Pa'mcr's Iron Shipbuilding Co. (1882), 10 (4. B. D. 5 ; o2L. J. Q. B. 25; 47 L. T. 3ir>. 84 THE LAW Ajb'i'ECTING rillNTEKS. 1. Defects. — The words of the Act are not " defects in the ways, works, machinery, or plant," but defects in the condition of the ways, &c. Where machinery is broken there is undoubtedly a defect both in it and its condition, but it is possible to conceive of cases in which there may be no defect in a thing itself, and yet a defect in its con- dition. Sujipose a Wharf edale machine placed in a machine- room in such proximity to a wall that when the ink-table is driven out it comes within a few inches of the wall, and suppose an unsuspecting person to get squeezed against the Avail by the ink-table, it is possible for the jury to find that tliere was a defect in the condition of the works, or of the plant, or machinery, and yet there may have been no defect in the works, or the plant, or the machinery them- selves. INIachinery imsuitable for the purposes for which it is used comes within tlie phrase "defect in the condition of the machinery," which does not apply simply to machinery which has become defective.-'' It would seem, therefore, that if machinery ought to be guarded or fenced, and is not, and an accident results therefrom, the plaintiff is entitled to recover. The machinery or plant used must be fit for the purpose for which it is being used at the time of the accident, other- wise the defendant is liable. It is no defence to show generally that it is fit and proper machinery."^ "'' Heske v. Samuehon (1883), 12 Q. B. D. 30; 49 L. T. 474 approved by the Court of Ajjpeal in Cripps v. Judcje (1884), 13 Q. B. D. 583 ; 53 L. J. Q. li. 517 ; 51 L. T. 428. In Heskev. Samuel- son the workman was killed by a piece of coke falling from a lift. The lift consisted of two platforms, which ascended and descended alternatively. The evidence was that the accident arose either from the sides of the lift not being fenced so as to prevent coke from falling over, or from the lower platform not being roofed so as to protect those working on it from falling coke. The plaintilf was held entitled to recover against the deceased's employers. ■■x> Cripps v, Jii(l!/e (1H84), 13 t^. 1}. 1). 583; 53 L. J. (^ B. 517 (('.A ). flerc llif plaiiitill w.i.s injured I13 reason of the lueaking of THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 85 It would seem to be no defence that the employer had no reason to doubt the fitness of the machinery or plant for the purpose for which it was used, if a skilled person could have told that it was in fact not fit for such purpose, and the employer had not obtained the opinion of a skilled person on the point, ^^ The case on which this proposition rests will, however, one day, probably, be reviewed by a Court of Appeal. It certainly seems hard upon the employer. The writer submits that it is not every "defect in the condition of the ways, works, machinery, or plant con- nected with or used in the business of the employer" which gives a workman injured thereby a right of action against his employer, but only such "defects" as would have rendered the defendant liable if the plaintiff had been a person not in his employ. In other words, that the work- man has no better right than a stranger would have, except when he can bring himself within Sub-section 3 of Section 2.^" Suppose the workman kneiv of the defects which caused his injury, can he recover against his employer 1 No ; a ladder wliicli was being used to support a scaffold. It was good enough as a ladder, but the jury found it was insufficient for the purpose for which it was being used at the time of the accident (viz., as a support for the scaffold). The defendants were held liable. 2' Fraser v. Fraser (1882, Scotch case), 9 Ct. of Sess. Cas. 89G. Here the deceased was employed as a workman to put up a lightning conductor, and was killed by the breaking of the rope supplied by the employer. It was proved that the rope was thick enough, and had been used for several days in raising stones of 3 cwt. There was no evidence to show what the defect really was, but experts said it might have been caused by a "nip " (a defect in the centre) of the rope, which might have been detected by the hand of a skilled person. No examination had taken place before the rope was used. Held that the defendant was liable, as he had not had the rope examined by a skilled person before using it on the occasion in question. ^- See the last part of Sec. 1 of the Act ; Note 28 above, and the text to which it refers. 80 THE LAW AFFECTTXC PRIXTKKS. unless lie can show (a) that within a reasonable time he had given, or caused to be given, information as to the defects to the employer or to some person superior to himself'*^ in the service of the employer ; or (6) 1, that the employer rr such superior already knew of the defect, and 2, that he, the workman, was at the time of the accident aware that the employer or such superior knew of the defect. ^^ But it is conceived that it was not the intention of the legislature to relieve a workman from the consequences of his own negligence. If a machine is manifestly dangerous and the workman knows it, he cannot be allowed to recover damages if he voluntarily continues to use it and in so doing gets injui'ed by it, even though he is aware that his employer knows it to bo dangerous.^-' If the defect did not arise from the negligence of the employer, or the person entrusted by him with the duty of seeing that the ways, works, machinery, or plant were iu proper condition, and if the emploj'er, or such person, was guilty of }io negligence in not having discovered or remedied the defect, the workman cannot sustain his action.^*' •" This must mean some one superior in coinmand, or someone who woukl have the riglit to get the defect remeilied. 3< See McMonagle v. Baird and Co. (1881), 9 Ct. of Sess. Cas. 3G4. Here a miner was injured by the falling in of the roof of a main roadway. The oversman had caused it to be partially secured, and had tohl the man to go on with his work under it. He admitted that he did not think it properly secured, but went on with his work exi)octiiig that men would come and complete the jiropping directly. He was held entitled to recover, the Lord Justice Clerk saying : " If there is a known danger which any one could see, that is one thing. But when he has reported a danger, and his report lias been so far acted ui)on as to have the thing practically secure, and it has turned out the oversman was wrong, and the place was not secure, it would be a hardship, and it would be oppression to make the man suffer." ^' See last note, and note 28 ; also page "T). *' Seo 2, Subsect. ?. THK r,A\V AFFF.(TIN(; rUINTRUS. 8" 2. /iK^'x, Biji'-Uncs, or FaittfuUir Jnsti itrtions. — An injured workman is entitled to recover damages against his employer if the injury resulted from the act or omission of a person in the service of the employer done or made in obedience to the rules or bye-laws of the employer, or in obedience to particular instructions given by any person delegated with the authority of the employer in that behalf. 2'" But if the employer can show that the rules, bye-laws, or instructions were authorised or approved by Government, he will escape liability.^'* To prove a case of injury resulting from rules or bye- laws, all the person has to do is to prove the injury to have been caused by a workman employed by the defendant, to prove the rules or bye-laws, and to show that the act or omission that caused the injury was done or made in pursuance of such rules or bye-laws. To prove a case of particular instructions, it will be necessary to show that particular instructions were given to the i)erson causing the injury to do the act or make the omission from which the injury resulted, and that such instructions were given either by the employer or by some one duly authorised by the employer to give those instructions. The authority may be express, or it may be implied from the position of the parties and the circum- stances of the case. But it is obvious that if the instructions were not authorised by the employer, the latter is not responsible. 3, Negligence.^^ — An employer is usually made to suffer for the negligence of any of his servants, but when the person injured through such negligence is his own workman, the " Sec. 1, Sub-sect. 3. '' Sec. 2, Sub-sect. 2. 33 Negligence is defined to be " the omission to do something which a reasonable man guided by those considerations which ordinarily regulate the conduct of human affairs, would do ; or the doing of something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do." — Addison on To)i.\ 88 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. plaintiff must show that the negligent person was a person in the service of the employer inlio has siipointendence en- trusted tu him,^^ and that the injury arose whilst such person was in the exercise of such superintendence" ; or a person in the employer's employ to ivhose orders or directions the %corkman icas bound to conform, and did conform, whereby he was injured.*- And even then the employer will escape liability if he can show that the workman knew of the negligence which caused his injury, and failed within a reasonable time to give, or cause to be given, information thereof to the employer, or some person superior to him- self in the service of the employer, unless the workman shows that he was aware that the employer or such superior already knew of the said negligence. ^^ In a claim under this head, the plaintiff must prove that the injury resulted from his conforming to an order or direction of some person in the defendant's employ, and that at the time he was hound to conform to that person's order or direction. If he is ordered or directed to do something distinctly and manifestly dangerous, he will have no action against his employer if he is injured, because (as a rule) no man is bound to hazard life or limb at the request or command "0 This means " a person whose sole or principal duty is that of superintendence, and who is not ordinarily engaged in manual labour " (Sect. 8). The fact that the person superintending was at the time of the accident vohuitaiily assisting in manual labour does rot of itself relieve the employer from liability. Osborne v, Jackson (1883), 11 Q. B. D. C19 ; 48 L. T. G42. Other cases on this point are Shaffers v. General Steam Naviyatum Co. (1883), 10 Q. B. D. 356; Ti2 L. J. Q. B. 2G0, and Bobbins v. Ctibitt (1882), 4G L. T, 535. <• Sect, 1, Sub-sect. 2. *■ Section 1, Sub-section 3. Mention of the liability of railway owners to their servants under Sub-sect. 5 is pur])osely omitted as being outside the scojie of this work. *■' Sect. 2, Sub-sect. 3. If a man knows tliat his fellow-workman is negligent, and yet cliooscs to go on working with him, ho cannot recover against his employer. THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 89 of another. So, too, if what he was ordered to do was outside the scope of his employment, for such an order he was not bound to conform to.'** Notice of the Injury. — In order to render a master liable under the Act, it is necessary that due notice of the injury should be given him, unless, indeed, the injury causes death, in which case notice may be dispensed with.*^ The notice required must be given within six weeks of the injuiy, and it may either be delivered personally or posted. It is not necessary that it should be signed by the person injured, and it may, in fact, be given by any iierson. The Act does not furnish a form of notice, but it does specify what it shall contain, viz. : — a. The name and address of the person injured. h. A statement in ordinary language of the cause of the injury. c. The date of the injury. Defects or inaccuracies in the notice which do not prejudice the employer, and are not made for the purpose of misleading, will not invalidate the notice.''*' The following practical instructions may be found useful in case of need. If a workman should sustain injury under circumstances which it is thought give him a right to compensation from his employers, he should as soon as possible, and within ** In Bunker v. Midland Railway Company (1883), 47 L. T. 476 ; 31 W. R. 231, the plaintiff was a boy under 15 years of age, and employed by the Company as a street-van guard. By one of the Company's rules, which plaintiff knew, no boy under 15 was to drive a van, but on the occasion in question the defendants' foreman ordered him to drive. Held that the plaintiff could not recover, the order of the foreman not being one he was bound to obey. See too MUlward v. Midland Railway Company (1884), 14 Q. B. D. G8. « Sects. 4 and 7. <" Thus in Carter V. Drysdale (1883), 12 Q. B. D. 91 ; 32 W. R. 171, the date of the injury was omitted from the notice, yet the plaintiff was held entitled to recover. i'O THE LAW AFFErTTXn PRINTERS. six weeks of the accident at tlie latest, write out or get written out for him a notice in something like this form : — " To Messrs. Jones and Smith (the EmpJoyer^). " Gentlemen, — I beg to give you notice that on Wednesday, the 3rd June, 1885, I sustained injury by reason of (Jvere state as well as possible the cause of the injury, e.g., 'the negligence of Edward Cooper, the machine- minder under whom I was working, in putting in motion a printing machine while I was engaged in greasing the cogs,' or ' the ink-table of a cylinder printing machine running out from the machine and crushing me against the wall,' or 'the machine on which T was set to work not being properly fenced '). " Dated this 5th June, 1885. (SiijH'it) " Thomas Brown, "Machine Boy. " Address— 18, Beta Street, " Clerkenwell, E.G." If the ])erson injured cannot for any reason sign the notice himself, a notice in the following form may be sent by his wife, or some friend : — ■ " 20, Alpha Street, Clerkenwell, " Gth June, 1885. ' ' To Messrs. Jones and Smith (the Employers). " Gentlemen,— I beg to give you notice that on Wed- nesday, the 3rd June, 1885, Thomas Brown, a machine-boy in your employ, whose address is 18, Beta Street, Clerk- enwell, E.C., was injured by reason of (here state the cause of injury as instrurti'd above). " I am, gentlemen, " Your obedient servant, (»S'/f/)i v7) "WiLijAM RoniNsoN." T.et a coj-y of (in- notice be made ami carefully kept. Wlifii tlie notice lias heeu written out and signed, let it be THR LAW AVFKCTIXC PRTVTKRS. !>1 put in an envelope and properlj' addressed to the employers at their (chief) place of business, and then let it bo taken by an intelligent person to a post-office, and there retjldcred and posted. The postmaster will give a receipt for the letter, and this should be carefully preserved, and the person who took the letter to the post-office should make a memorandum on the back of the receipt to the efiect that he posted the letter on such-and-such a day. This person may at the trial have to give evidence of the fact. There are other ways of serving the notice ; *'' but sending it by post as a registered letter is the best way, as then the employers will be presumed to have received it in ordinary course. Bringhuj the Action. — If it becomes necessary to institute an action, it must be commenced in the County Court within six montJis of the date of the accident, unless the injury results in death, when the representatives of the deceased have twelve months from the date of the accident within which to commence proceedings. The person injured (or his representatives, if he be dead) should not commence or undertake an action of this kind in pei'son if they can possibly help it, but should seek the advice of a solicitor of skill and repute. Where the person injured dies and leaves a wife, hus- band, father, stepfather, stepmother, grandparent, son, daughter,^* grandson, granddaughter, stepson, or step- daughter, the executors or administrators of the deceased may bring the action for damages for the benefit of such relatives : *^ other relatives have no claim for compensation. If there is no executor or administrator, or if the executor or administrator does not within six months after the death of the deceased bring the action, it may be brought by or " See Section 7. " Illegitimate cliiWren have no claim {Dickiii.fon v. (•'. E. Ry. Co., 33 L. J. Ex. 1)1). *■< 9 k 10 Vict., c. 93 (Lord Campliell's Act). 92 THE LAW AFFECTING PRIXTERS. in the names of all or any of the persons for whose benefit it would be brought by the executor or administrator.^'* Tlie Damages recovcrahle. — We have already seen that the damages recoverable are limited by the Act, but it does not follow that in every case the plaintiff is to have the maximum sum allowed : he is to be properly compensated, that is all. " I may take the common case of a labourer receiving an injury, which has kept him out of work perhaps six months ; his evidence may be that before the time of the accident he was earning 25s. a week, that during twenty- six weeks he has been wholly incapacitated for work, that for ten weeks afterwards he has been able to earn only 10s. a week, and that he will not get into full work again for twenty weeks. The plaintiff will be entitled to 26s. for each of the twenty-six weeks, and to 15s. for each of the ten and twenty weeks. He is also entitled to some amount for his bodily sufferings and for his medical expenses ; and in this manner the compensation to be awarded to him is estimated. I have put a case where a definite term may be fixed upon within which the partj' injured will recover ; but suppose a case in which no definite term can be fixed : in that case the direction to the jury is that they must consider for themselves how long the plaintiff will be in- capacitated from earning his livelihood or practising his profession, but tliat they must also take into account tlie cliance of his losing employment if he had not met with the accident."''^ Tlie jury are not to give less because the plaintiff was insured against accidents."'- When an action is brought under Lord Campbell's Act the jury have to estimate only the pecuniary loss the per- sons on whose behalf the action is brought have sustained ; "27&28 Vict., c. 95. " Per Lord Justice ]5iamwell in PhUlips v. L. ,(■ S. W. J!i/. Co. (IST'J), 5 0. r. 1). at p. 287. " Bradhurii v. (!. W. llii. Co. (1874), L. 11. 10 Ex. 1 ; 44 L. ,T. Ex y. THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 93 but they must not give anything for wounded feelings, funeral expenses, or mourning, and money received under an insurance against accidents must be taken into account, because that money could never have been received had not the deceased met his death by accident. ^^ But the present writer conceives, notwithstanding the statement in " Mayne on Damages," 3rd Edn., p. 449, that no deduc- tion is to be made in respect of money received under an ordinary life insurance jwlicy, because that would be pay- able certainly at some time or other. The jury may, how- ever, be rightly told to deduct what the deceased would in all probability (according to the actuarial tables) have paid in premiums on such insurance had not his life been cut short by the accident. ^^ (f) As Resjiccts Cliayaciers. A master is not bound to give his servant a character. Should he give one which is defamatory, the servant cannot sustain an action for libel or slander against him, unless it be proved that the master in giving the character was actuated by malice. In other Avords, a character, however bad and however unjust, is privileged, unless the master gave it in bad faith. But the privilege extends only when the character is given in the discharge of some public or private duty. When a person who professes to be intending to employ the servant asks the former employer for the servant's character, it is the duty of that employer to give the character he honestly believes the man entitled to, and if his opinion or belief is erroneous, he will not be respon- sible for stating it, so long as he acts in good faith, and this notwithstanding that he may do the servant great harm by giving the wrong character. But there is no duty on a master to tell every one who asks the character of his servant, still less to state it voluntarily ; in such cases, •■» See Bradhurn v. G. W. Ry. Co. {ubiimpra). ^ See Hicks v. New2wrt. dc. By. Co. (18G3), 4 B, & S. 403. 94 THE LAAV .EFFECTING PRINTERS. unless there exist contidential relation between the parties, there is no privilege, and the master will be liable to the servant for any slander or libel he may utter. •■* 6. Tlte Master's Rights against Tliird Persons. A master has a riglit of action and may recover damages against any one who wrongfully deprives him of his servant's services. Actions of this kind are sustainable where a servant has been seduced, has been bodily injured, or has been enticed away ; but, oddly enough, if the injuries have caused the death of the servant, the master has no remedy. -^^ As to enticing awaj^ it has been held ^^ that the action may be brought when the servant was a journeyman working on piece, and not hired for any fixed period. But an action will not lie for inducing a servant to leave at the end of the term for which he was engaged, although but for such inducement he would have stayed on."" As a rule, in these actions it is not necessary for the plaintiff to prove a binding contract of service : it is enough that he received the services ; but where an action was brought for enticing away an apprentice, and the deed of api)renticeship was shown to be void, the plaintiff was nonsuited.'^*' An action may be maintained against persons who knowingly harbour or employ the servant of another. In these cases, however, a contract by the servant to serA^e the plaintiff must be proved.'''' 7. The Kights of Third Fcrso)i.^ against the Master. (Jenerally, when a servant, within the scope of the authority committed to him by his master, does any act, *' Odgers on Libel and Slander, pages 200-219. « See Oaborne v. Gillctt (1873), L. It. 8 Ex. 88 ; 42 L. J. Ex. 53. " In Hart v. Eldridije (1774), Cowp. M. See also Lumley v. Gi/e (1853), 22 L. J. C^. ];. 4(i3 ; and Bowen v. Hall (1881), G Q. B.'d. 333. ■" Nidwl V. Martin (17'.»!l), 2 Ksp. 734. ■*' Coxv. Munccy (1H,V.»), (J I'. B. N. S. 375. "• Hiikcs V. Dixon (18311), 'J A. k E. (i!)3 ; PUkiHylon v. /%y«(iSJG), 15 II. k W. U57. THK LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 95 tlie master becomes bound by it just as if he had done tlie act himself. The authority may be express, or implied from the circumstances of the case. But if the servant did not act Avithin the scope of his authority, the master is not bound. The scope of authority is not commensurate with authority derived from actual instructions. Thus, when a man authorised his traveller to sell a log of niahogany, but did not tell him to make any statement as to its condition, and the traveller represented to the intending purchaser that it was perfectly sound, upon the faith of which repre- sentation the purchase was made, and it turned out that the log was unsound, it was held that the employer was liable for the misrepresentation of the traveller, the latter having acted within the scope of his authority in making it.*''^ And a person is even liable for the fraud of his servant or agent, when it is conunitted within the scope of the latter 's authority.''^ It follows, therefore, that contracts entered into by servants or agents invested with the authority of their masters or principals bind the latter. But the authority must be shown to exist ; and it can only si)ring from the words or conduct of the master or principal, or from absolute necessity. Thus, if 1 give my servant money, and send him to a shop to buy goods for me for cash, and the servant buys them for me on credit, and keeps the money, I am not liable, unless I have on previous occasions allowed my servant to buy goods for me of that shopkeeper on my credit, and then I am liable, because from the previous dealings the shopkeeper may fairly believe that this time also the servant had my authority to buy on credit. And a wife is in the same position as a servant : if her husband forbids her to buy goods on credit he is ™ Udell y. Atkerton (1861), 7 H. & N. 172; SOL. J. Ex. 337. «i Barwlck v. English Joint Stock Bank (1867), L. E. 2 Ex. 259 ; 36 L. J. Ex. lAl •fMackayv. Commercial Bank u/ Nav Brunswick (lH7i), L. K. 5 P. C. 304 ; 43 L. J. P. C. 31 ; War v. Bill (1877), 3 Ex. D. 23S ; 17 L. J. Ex. 7Ul, ;iud otlicr cubes. 96 THE LAW AFFEL'XING PllINTEK.S. not liable, and the onus lies on tlie plaintiff to show that the husband did authorise the wife to pledge his credit/'^ So, too, a master is liable for all wrongs done to third persons by his servants or agents acting in the course of their employment or within the scope of their authority. Nice questions sometimes arise as to whether the act in question is or is not within the scope of the authority of the person doing it. The following illustrations may serve as some sort of guide in this matter : (a) A printer keeps a horse and cart for delivering his work ; one day while on his way to a customer his man drives it so negligently as to run into and damage a brougham : the printer is liable to compensate the owner of the brougham, (b) The man is sent out with his horse and cart on his master's errand ; he finds a friend and takes him for a drive, intending to do the errand afterwards ; while on this drive he runs into a brougham : the master is still liable, (c) The driver of the cart is sent out on his master's errand, but he goes off to the races instead, and on the way drives into a brougham : the master is not liable.""" (d) A clerk goes, contrary to orders, to a lavatory resei'ved exclusively for his master's use, and leaves the tap on, whereby the goods of a printer on the floor below ai"e saturated with water : the master is not liable.*'* (e) I put my children into my carriage and tell my coachman to drive slowly : he drives fast, and injures tlie plaintift' : I am liable, notwithstanding my instructions to drive slowly."^ (/) My servant negligently leaves a horse and cart unattended in the street : a passer-by strikes the horse, which starts off and runs into the plaintiff's trap : I am liable."" (c/) I send my man to deliver <" Debenhamv. Mellon (1880), G App. Cas. 24 (H. Lils.). <° Joely. Morrison (1834), 6 C. & V. .501. «' Stevens v. Woodward [l^Sl), G Q. B. D. 318. ''" HeeLhnpw' V. London dcneral OmnihitH Co. (18G2), 1 IT. k C. .'>2G; ;i2 J>. J. Ex. 3."), "" Illidye v. rioodinan (1831), 5 C. :. I'. 1'.)?. THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 97 goods : he in the ordinary course takes up a trap in the foot pavement to pass the goods through, but leaves the hole unguarded ; the plaintiff falls down the hole and is injured : I am liable.''^ Masters are liable to third persons for the consequences of their negligence in employing incompetent servants.**^ A question sometimes arises whether the person doing the act in respect of which the action is brought was the servant of the defendant, or the contractor employed by him. The distinction is important, because, as a general rule, a pei'son who employs a contractor to do work for him incurs no liability for the act of the contractor or his servants.^'' 8. The Bights of Tldrd Persons against Servants. A servant, who as agent for his master and in his name, enters into a contract with a third person, is not personally liable upon it. But if he has not his master's authority, express or implied, he is personally liable. If the servant does not disclose the fact that he is contracting for another, he is personally liable on the contract if the other party chooses to make him so.'" A servant is not liable to third persons for omitting to do something he should have done ; but he is liable for any wrong he actually commits,"' and the fact that he has committed it at the request or for the benefit of his master will be no answer to an action against him. Thus, where a servant sold for his master's benefit goods belong- ing to a third person, he was held liable, although he was ignorant that they were not his master's."* ^ Whiteleij v. Pepper (1877), 2 Q. B. D. 276 ; 46 L. J. Q. B. 43G. «• Wilson V. 3Ierr^j (1868), L. E. 1 Sc. & Div. App.326. « Eeedie v. L. db N. W. By. Co. (1849), 4 Ex. 244. " See Anson on Contract, pp. 337 — 34G. " Lane v. Cotton (1701), 12 Mod. 488. n^Cary v. Wchsier (1716), 1 Strange, 480. 98 THK LAW AFFECTING ritlNTEliS. A servant who executes his master's unlawful orders is personally responsible for his acts. Thus, if he, at his master's bidding, assaults a man, the latter may maintain an action against him, or may i:)rosecute him criminally. A servant who knowingly joins with and assists his master in the commission of a fraud is responsible for the consequences. ' ' All persons directly concerned in the commission of a fraud are to be treated as principals. No party can be permitted to excuse himself of the fraud that he acted as the servant of another."'"'^ " Per Lord Westbury in CuUen v. Thompson's Trustees (1862), 4 Macqueen, 424. THE LAW Ai-'FECriXU PRINTEKS, 99 CHAPTER VIII. MASTER AND APPRENTICE. An apprentice is a person who has undertaken to serve some particular individual or body of individuals for a specified time, in order to learn an art or trade which that individual or body of individuals has undertaken to teach him. In many respects, so far as his legal rights and liabilities are concerned, he differs little from a journeyman, but in others he is subject to special rules of law, and in many trades he is also subject to special customs. An apprentice for more than a year must be bound by a contract in writing. The contract is usually in the form of a deed or indenture of apprenticeship. An indenture or other instrument of apprenticeship must be stamped with a 2s. Od. stamp if no premium be paid, and if tliere be a premium, then with a 5s. stamp for every £5 and fractional part of £5 of the amount or value of the premium or consideration.^'' The premium or consideration must be truly stated in the indenture under heavy penalty ; if it is not, the indenture is void.''^ ^ y~-t t The indenture must be signed and sealed^ by the master ' [.(^I ' " ' ' / and by the apprentice, even though the latter be an infant. The apprentice will be bound by the terms of the indenture, unless he be an infant and they be not beneficial to him.^'' '* Stamp Act, 1870. Paup'ers' apprenticeships are not liable to stamp duty. ■= Ibid. '« See Meakin v. Morris (1884), 12 Q. B, D. 352 ; 53 L. J. M. C. 72 ] In this case a minor was apprenticed by a deed containing a pro* vision that the master should not be liable to pay wages to him so long as the master's business should be interrupted or impeded by or in consequence of any strike or turn-out, and that the apprentice might, during any such turn-out, employ himself in any manner and with any person for his own benefit. Held, that this provision not being for the benefit of the infant apprentice, the deed could not be enforced against him. / 100 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTEKS. It is usual for the father or other guardian of the apprentice to be made a party to the indenture, and for him to covenant with the master that the apprentice shall serve him well and faithfully during the term for which he is bound. In such a case, if the apprentice absents him- self from his master's employment or misconducts himself, the father or guardian may be sued for damages upon the covenant. ^ By consent, apprentices in the printing trade are often assigned or turned over by one master to another. Such apprentices are called " turnovers." They ought to be re- bound to the new master by an indenture of assignment, which all parties to the original indenture must execute. The stamp on such an assignment will be the same as on the original indenture, but in no case more than 10s., unless the consideration for the transfer exceeds £100. The London Society of Compositors has a rule that all turnovers must be legally assigned or re-bound to their new masters ; but it is a rule pei'haps more honoured in the breach than in the observance. It is doubtful how far a turnover not properly assigned or re-bound is an apprentice in the eye of the law. If the master is adjudicated bankrupt, either the master or the apprentice may give notice in writing to the trustee that the apprenticeship is to be at an end, and t]iereuj)on it will cease ; either party or any one on his belialf may, however, ash the trustee to transfer the inden- ture to some other person, and the trustee may do so if he thinks fit . An ajjprentice cannot be transferred to a new master against his will, except when by the indenture he has been bound to serve the master's "assigns." By an ancient custom of the City of London, however, ajiprtntices of citizens )uay be assigned without their consent. When the term (^f aiiprenticcshii) is ended the appren- tice is, by custom, entitled to have the indenture of " Baiikiiiptcy Act, 1883 (4G ami 47 Vict!, c. 50), sect. 41. THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 101 apprenticeship, and it is proper for the master to endorse on it a certificate that the apprentice has duly served out his time. If the master dies, the ajtprenticeship is at an end, unless the indenture contains words showing that the apprentice is to serve the master's executors. In Cooper V. Simmons (1862), 31 Law Journal Reports, Magistrates' Cases, 138, a lad, John Cooper, bound himself by the indenture to serve Thomas Simmons, his executors and administrators for seven years. Thomas Simmons died, leaving his wife his executrix, who carried on the business. It was held that the lad must serve out his time with her. If a premium have been paid with the apprentice, in the absence of any provision in the indenture, no part of it will be recoverable on the apprenticeship coming to an end by the death of the master or the apprentice.''^ In the case of the master's bankruptcy, provision is made by the 41st section of the Bankruptcy Act, 1883, for a return of a proportionate part of the premium paid with an apprentice, on application being made to the trustee. When an indenture of apprenticeship is cancelled under the Employers and Workmen Act, 1875, the magistrate has power to order the whole or any part of the premium paid on the binding of the apprentice to be repaid. If a father has paid a premium to have his son taught a trade, and the master neglects to teach the trade properly, the father cannot recover back the premium, but must bring an action for damages. ?7ie Master^s Rights. A master has the exclusive right to the services of the apprentice in the trade wliich the latter is to learn, during all oi'dinary hours of work throughout the whole term of the apprenticeship. It follows, therefore, that an appren- tice may not quit the service of his master during the term of the apprenticeship, except with the master's consent. '" Whincup V. Hiijhes (1871), L. R. fl C. P. 78. THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTEBS. A master cannot compel his apprentice to work beyond tihe ordinary -working hoiu's, unless the deed of apprentice- ship provides otherwise.'''' A master cannot compel his apprentice to do work of a kind not fairly coming within the scope of the trade the apprentice is to learn. The master has a right to all the earnings of the apprentice. He may even sue for what the apprentice has earned Avhen serving Avith some other person. Any person who entices away, knowingly employs, or harl)ours the apprentice of another is liable to an action by the master of the apprentice. Therefore, if a printer employ a lad who applies to him for work and afterwards discover that he is an apprentice, he should at once send him back to his master, even though he may have taken him as his own apprentice. A master has the right to inflict moderate corporal pun- ishment ujion his apprentice for misconduct. His overseer, however, has no such right. It is very seldom a master exercises this right in these days, the more usual course being to take the apprentice before a magistrate for cor- rection.^" A master who pays wages to his apprentice may, in the writer's oi)inion, deduct from such wages reasonable sums by way of damages if the apprentice has caused him loss by gross negligence, or by absenting liimself.**^ If an aj^prentice should enlist in the armj', the master, if he wants to recover him, must, within one month of the ••' See Sc(jU v. Bowel! and JJurf/fss {Printers' liegister, Jan., 1885, p. 1.35 ; Print in;/ Times s.m.)— a case decided by the Cliambcilain of London, Mr. Scott re(Hiiicd his apprentices to worlc HDi hours a week, and they refused, alleging that 54 hours were the normal liours in the London i)rinting trade. The CJhambnrlain after hear- ing evidence found that this was so, and decided that the master could not compel tlie a]>prenticcs to work longer. "^ Sec in/v't, " Sco'fv/c, paj:c40. THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTEES. 103 date of the tapprentice leaving hiui, go before a justice of the peace and make oath in the prescribed form that the hid was his apprentice and absconded, and afterwards ho inust apply to a court of summary jurisdiction (a police court) for an order directing the apprentice to be given up to him.®^ The Ap2)rentl<:e's Biglds. The apprentice has a right to be i)roperly taught the trads or trades stipulated for in the indenture. If he be not so taught, he may biing an action for damages against his master. A master who carries on more than one trade, and takes an apprentice to learn all, commits a breach of his contract if he discontinues one of the trades. ^^ So, too, if au apprentice be bound to two partners and one of them retires, there is a technical breach of the contract entitling the apprentice to sue for damages.** But ordinarily the damages Avould be nominal. An indoor apprentice is entitled to receive from his master suitable lodging and wholesome and sufficient food ; the master must also provide him with proper medical attendance and medicine when he is ill, unless there be a contrary provision in the indenture. Wilful neglect on the part of the master to provide his indoor apprentice with necessary food, clothing, or lodging, whereby the health of the apprentice is seriously injured, is an indictable offence, punishable with two years' imprisonment with hard labour.*^ A case of this kind may also be dealt with by magistrates summarily under 38 & 39 Vict. , cap. 8G, sect. 6, the maximum punishment then being a tine of £20, ^- Ai my Act, 1881 (44 and 45 Vict, c. 58), sect. '.)j. ■ 8^ Ellai V. Topp (1851), 6 Ex. 424 ; £att>/ v. Muiiki (1SG4), 12 L, T. N. S. 832. «* See Couchmaa v. Sillur (1870), 22 L. T. X. &>. ISC *^ 24 and 25 Vict , c. 100, f. 2(5. 104 THE LAW AFFECTING PKINTERS. or imprisonment with or without hard labour for six months. An apprentice is entitled to be taught the whole of the trade stipulated for, and not one branch of it only. In Scotland, where a stonemason taught his apprentice only how to hew stones, it was held that the contract was broken. ^^ It is implied in a contract of outdoor apprenticeship that the master shall, throughout the term, carry on business in or near the same locality as when the indenture was signed, Paton v. Western,^'' decided by the Court of Appeal in 1882, is the leading case on this point. There the plaintiff was bound apprentice to the defendants "and their partners and successors in business " for six years in the trade of an engineer, and his father covenanted to provide him with board, clothing, and lodging. There was no stipulation in the indenture as to the defendant carrying on the business in any particular place. At the date of the indenture the business was carried on in Lambeth, but before the six years were ended the firm dissolved partnership, and two firms were established, one in Lambeth, consisting of two partners in the old firm, and the other at Derby, consisting of the remaining partners in the old firm. The manufacturing part of the old business was transferred to the Derby firm, and the selling part was made over to the London firm. All the partners agreed that the plaintiffs services should be transferred to the Derby firm, and they accordingly rcfjuired him to attend tlic works at Derby. The plaintiff refused to go, brought an action to recover damages, and was awarded £50. The defendants appealed, and the Court of Appeal held that the apprentice Avas not bound to go to Derby, and was entitled to the damages awarded, and, furtlier, that as the business was not carried on in its " Fraser's Master and Servant, by Campbell, p. SCO. •^ 9 Q. U. D. CM. ^ THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 105 enth'ety by either of the two new firms, neither of them was the successor of the original firm, or entitled to the services of the apprentice. Of course, a slight change of locality, not necessitating a change in the place of residence of the apprentice, is not a breach of the contract ; and, again, if the apprentice is an indoor apprentice, the master may remove as often aind as far as he likes, so long as he does not go out of the country ; and the apprentice must go with <* him. An apprentice cannot lawfully be dismissed by his master even for theft or other gross misconduct, unless "tliere be a stipulation to that effect in the indenture. The "master's remedy is to chastise the apprentice, or to take him before the magistrate, under the Employers and "Workmen Act, as stated below, when in a proper case the indenture will be cancelled. However, if the apprentice grossly misconducts himself, and his master thereupon dis- misses him, he may fairly brave any action the apprentice may dare to bring. If a master behaves badly to his apprentice, the best course for the latter to adopt is to lay his case before the magistrate, or failing that, to absent himself, and leave the master to take such steps against him as he may think proper, when the whole matter may be gone into, and if a proper case be made out, the indenture may be cancelled. Niggardliness and unkindness, and even threats on the part of a master are not matters giving any legal cause for complaint, however hard it may be upon the apprentice to have to serve such a man. But it was held by Mr. Justice Grove that if an apprentice had reasonable grounds for fearing that his master would actually inflict grievous bodily harm on him, he might absent himself from his service.*^ A minor who is apprenticed is bound by tl-e indenture until he be twenty-one years of age, but on reaching that ** Halliwell v. CounscU (1878), 38 L. T., N. S. 170. iCu/l^ai^' 106 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. age he may, if he chooses, declare that he will no longer serve under the indenture, and the master will have no claim against him.^'-' He must, however, disaffirm the indenture within a reasonable time of his coming of age, or he will be held to have elected to be bound by it. The proper way of disaffirming the indenture is by giving the master written, or even verbal notice to that effect.'"' The apprentice must, however, remember that if when he comes of age his term of apprenticeship has not run out, and he refuses to be bound by the indenture, every person who joined with him in the indenture and covenanted that he should serve his master for the full term is liable to an action for damages by the master,^'- This, therefore, should operate as a serious check upon any apprentice who thinks of throAving up his indenture as soon as he is twenty-one years of age. An apprentice who works overtime is, in the absence of provision to the contrary in the indenture of apprenticeship, entitled to payment therefor.''-^ It may here be stated that where a son under age lives with his father, Avho keeps him, the father is entitled to the earnings of the son. Lec/al ProceedUujs. Complaints by a master against his apprentice, and vice versa, are in general heard by courts of summary juris- diction — that is, in London, by the aldermen or police magistrates, and in the provinces by the stipendiary »» Exp. Davis (1794), 3 T. R. 715 ; Wmy v. West (1866), 15 L. T. N. S. 180. "'• Moore v. Smith (1875), 3!) J. T. 772. "' Sec Richardson v. Harrison, Printers^ licoistcr, August, 18?3, p. 40 ; Vrinting Times, same itiontli, p. 2ir), where the master recovered hirgc dainuges against the !ii)i>reutice's father. I .jjj^ "^ Sec While V. Smith, Printas'' llcyistcr, Nov., 1884, p. 99, where "v-*''^^ the cinitloyer was ordered by Alderman Watcrlow to pay the a))prcnticc Os. for overtime, lie having worked more than fifty-fuur hours in a week. THE LAW AFFECTING FEINTEKS. 107 magistrates or justices of the peace. The powers of these courts in this respect are conferred by the Employers and Workmen Act, 1875 (38 and 39 Vict., c. 00) ; they are as follows : — a. To make an order directing the appi'entice to perform his duties under the apprenticeship, h. To cancel the indenture of apprenticeship, and if the court thinks right to do so, to order the whole or any part of the premium paid with an apprentice to be returned. c. To imprison an apprentice for not more than 14 days at a time, when an order directing him to perform his duties has been made, and he has, for a full month from the making of the order, failed to comply with it. d. To compel the attendance of any person liable under the instrument of apprenticeshii) for the good conduct of the ajiprentice, and, either in substitution for, or in addition to, any order against the apprentice himself, to order such person to pay damages to the master, and (or) to take security from such person, if he is willing to give it, for the future good conduct of the apprentice. "-^ In addition, the courts of summary jurisdiction have, in cases between master and apprentice, all the powers conferred upon them by the Act in cases between employer and workman."^ The police courts have no jurisdiction in the cases of apprentices with whom more than £25 premium has been paid.^^ In such cases the party aggrieved must bring an action either in the High Court of Justice or the County Court, '"'■^ Sections G and 7. "' Section G. "' Section 12. 108 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS, In London, the Chamberlain of the City has jurisdiction in all matters respecting City apprentices bound in accord- ance with the customs of the City. This jurisdiction is of long standing, and is concurrent with that of the magis- trates. The Chamberlain has power to commit offending apprenfices to confinement in Bridewell.''^ ^ Vide the Printers' Register for Jan., 1885, pp. 129 and 137 ; and the case of Scott v. Howell, cited ante. THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 109 CHAPTER IX. THE FACTORY ACTS AND KINDRED LAWS. 1. The Factory Acts. There have been several Acts to regulate the employment of women and young people in factories and workshops, but there are but two now in force, that of 1878 (41 Vict. c. IG), which consolidated the whole law on the subject, and the short Act of 1883, which, so far as this treatise is concerned, is important only for two sections declaring the meaning of passages in the former statute. As the Act of 1878 is of great length and its provisions are clothed in the somewhat prolix language adopted by parliamentary draughtsmen, it is thought best not to print it here m extenso, but to give the reader an abstract of it in as suc- cinct a form as possible. Much of the Act has reference to trades distinct from printing : of these parts no notice is here taken. Letterpress printing works, bookbinding works, and paper mills are classed as non-textile factories. Lithographic printing works are "factories" or "workshops " according as mechanical power is used or not. A " child " is a human being of either sex under 14 years of age. A " young person " is a person who is between 14 and 18 years of age.^'' A person of 18 years and upwards is a "man " or a " woman." "Parent " includes guardian. " Week " means the period between midnight on Saturday and midnight on the following Saturday. " Night " means the period between 9 p.m. and 6 a.m. " Mill gearing " includes every shaft, wheel, drum, or pulley by which the motion of the first motive power is. communicated to any machine. 9' A child of 13 who possesses an authorised educational certificate is to be considered a young person. 110 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. General Provisions. Every person who starts a factory must give notice to the inspector within one month, stating the nature of the factory, the kind and amount of motive power, and the name of the firm carrying it on. Penalty, £5. (s. 75.) At the entrance of every factory, and in such otlier places as the inspector may prescribe, must be posted the official abstract of the Act, with the notices appended thereto duly filled up. (s. 78.)3S The inspector is to have free access to factories and work- shops at all times. Whoever obstructs him in his duty is liable to a heavy fine. (s. 68.) When he applies for admission he must, if required, produce the certificate of his appointment as inspector, (s. 70.) Cleanliness. — The factory must be kept clean and free from effluvia arising from drains, &c. It must be jn'opei'ly ventilated and not overcrowded. In default, the factory inspector may call in the inspector of nuisances or medical officer of health, (ss. 3 «S.' 4.) Unless printing offices, binderies, and paper mills shall be specially exempted by the Secretary of State, they must be lime-washed every 14 months, or if painted within every seven years, such paint must be washed every 14 months, (s. 33.) Safety. — All hoists and all fly-wheels directly connected with the motive power must be properly fenced ; so must all " mill gearing," unless it be in such a position or of such construction as to be efiually safe as if it were fenced. If the factory inspector shall think any other machinery or driving bands ought to be fenced, he maj- require it to be done. The master of the factoiy may, if he likes, give such inspector notice that he recjuires the (question of fencing to be settled l)y arbitration, and thereupon it shall be so settled, (ss. .5 it C.) v** This abstract costs 3d., and may be obtained of Knight and Co., DO, Fleet Street, and others. THE LAW Al'FKCTINd I'llINTEKS. Ill A child may not clean machinery while it is driven by power ; neither may a young person or woman clean the "mill gearing " while it is in motion. Men only are allowed to work between the fixed and traversing part of any self- acting machine driven by power, (s. 9.) AccldenU. — Wliere any accident occurs which (a) causes death, or (l>) causes bodily injury, and is produced by machinery or through a vat, pan, ttc, filled with hot liquid or molten metal or other substance, or by explosion by escape of gas, steam, or metal, and is of such a nature as to prevent the person injured returning to work for 48 hours, written notice must be sent at once to the certifying surgeon for the district, and to the factory inspector, stating the residence of the person injured or the place to which he has been removed. Penalty, £5. The surgeon must have aflbrded to him full opportunities for investigating, (ss. 31 & 32.) The foregoing provisions of tlie Act apply to all factories ; tlie provisions following apply to those only where women or young persons or children are employed. Employment of Children mid Young Persons. Masters employing children or young persons in factories must keep the registers prescribed by the Act.**^ Penalty, £2. (s. 77.) No child or young person under the age of IG is to be employed for more than 7 or (if the certifying surgeon lives more than 3 miles from the factory) 13 work days, unless the master of the factory has a certificate of the fitness of such child or young person for work in that factory. The certificate is to be obtained from the certifying surgeon, who must first examine the person named in it, and also be provided with evidence of age. (s. 27.) If the inspector shall think a certain child or young person under IG years of age is unfit for the work he has to do, he «> These registers are procurable at the same publishers as the abstracts. THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. may require the master to get the surgeon to examine and certify, (s. 29.) When a child becomes a young person, a fresh certificate is necessary. The Stirgeorb s fees for examination areas follows : — When the examination is at a factory not exceeding one mile from the surgeon's residence, 2s. Cd. for each visit and Cd. for each person after the first five examined at that visit. Where the factory is more than a mile distant then, in addition, Gd. for every complete half-mile over and above the mile. When the examination is at the surgeon's residence or at Bome place appointed by him, Cd. for each person examined, (s. 74.) Children can only be employed on alternate days or in morning and afternoon sets. Those forming the morning set one week must form the afternoon set the following week, and vice versa. On Saturdays, too, they must not work in the same set as on the other days of the week. (s. 14.) No child under 10 years of age may be employed at all in a factory or workshop, (s. 20.) The object of this mode of employment is that the child may attend school. A child who has not in any week attended school for all the attendances required by Section 23 is not to be employed in the following week till he has made up the deficiency. Hours of EmjAoyment. Subject to certain exceptions hereafter appearing, no woman, young person, or child may be employed except between tlie hours of G a.m. and G p.m., or 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. (Saturdays, G or 7 a.m. and 2 p.m). Printers, lithographers, bookbinders, machine rulers, and envelope, playing card, almanack, valentine, and fancy box makers may make the hours 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. (Saturdays, 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., or 7 a.ui. to 3 p.m.), if they specify them in the notice appended to the ollicial abstract of the Act. (s. 42.) THI'; LAW AI'l'KtTfM; PllIXTKliS. 1 | ;■; When occasion requires, the Secretary of State may make the hours 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. (except on Saturdays), but he may make his licence subject to certain conditions if he thinks iit. (ss. 43 & G3.) .When a young person or woman has not worked more than eiglit hours on any day of the same week, he or she may be employed during the same hours on the Saturday as on the other days. Notice, however, must be given to the inspector and affixed in the factory, (s. 18.) Meals. — On every day except Saturday, not less than an hour and a half, or, in the case of children, 2 hours, must be allowed for meals, of which time one hour at least must be before 3 i:).m. It may be given all at once or at difterent times. On Saturdaj's not less than half an hour. No child, young person, or woman may be emphjyed for more than 5 hours continuously, without an interval of at least half an hour for a meal. (ss. 13 ct 14.) Meals must be taken at regular hours, and during meal- times no work must be done, nor may the hands remain in the work-rooms (s. 17), but these provisions do not apply in the case of letterpress printing works, or paper mills (Schedule III., part 2.) Holidays. — No child, young person, or woman may be employed on Sundays (s. 21), or on Christmas Day, or on Good Friday, unless an Easter holiday is substituted for it. (s. 22.) In addition, eight half-holidays must be allowed during the year, at least four of which must be between the 15th March and the 15th October. A whole holiday counts as two half -holidays. Cessation of work does not count as holiday-time unless notice of a half-holiday or holiday has been stuck up in the factory during the whole of the last previous work -day but one. (s. 22.) Overtime. — In order to cope with a press of work at certain I 114 THE LAW AFFECTING I'RINTER.S. seasons of the year, young persons and women may be em- ployed on 48 days in any twelve months for two hours after the regular closing-time (i.e., till 8 p.m., where the hours are from 6 to 6 ; till 9 p.m., where they are from 7 to 7 ; and till 10 p.m. , where they are from 8 to 8), in works where these operations are carried on, viz., letterpress printing, lithography, bookbinding, machine ruling, almanack making, valentine making, envelope making, playing card making, fancy box making. But such employment must not be for more than 5 days in any one week, nor for more than 48 days in the whole in any twelve months ; and the meal-time must be increased to at least two hours, of which half an hour is to be after 5 p.m. (s. 53 and Schedule III., part 3, as explained by s. 13 of the Act of 1883.) In paper mills where male young persons are not employed during any part of the night, children, young persons, and women may be kept half an hour after the regular limit if their work is in an incomj^lete state. But any time thus worked must be taken into account, so that the total work- ing hours in the week are not raised above the number otlierwise allowed, and women may not work overtime on more than 90 days in the whole in any twelve months, (s. 54 and Schedule III., part 4, as explained by s. 13 of the Act of 1883.) NUilit-icork. — In letterpress printing works and paper mills and such other works as may be specially licensed by the Secretary of State, male young persons may be employed at night, subject to the following conditions : («) They must not work more than 12 consecutive hours beginning and ending at times fixed by the notice ; (b) they are to have similar periods fen- meals as the day hands ; (<•) they must not be employed during any part of the twelve hours preceding or succeeding the period of night cnii)loyment. (a. 58 and Schedule III., part G.) Wlierc tlie jn-ocess of j)rinting newspapers is carried on on THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 11 not more than two nights in the week, male young persons of 10 and upwards may be employed at night as if they were men, but not for more than two nights a week. (s. 50.) Tlie EihicaUon Acts. The Education Acts, 1870 to 1880, contain provisions relating to the employment of children, which arc supple- mentaiy to those in the Factory Act, and which should be known to the reader, although it is hajipily not usual to employ young children in or about printing-ofHces. Subject to what is written below, a child under ten years of age may not be employed at all, except in agricultural pursuits, and then only under close restrictions. ^ A child of the age of ten years or upwards may not be employed, unless he has received a certificate of sufficient instruction in reading, writing, and arithmetic ; or, if resi- dent in a School District, a certificate of having reached the standard of education fixed by a bye-law in force in the district for the total or partial exemption of children of like age from the obligation to attend school.^ The penalty of disobedience to either of these enactments is a fine not exceeding forty shillings. It is enforceable at the instance of the local School Board, or School Committee. Parents can no more employ their own children in con- travention of the Act than they can other people's. Employment of a child " in any labour exercised by way of trade, or for the purposes of gain," is "employment" within the Act.'' An agent or workman taking a child into employment, in contravention of the Act, is liable to a penalty as if he were the employer.* It is a sufficient answer to a charge under the Act, to show (1) that there is no elementary school w'hich the ' 39 and 40 Vict., c. 79, ss. 5 and 9. - Same stat., sec. 5, and 43 .and 44 Vict., c. 23, s. 4. 3 39 and 40 Vict., c. 79, s. 47. ' Section :59. ] in THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. child can attend within two miles from its residence ; or (2) that the employment is only during holiday-time, and that the child attends an efficient school regularly during full time.^ Moreover, where an employer charged with taking a child into his employment, in contravention of the Act, proves that he has used due diligence to enforce the observance of the Act, and either that some agent or work- man of his employed the child without his knowledge or consent, or that the child was employed either on the pro- duction of a forged or false certificate, and under the belief in good faith in the genuineness and truth of such certifi- cate, or on the representation by his parent that the child was of an age at which his employment would not be in contravention of the Act, and under the belief in good faith in such representation, the employer is to be exempt from any penalty under the Act." And where the employer satisfies the local authority, inspector, or other person about to institute a prosecu- tion that he is exempt under this section by reason of some agent, workman, or parent being guilty, and gives all facilities in his power for proceeding against and con- victing such guilty party, no proceedings under the Act ai'e to be taken against the employer." The Boiler Explosion Act, 1882.^ Whenever the misfortune of a boiler explosion happens in a printing-office or other factory, notice must, withir twenty-four hours, be sent to the Board of Trade by the owner or user of the boiler, or by some one acting on his V)elialf, and such notice must state : — 1. The name and precise hjcality of the works where the explosion took place. 2. The day and hour when it took place. 3. The number of persons killed. 39 and 40 Vict., c. 79, s. i). Section 39. ' Ibid. » 45 anil 4G Vict., c. 22. 'I'llK LAW Al-'KJit i'lNi; rillNTKU.S. 117 •4. The number of persons injured. 5. A general description of the boiler. 6. The purposes for which the boiler was used. 7. The part of the boiler which failed, and the extent of the failure generally. 8. The pressure at which the boiler was worked. !). The name and address of any society or associa- tion by whom the boiler was last inspected or insured. This notice must be dated and signed by some person responsible for the particulars contained in it. By notice in the Gazette, the Board of Trade may from time to time require additional particulars. Failure to give the recj^uired notice entails a tine not exceeding £20, to be inflicted in a magistrate's court. The Board of Trade has power to send down a commis- sioner or commissioners to inquire into the circumstances attending the explosion ; and the connnissioners have power to make insjjection, summon witnesses, order production of books and papers, and award expenses ; and they may order the costs of the inquiry to be paid by the party summoned before them, or by the Board of Trade. Smoke mul other Nuisances. In the Metropolis and all towns to which the Towns Improvement Clauses Act, 1847, applies, all furnaces or fireplaces used for manufacturing purposes or for steam engines must be so constructed as to consume their own smoke, and the use of any furnace not so constructed, or in such manner as to consume the smoke, is prohibited under penalties. In the Metropolis the penalty is a sum not exceeding £5, nor less than 40s. , for the first offence, £10 for the second offence, and for each subsequent con- viction a sum double the amount of the penalty imposed for the last preceding conviction ; and these penalties may be inflicted on the owner or (jcciipier of the premises, or the foreman or other person enqjloyed by such owner or occupier. Moreover, the police have power to enter and 118 THE LAAV AFFECTING riMNTKUS. inspect premises to see that the Act is complied with.'' in j)ruvincial towns the penalty is 40s. for every day during any part of which such furnace or fireplace shall be used in contravention of the Act after one month's notice in writing shall have been given to the owner or occupier by the commissioners of the town to remedy or discontinue the use of the same. '^ By the Sanitary Act, ISGO, a furnace or fireplace not smoke-consuming is constituted a nuisance, and so is every chimney (not being the chimney of a private dwelling- house) sending foith black smoke in such quantity as to be a nuisance, provided that when a person is summoned before the justices in respect of a nuisance arising from a fireplace or furnace which does not consume its smoke, the justices may hold that no nuisance is created within the meaning of the Act and dismiss the complaint, if they are satisfied that such fireplace or f ui'nace is constructed in such manner as to consume as far as practicable, having regard to the nature of the manufacture or trade, all smoke arising therefrom, and that such fireplace or furnace has been care- fully attended to by the person having charge thereof." The Act contains provisions for inspection and abating, and for structural alterations. The same Act also constitutes a nuisance any factory, workshop, or work-place not kept in a cleanly statu, or not ventilated in such a manner as to render liavmless, as far as practicable, any gases, vapours, dust, or other impurities generated in the course of the work carried on therein that are a nuisance, or injurious, or dangerous to health, or so overcrowded while work is carried on as to be dangerous or pi'ejudicial to those employed therein. ^-' Thu inspector of nuisances or other nuisance authority " 16 aii.l 17 Vict., c. 128, ss. 1 and 4. 1" JUiiii.inVict., C.34, s. 108. " 2J uiul oO Vict., c. 90, s. 19. '= Sect. 1'), sub. K. 1. THE LAW AFFEOTIJSG PKIJ, ami clnewliore. ■THE LAW AFKEC'TINO I'lMNTEKS. 121 This was especially su in the reign of Edward iJJ., when the country was visited with the black plague, an awful disease, which swept away considerably more than half the population of the country, then between three and four millions. The natural result of this was a great scarcity of labour, and a demand by the labourers for higher wages, which the employers— the farmers and the wealthier crafts- men — were unabla to meet. To remedy this state of things was passed, in 1349, the famous Statute of Laboui'ers, which enacted that ' ' every man or woman of whatsoever condition, free or bond, able in body, and within the age of threescore years, . . and not having of his own whereof he may live, nor land of his own about the tillage of which he may occupy himself, and not serving any other, shall be bound to serve the employer who shall require him to do so, and shall take only the wages which were accustomed to be taken in the neighbourhood where he is bound to serve," tAvo years before the plague began, and refusal to obey was punished by imprisonment. The next year Parliament fixed the rates of wages, and forbade labourers to quit their parishes in search of better-paid employment under pain of imprisonment. It was the attempt to en- force these laws, coupled with the deep distress of the people, the preaching of John Ball, and the dissemination of Wicliffe's tracts, which led to the revolt of the peasantry in which Wat Tyler figured. The Statute of Labourers was from time to time con- firmed by Parliament, and in 13G0 a statute '-" forbade all combinations by masons and carpenters, "so that every mason and carpenter, of what condition soever he be, shall be compelled by his master to whom he serveth to do every work that to him j)ertaineth to do ; " and by c. 11 of the same year it was provided "that if a labourer do flee to a city or borough, the chief officer, upon request, shall deliver him up, under penalty of £10 to the king, and £5 to the party." By the 3 Henry VI., c. 1 (1425), it -" 34Edwaicl ill., c. y. 122 THE LAW AFFECXINli TRINTERS. . was recited that masons held annual congregations and confederacies in general chapters, whereby the "good course and efiect of the Statute of Labourers are publicly violated and broken, to the grievous damage of all the com- munalty," and such chapters and congregations were for- bidden on pain of imprisonment as felons ; and by the 2 & 3 Edward VI., c. 15 (1548), it was provided that "if any artificers, workmen, or labourers do conspire, cove- nant, or promise together, or make any oaths that they shall not make or do these works but at a certain price or rate, or shall not enterprise or take upon them to finish that another hath begun, or shall do but a certain work in a day, or shall not work but at certain hours and times," they should sufi"er fine and imprisonment, and for second offences, pillory also. This Act was not repealed till the reign of George IV. ; but, on the other hand, many other statutes of the same tenor were from time to time passed,-^ the last of them being the 30 & 40 Geo. III., c. lOG (1800), a long statute relating to workmen, whereby all agreements between workmen for obtaining higher wages, or shorter hours, or a diminution of work, were declared illegal, and combination and meetings for the like ends were made punishable, as also was the contribution towards the support of any who offended against tlie Act. In 1824 was passed the 5 Geo. IV., c. 95, whicli repealed all Acts relative to the combinations of workmen or of masters as to wages, time of working, quantity of woik, &c., and provided (sect. 2) "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 of work, or to induce another to depart from his service before the end of the term or terms, for wliich lie is hired, or to quit or return to his woi'k before tlie same shall be finished, or, not being liired, to refuse to enter into work or employment, or to regulate the mode of carrying on any manufacture, trade, or business, or the "' They arc spucifiud in tho iircamblu to T) t!oo. IV,, c. 1)5. THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTEKS. 123 management thereof, shall not therefor be subject or liable to any indictment or prosecution for conspiracy, or to any other criminal information or punishment whatever, under the common or statute law."^^ But by subsequent sections the use of threats, violence, or intimidation, or combinations to bring about such were still made punish- able. This Act was repealed the next year, by G Geo. IV., c. 129, when new provisions were made against endeavours to obtain the objects before mentioned by violence to the person or property, or by threats or intimidation, or by molesting or in any way obstructing others. Meetings for the purpose of discussing and agreeing upon wages or prices and duration of woi'k were expressly permitted. This statute remained in force till 1871, being amended in 1859 by the 22 Vict., c. 34, which declared that no workman should by reason merely of entering into an agreement with others for the purpose of fixing Avages, or by reason merely of his endeavouring peaceably and in a reasonable manner to persuade others to cease or abstain from working in order to obtain the rate of wages or the altered hours of labour so fixed or agreed upon, be deemed guilty of molestation or obstruction. Thei-e were several decisions of the Courts on these Acts, and the opinions of the judges were sometimes in conflict. Baron Rolfe, afterwards Lord Cranworth, held that strikes were not of themselves illegal, and said, "It is lawful for a dozen to agree together and saj% ' We will not work unless A. B. raise our wages. '"^•^ Mv. Justice Erie, Mr. Justice Lush, and Mr. Justice Hannen held similar opinions in later cases,-^ but Mr! Justice Crompton declared them illegal at common law.^' What amounted to a threat or molestation often came up for decision. In Bex v. ^ Sect. 3 gave the like liberty to masters. « Bc(j. V. Sclbn (1847), 5 Cox's Grown Cases, 495, ■* See Farrei- v. Close (1809). L. R. 4 Q. B. (i02 ; 38 L. J. M. C. 132. Ecy. V. Ilozvlands (1851), 17 Q. J). 071. - lu Biltoji V. EckcrsUii (1856), G E. & B. 47, and WaUhy v. Anloj (1861), 3 E. &E. 516 ; 30 L. J. M. C, 134. 124 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. Bijkerdyke -"^ (1832) men were held rightly convicted, who, in combination, sent a letter to an employer, informing him that all his men would strike unless seven named were discharged. In Wahhy v. Anley (1869) ^^ it was held that the threat must be to do something illegal, and that it was illegal for a workman, in conjunction Avith others, to go and tell his employer that they would all cease working immediately unless he discharged certain others. So, too, in O'Neil v. Lvngman (1863) -® it was held a threat where the chairman at a meeting of a benefit club asked a member whether he would leave a certain Avorkshop, or stay and be desjjised by the club, have his name sent round the country in the report, and be put to all sorts of unpleasantness. And so it was in Shelbourne v. Oliver (1866),-^ where work- men went in a body and told the employer that unless he discharged X. Y. his men should not be allowed to work ; and in SMimer v. Kitch (1867),^" where the secretary of a branch of the Carpenters' Union served on a master builder a letter stating that he had been requested by the committee to give the men in that builder's employ notice to come out on strike unless one Jordan, employed by him, became a member of the union, it was eld that the accused was rightly convicted. In 1871, after a Royal Commission liad reported on the subject, two Acts were passed upon the subject of Trades Unions : the Trade Union Act and the Criminal Law Amendment Act.-'' The former, as amended by a later statute, is still in force ; the latter was repealed in 1875. Under it, however, were trie(J two notable cases: Beg. v. Bumi, (the Gas Stokers' Case, 1872), ^^ and Bey.v. Halliday (187^). ••» 1 M. & K. 179. '■''' l/ln supra. 4 B. &; S. 370. '' r.i L. T. N. S. (i-'W. L. K. 2 (I li. 3'J3, ■■' 34 ami 3.5 Vict., cbap.s. 31 an.l 32. 12 <'on'h Criin. < 'a.s. 31(1. THI'; LAW AFFECTIXO PllINTEllS. 125 In the former Mr. Justice Brett (now Lord Esher, Master of the Rolls), in summing up, said, " If there was an agree- ment among the defendants by improper molestation to control the will of the employers, then 1 tell you that that would be an illegal conspiracy at Common Law, and that such an offence is not abrogated by the Act. ... If you think that the molestation which was agreed upon was such as would be likely, in the minds of men of ordinary nerve, to deter them from carrying on their business according to their own will, then I say that is an illegal conspiracy " ; and in the other case Baron Amphlett expressed himself to the like effect. 2. The Present Law. The law at present in force concerning Trade L^nions and combinations of workmen is the Common Law as affected by the Trade Union Acts, 1871 and 1876,'" and the Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 1875.'*^ By the Common Law all combinations of two or more persons who agree to do unlawful acts, or acts injurious to the public weal, or to do lawful acts in an unlawful way, are punishable.^*" By the Trade Union Act, it is enacted^" that "the pur- 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." And by sec. 3 "the pm'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 void or voidable any agreement." But sec. 4 goes onto enact that "Nothing in «^ 34 and 35 Vict., c. 31, and 39 and 40 Vict., c. 22. « 38 and 39 Vict., c. 8G. '^ See Wright on "Conspiracies," and Stephen's "Digest of the Criminal Law" (p. 95). As to "boycotting," see Reg. v. PavneU, the Times, Jan. 25, 26, 1881, and Mogul Steamship Co. v. McGregor (1885), 15 Q. B. D. 470. '" Sec. 2. 126 THE LAW AFFECTING PIIINTEKS. this Act shall enable any court to entertain any legal pro- ceeding instituted with the object of directly enforcing or recovering damages for the breach of any of the following agreements, namely,(l) 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, (a) 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 resolutions of such trade union, or (c) To dischai'ge any fine imposed upon any person by sentence of a court of justice ; or (4) Any agreement made between one trade union and another ; or (5) Any bond to secure the jjerformance of any of the above-mentioned agreements. But nothing in this section shall be deemed to constitute any of the above- mentioned agreements unlawful." The effect of this section is that agreements of the kinds mentioned, though not un- lawful, cannot be enforced. By sec. 5 it is provided that the Friendly Societies Acts the Industrial and Provident Societies Acts, and the Companies Acts shall not apply to ti'ade unions, and that the registration under any of these Acts of any trade union shall be void ;•'" and then follow provisions enabling trade unions to be registered as such with the Registrar of Friendly Societies, giving power to the trustees of regis- tered trade unions to hold property, and to such trustees, or any other officer of the trade union who may be autho- rised so to do by the rules thereof, to sue or be sued in behalf of tlie union in actions or other legal i)roceedings, and regulating their internal management. »' By 39 and 40 Vict., c. 22, however, ,sec. 2,S of the Friendly Societies Act, 1875, is in:ulc applicable to all trade xuiions which iiisxire nr pay money on tlie death of a child midcr ton years of age. THE LAW AFFECTING nilXTEKS. J 27 The Trade Union Act of 1870 relates exclusively to the internal affiiirs of such unions, and defines a trade union as " any combination, whether temporary or permanent, for regulating the relations between workmen and masters, or between workmen and workmen, or between masters and masters, or for imposing restrictive conditions on the conduct of any trade or business, whether such combina- tion would or would not, if the principal Act [that of 1871] had not been passed, have been deemed to have been [sic] an unlawful combination by reason of some one or more of its purposes being in restraint of trade." The Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act,^^ section 3, provides as follows : '''An agreement or combination by two or more persons to do or procure to be done any act in contemplation or furtherance of a trade dispute between employers and workmen shall not be indictable as a con- spiracy 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 punishment 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 anj^ offence against the State or the Sovereign. "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 commission 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 alternative 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 " (1875) 38 and 89 Vict., c. 86. 128 THE LAW AFFKCTINO PKINTEUS. . have been presunbed by the statute for the punishment of the said Act when committed by one person." Section 5 provides as follows : ' ' Where any person wilfully and maliciously breaks a contract of service or of hiring, knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that the i:)robable consequences of his so doing, either alone or in combination with others, will bo 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 sum» mary jurisdiction, or on indictment as hereinafter men- tioned, be liable either to pay a penalty not exceeding twenty pounds, or to be imprisoned for a term not ex- ceeding three months, with or without hard labour." Section 7 relates to picketing, molesting, and intimida- tion, and is in these words : "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 owned or used by such other person, or deprives him of or hinders him in the use thereof ; or, ' ' (4) Watclies or besets the house or other place where such other pers(jn resides, or works, or carries on business, or ha]>pens 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 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 liard laboux". THK LAW AFFE(.'TIN(i PRINTERS. 129 " Attending at or near the house or place where a person resides, or works, or carries on business, or happens to be, or the approach to such house or phace, in order merely to obtain or communicate information, shall not be deemed a watching or besetting within the meaning of this section." It will be observed that offences under the above sections may be disposed of by the magistrates summarily, or they may be sent for trial upon indictment. The accused may demand a trial ; or if tlie case is dealt with summarily, and it is desired to appeal to the court of quarter sessions from the magistrate's decision, this may be done on giving the proper notices. Accused persons and their wives or husbands are, not- withstanding the general rule to the contrary, permitted to give evidence in cases under sections 5 and of this Act. -^^ Prosecutions for conspiracy in any case of trade com- bination are now unheard of. The Act on this point simply declares what was conceived by most judges to be the law before ; namely, that if one person can do an act without committing an offence, it is no offence for several to combine to do that act. Section 5 deserves to be carefullj^ considered by men who contemplate quitting their employment, in violation of their duty under their contract of service. They are under any circumstances liable to pay damages for their breach o contract ; but they may, under the circumstances stated in this section, be liable also to fine or imprisonment. It is section 7 which limits the operations of workmen in trade disputes. A certain amount of coercion is permissible, but the consequences are serious if the limit is transgressed. There must be no violence, intimidation, or persistent annoyance, or the law will be infringed. '' Picketing, that is, watching and speaking to the workmen as they come and go from their employment, to induce them to leave their ^■' Sec. 10. Also in cases under section 4. wliich, liowevor. do not affect printers. 130 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. C3i'vice, is nut necessarily unlawful ; nor is it unlawful to use terms of persuasion towards them to accomplish that object ; but if the watching and besetting is carried on to such a length and to such an extent that it occasions a dread of loss, it is unlawful."^" In regard to what may and may not be done in times of trade disputes, the statements of Baron Bramwell in Reg. V. Druitt (1867) ^' and Baron Huddleston in Reg. v. Bauld (1876) ■•" deserve to be carefully considered. Baron Bramwell said : " The liberty of a man's mind and will, to say how he should bestow himself and his means, his talents, and his industry, was as much a subject of tlie law's protection as was that of his body. ... If any set of men agreed among themselves to coerce that liberty of mind and thought by compulsion and restraint, they would be guilty of a criminal offence : that was the common law of the land. As to picketing, he was of opinion that, if it could be done in a way which excited no reasonable alarm, or did not coerce or annoy those who were the subjects of it, it would be no offence in law. ... If pickets made use of abusive language, of threatening gestures, or even if they abstained from them, yet so placed themselves, or so acted, by watching the movements of the workpeople and masters, or by black looks or any other annoyance, as would be likely to have a deterring effect on tlie minds of ordinary persons, it was 'molestation.' " Baron Huddleston, in his observations in Meg. v. Bauld, said: "Men liave no riglit to compel any other persons to abstain fi'om doing any act whicli they have a legal right to do, and for that purpose, to watch ijr beset the house or other place where such persons reside, work, or carry on business. But they may watch merely to obtain or com- municate information. When the men combine, as they ♦• Per Baron Cleasby in Reff. v. Hihbcrt (1875), 13 Cox's Criminal Cases, 82. " 10 Cox's Vj. C, r/J2. " 13 Cox's C. C, 28'1. ■ni\i. LAW AirECTIX(i rillN'TKUS. 131 have a perfect right to do, they may say ' We won't work except for certain wages, we won't work except upon certain terms,' and they have a right to agree together for this purpose ; but there may be amongst their number some persons disposed to enter into an arrangement to receive money from the funds raised for the purpose of supporting the strike, and then to go to w^ork and also get wages from the masters at the same time. This woidd cer- tainly be a hardship of which the men might comphiin, and therefore the Legishiture enacted that if their watching and besetting was only for the purpose of watching their own men who slioukl so act, it should not be a watching and besetting within the meaning of the Act. But this Avatching and besetting is a very serious offence, unless it is confined to merely obtaining and communicating infor- mation, and this cannot be too well knoAvn." 131a the law affecting printers. CHAPTER XI. It is not intended in this chapter to give an elaborate treatise on the law of Libel, for that would occupy more space than can be afforded ; moreover, the existence of such excellent books as Odgers on Libel and Slander, and Folkard's Starkie on the same subject, renders it unneces- sary. It is, however, proposed to give such a statement of the law as will be in general sufficient for aU the needs of the printer or newspaper publisher. 1. What is a Libel. A libel may be defined generally to be defamatory matter published otherwise than by speaking. Libel is both a civil wrong and a crbninal offence : it may be redressed by an action for damages,*^ or punished on prosecution under the criminal law. A libel which may be punished is not in all respects the same as a libel which may be the subject of an action. Some acts constitute punishable libels which will not support an action, and on the other hand some acts, followed by certain consequences, constitute actionable libels, but can- not be punished under the criminal law. A libel, punishable under the criminal law, is defined by the Draft Criminal Code*^ as " matter published without legal justification or excuse, designed to insult the person to whom it is published, or calculated to injure the reputa- tion of any person, by exposing him to hatred, contempt, or ridicule. Sucli matter may be expressed either in words legibly marked upon any substance whatever, or by any object signifying such matter otherwise than by words, '■' All action for libL'l c.iimot l)o brought in the County Court. " That settleil by Lord lilackbuni and other judges in 1879. THE LAW AFFECTTXG PRINTERS. 132 and may be expressed eitliei' directly or by insinuation or irony." A libel in respect of which an action may be brought has been defined as " a written'*'' statement, published without lawful justification or excuse, calculated to convey to those to whom it is published an imputation on the plaintiffs injurious to them in their trade, or holding them up to hatred, contempt, or ridicule."^'' The reason why a distinction is made between actionable and punishable libels is that libels are actionable only when they either do cause, or are in their nature calculated to cause, injury to the party libelled, while they are criminally punishable because they tend to a breach of the peace. Hence sending defamatory matter to the person defamed is! not actional^le, because that cannot injure him ; but it is punishable because it is likely to lead to a breach of the peace. Defamatory matter which is only spoken is not "libel," but " slander." Many things may be said orally with im-. punity, which, if reduced into writing, would be libellous ; the reason being that a man often says things hastily and without meaning quite what he says, but he cannot commit a thought to paper, and still less to print, without more or less deliberation. A libel, though generally conveyed by words, may be conveyed also by pictures, sign, and effigies. The word " publish " used in the above definitions re- quires explanation ; accordingly in the Draft Code the meaning of "publishing a libel" is declared to be "ex- hibiting it in public, or causing it to be read or seen ; or showing or delivering it, or causing it to be shown or ■•■• Writing includes printing and any other method of expressing an recording ideas. " Per Lord Blackburn in Capital and Counties Bank v. Henty (1882), 7 App. Cas. 741 ; 52 L. J. Q. B. 233. 132a TlIE LAW AFFECTING PlilXTERS. delivered, with a view to its being read or seen by eitltcr the person defamed or any other jyerson," This is correct, so far as the criminal law is concerned ; ' /- -^ \ but for the purjjoses of the civil law, or actions, the words '^ ^-^ |_italicised must be changed to " some person other than the" person defamed." " Person " as used in the first definition is not confined to a single human individual. It will include several, and even a collection of individuals. Thus it was held a libel where a certain nunnery was vilified, although no indi- vidual was specially referred to,*' and also where the persons defamed were described simply as " certain Jews lately arrived from Portugal, and living near Broad Street," no one being particularised.** A comj^any or corporation may be libelled, and may bring an action for the libel.*'' 80, too, it is an off ence punishable by the common law to defame a dead person, if it be alleged and proved that it was done with intent to bring contempt and scandal on his living family and relations. ^f* But it is not actionable. Words written and published, which of themselves are defamatory, or have a defamatory meaning, are actionable without showing that special damage has resulted from them. " Special damage " may be defined to be " the loss of some material temporal advantage, arising from an injury directly and legitimately as a fair and natural although not necessary result."^' Words which arc not defamatory in themselves, but are " Hex V. Gatkercok (1838), 2 Lcwin's Crown Cases, 2S7. \\^~Jicx V. 0.^ho)-ne (1732), W. Keiyiige, 230. 4" Mttropotitan OviniOvs Co. v. Haw/dns (18ri!t), 28 L. J. Ex. 201, 4 H. and N. 87. *** Hex V. Top/iain (171)1), 4 Term Itep. 12G See lie'/, v. Elisor (1887), 3 "Times" Law Kep. 360. "' Compare Mjiyne 011 Damages, 4th Eilitioii, p. r)23, with Tow Il^lll■lKl on Slander and J.ibel (New York, 1877), p. 310. THE LAW AI'FECTIXG PniMTERS. 133 in the circumstances in which they are published likely to be understood in a libellous sense, are actionable if special damage has resulted therefrom and is alleged as the ground of the action. For the purpose of determining Avhether the matter in question is a libel or not, the intention of the publisher of it is not to be considered. A man may libel another un- willingly, and even unwittingly, and will be held responsible nevertheless. Thus, where a newspaper proprietor, by a compositor's mistake, inserted the name of a certain firm under the head " Bankrupts " instead of under " Dissolutions of Partnei-ship," this was held a libel, and the defendant had to pay damages.'''^ Whether the matter in question in any case amounts to a libel is for the jury to determine upon the evidence ; it is for the judge to see that none but proper evidence is laid before them, to sum up and give his opinion thereon, to define a libel and point out when it is actionable or punish- able, as the case may be, and when not, and to instruct them as to the awarding of damages.''^ It is for him, also, to determine whether the matter charged as a libel can, in the circumstances in which it is published, be libellous ; if he thinks it cannot, he is to non-suit the plaintiff, or, in a criminal prosecution, order the defendant to be discharged ; if he thinks it can, he is to leave it to the jury to say whether in the said circumstances it is libellous.'* In strictness, a thing cannot be libelled, but, as we shall see hereafter, an action will lie for unlawfully decrying or depreciating another man's property which he has for sale, or for unlawfully disputing his title to it. Defamation of the thing, too, may amount to defamation of the jiersons 5- Shepheard v. Wkitaker (1875), L. R. 10 C. P. 502. M Fox's Act, 32 Geo. III., c. GO. ■^^ See per the Lords in Capital and CouiUi':s Bank v. HeiUi/ (1882), 7 App. Cas. 741 ; 52 L. J. Q. B. 232. 133a the law affecting PRrSTEUS. owning or otherwise concerned with it, and in such case they may complain of the libel. Thus, where one news- jiaper pubhshed an attack on another referring to '-the advertisements of usurers, which it parades before its readers weekly for a valuable consideration," and asserted that it took " other advertisements cheap to induce respect- able advertisers to appear in the usury and quack doctor page," it was held that this amounted to a libel on its proprietors, and they were entitled to bring an action in respect of it.-^^ On the question, What is a Libel? the case of The Capital and Counties Bank v. Hentij,^^ which went to the House of Lords, is very instructive. There ^Messrs. Henty, brewers, being annoyed at the refusal of one branch of the plaintiffs' bank to cash some cheques on another branch of it, gave notice to their customers that they would not receive cheques on the plaintiffs' bank in payment of their accounts, and these notices caused a run on the bank. The plaintiffs brought an action, alleging the notice to be libellous as imputing insecurity, and a verdict was returned in their favour. The defendants appealed, and judgment ultimately went in their favour. In giving his opinion. Lord Blackburn gave the definition of an actionable libel quoted above, and then went on to say : " The manner of publication and the things relative to which the words are published, and which the person publishing knew, or ought to have known, would influence those to whom it was puljlished in putting a meaning on the words, are all material in determining wliether the writing is calcu- lated to convey a libellous impntation. ' . . I tliink that from the earliest times it has by the law of England been the province of the Court to say whether words pn])lished in writing are a lil»cl or not. '''^ . . " Russell V. Webster (1874), 23 W. R. 59. •■« (1882) 7 App. Cas. 741 ; 52 L. J. Q. B. 232. Qiicir^ whether, having; regard to Fox's Act, this is quite so ; or THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 134 In coustruiug the words to see whether they are a libel the Court is, where nothing is alleged to give them an extended sense, to put that meaning on them which the words would be understood by ordinary persons to bear, and say whether the words so understood are calculated to convey an injurious imputation ; the question is not whether the defendaut uitended to convey that imputation " — for if the words are calculated to injure, the best intentions Avill not absolve the defendant. Lord Blackburn then went on to consider the class of cases where the words were not such as in their ordinary sense would be libellous, but where the plaintiff asserted that they had a hidden meaning — an innuendo. In such a case the learned lord declared that the defendant could not be held responsible unless hoth the Com-t and the jury were of opinion that the writing was libellous. "If the defendant can get either the Court or the jury to be in his favour he succeeds. The prosecutor or plaintiff cannot succeed unless he gets both the Court and the jury to decide for him." Then what is to guide the Court in forming an opinion as to the libellous tendency of a writing not appearing to be such upon the face of it ? Lord Selborne said : " La deciding on the question whether the words are capable of the meaning ascribed to them, the judge ought not, in my opinion, to take into account any mere conjectures which a person reading the document might possibly form as to some one of various motives or reasons which might have actuated the writer, unless there is something in the docu- ment itself, or in other facts properly in evidence, which to a reasonable mind would suggest, as implied in the pub- lication, these particular motives or reasons." Did the bald statement that the defendants would not take cheques drawn on the plaintiffs' bank necessarily impute insolvency ? To his whether the respective functions of the judge and jury are not as stated on page 133. 13iA THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTEKS. luiiid it meant no more than it said, namely, that the defen- dants declined to take such cheques ; they were not obliged to accept them, and they might have various motives or reasons for not doing so ; they were under no obligation to give any reason, nor did they give any, and in his opiiiion it would be arbitrary, and not reasonable, to imply from the mere words of the circular an imputation upon the plaintiffs' credit or solvency. " The test, according to the authorities, is whether, under the circumstances in which the writing was published, reasonable men, to whom the publication was made, would be likely to understand it in a libellous sense." And again. Lord Blackburn said he agreed with Lord Justice Brett that " it is unreasonable that when there are a number of good interpretations the only bad one should be seized upon to give a defama- tory sense to the document." Lord BramweU also ex- pressed his opinion to the same effect. In the principles laid down in this important case is to be /ound the solution of the question whether all written vlanguage causing special damage is actionable, or only such as is defamatory in itself. This was a moot point. In Comyn's Digest,-'^ an old law book, it is laid down that " (duj words by which the party has a special damage " are action- al)]t', while in Kell// v. Parthigtoiv''-^ the Court of King's Bench held tliat to be actionable the words must in their nature l)e defamatory, a decision which was supported in Ireland in 187o.''» It would seem, as already stated,''' tliat for the plaintiff to succeed the Avords need not be defama- tory in themselves in tlieir ordinary meaning, if from the circumstances in wliich they were j)iil)li.slu'd they would be likely to be understood in a libclh)us sense. ^< *' Action on the case for Defamation, D. 30. •■'" (1833) 5 B. & Ad. (J45. "° Shcahan v. Ahearnc, \) Irish Kcp. C li. A'k »' See page 133. THE X.AVV AFKECTING I'lUNTERS. 136 2. What Libels are Actionable or Prmishable. In order that a libel may be the subject of an action or a criminal prosecution, it must have been published " maliciously."^^ Every libel is deemed to have been published maliciously which does not fall under one or other of the following heads, viz., 1, Justification, and 2. Privilege. I. The publishing of defamatory matter is not a civil wrong {i.e., is not actionable) if such matter is triie. • But its publisher is still liable to be £unijhgd criniinally unless he pleads and can show, not only that it is true, but that the publishing of it in the manner in which it was published was for the public benefit at the time when it was published, ^^ ** The averment in an action is that the defendant " falsely and maliciously published of and concerning the plaintiff " the words ; the averment in an indictment is that the defendant '' falsely and maliciously published of A. B. a false, malicious, and defamatory libel." " Malice," said Mr. Justice Bayley, in Bromage v. Prosser (1825), 4 B. & C. 255, "in common acceptation means ill-will against a person, but in its legal sense it means a wrongful act done inten- tionally without just cause or excuse. . . If I traduce a man, whether I know him or not, and whether I intend to do him an in- jury or not, the law considers it as done of malice, because it is wrongful and intentional- It equally works an injury whether I meant to produce an injury or not, and if I have no legal excuse for the slander, there shall be a remedy against me for the injury it produces. And the law recognises the distinction between these two descriptions of malice — malice in fact, and malice in law — in actions of slander [and libel]." " Intent " is generally understood as equivalent to " meaning," but in law it is not so, for a man is in law held to intend the natural consequences of his acts or omissions, although he never meant that they should follow. Mr. Justice Bayley in the above passage uses the word in one place in its popular and in another in its legal sense. •'' See Stephen's Digest of the Criminal Law, art. 272. The lan- guage of the text is taken from the Draft Criminal Code, that of Mr. Justice Stephen being simply "that it was true, and that it was for the public benefit that such matter should be published," without 136 THE LA^\ AFl'EUTINti PKINXEKS. A defence setting up the truth of the libel is called a plea of justitication. It is dangerous to raise this defence if there is a doubt as to proving it, for justification pleaded and not proved is a ground for the awarding of higher damages than would otherwise be awarded. The adage, " The greater the truth the greater the libel," arose under a former state of the law ; it is applicable now, if at all, only in those criminal cases where it cannot be shown that the publication of the matter complained of was for the public benefit. 2. The publication of defamatory matter is not a civil wrong or a punishable ofience if it is a privileged publica- tion. The publication of defamatory matter tnay be privileged (a) When it is made in answer to inquiries or in giving information, (b) When it is made in courts of justice. (c) When it is made in a parliamentary paper. (d) When the defamatory matter is contained in a report of or comment ujion proceedings in Parliament or in a public court of justice. (e) When the defamatory matter is relevant to a matter of public interest. (/) When the defamatory matter is a comment on some subject on which there is a right to comment. (y) When the defamatory matter is published to remedy a grievance. (/() When the defamatory matter is published on the invitation or challenge of the person defamed. We will consider each separately. (ft) Aiiswens to iiujuirles and informativn given. In order that the publication of defamatory matter maybe privileged in tliese cases it is necessary that the following any of the limitations suggested by the text. It is thought, how- ever, tlmt tlio liiiiguagi; of the draft code correctly states the law at prcbetit txiating. THE LAW AITECTING fKINTEKS. 137 elements should co-exist : (1) the person publishing the de- famatory matter must, at the time of publishing it, honestly believe it to be true ; (2) the relation between the parties by and to whom the publication is made must be such that the person publishing is under some legal, moral, or social duty to publish such matter to the person to whom the publication is made, or has a legitimate personal interest in so publishing it ; and (3) the publication must not exceed either in extent or in manner what is reasonably sufficient for the occasion. For instance, if A., a master printer, in whose employ- ment B. has been, is asked by C, who contemplates engaging B., for the character of the latter, and A. writes that B. is lazy, good for nothing, drunken, and of more than doubtful honesty ; if A. honestly and on reasonable grounds believes that B. is what he states him to be, he is not liable, either in an action or on a prosecution, although the statement is in fact untrue in every particular. If A. were not asked for B. 's character, but volunteered the statement to C, he would or would not be liable according as (a) there was or was not an honest belief on his part in the truth of the statement (or, as it is often put, there was " ex- press malice " on his paii) ; and (b) thei'e was a duty, legal, moral, or social, on A.'s part to disclose to C. his opinion of B. 's character. If C. were not contemplating taking B. into his service, tjut was only a person who possibly might do so, A. would be liable, because there would be no duty on his part to give the opinion. Still more so would he be liable if C. were a mere stranger. If I hear from what I think a trustworthy source that A.'s servant is robbing him, and I, bond fide thinking it my duty to do so, write to A. and tell him what I have heard, or forward the letter in which the infonnation is given to me, and it turns out that my informant was mistaken, am I liable in an action or prosecution for libel ? The question was much discussed in Godhead v. Bichards.''* '^ *»li846) 2~C. B." 5697 15JL. jTcrpTm 138 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. There the defendant received a letter from the mate of a ship accusing the plaintiff (the captain of the ship) of fre- quent' drunkenness and neglect of duty ; the defendant had nothing to do with the matter, but thought it incumbent on him to let the owners know, and accordingly he, in good faith and privately, communicated the letter to them, and in consequence the plaintift' was dismissed. The latter brought an action for libel against the defendant, and Chief Justice Tindal directed the juiy that if the defendant acted honestly and in good faith the publication was jirivileged, and their verdict must be for him, otherwise for the plaintiff. They found for the defendant, and on motion to the Court to set aside the verdict, it was held by the Chief Justice and Mr. Justice Erie that this direction was right, and by Justices Coltman and Cresswell that it was wrong. The difference of opinion between the judges was caused by the different views they took of the duty of the defendant under the circumstances, having regard to the fact that he had nothing to do with either the ship or her owners. The point has not since been before the Courts, and the law, there- fore, remains uncertain.'''' But social relationship — such as consanguinity, affinity, or even friendshij) — is sufficient to support a plea of privilege. Thus when A.'s mother-in-law was about to many B., of whom A. entertained a bad opinion, and he wrote her, making serious charges against B. , honestly believing A\hat lie wrote and acting in good faith, he was held not liable, although the charges were false."*"' But if he had not acted in good faith he would have been liable. So, too, a common interest in the matters complained of may be enough to establish privilege. Thus a report of auditors reflecting upon the manager of a company and •■■■■ The learned judges who have settled the Draft Criminal Code jtropose that the opinion of Chief Justice Tindal and Mr. Justice Krle Hhall prevail. •■" Todd V. Ilavkinx (183 See 3 and 4 Vict., c. !). •1 44 and 45 Vict., c. 00. " As to what is a nrwsiiaiier witliin the Act, see infra, p. 144. THK LAW AFFECTING I'HINTEKS. 141 defaming some particular person, was decided in Wanon v. Walter (1801)). ^^ There the Times had published a fair report of a debate in the House of Lords, in the course of which 'occurred matter defamatory of the plaintiff, who accordingly brought his action against the proprietor of the paper, and it was held that he could not recover. As to reports of proceedings in the law courts, it matters not what court it be so long as it is a public court of justice. "^^ If a judge sits in his private room to hear a case, a fair report of it will be privileged only if the public have free access to such room while the case is being heard. If he is sitting in private the report will not be privileged.''^ Proceedings before an arbitrator are not proceedings in a court of justice, and reports of them are not privileged, unless, perhaps, the arbitrator be appointed by Act of Parliament, as in the matter of the European and Albert Insurance Companies. A report of ex parte proceedings in a public court is privileged, even if the court have no jurisdiction to entertain the application made to it. Where, therefore, three London papers published reports of an ex parte application made to a police magistrate, in the course of which the applicant alleged something defamatory of the plaintift", and the magistrate decided that he had no jurisdiction in the matter, it was held that the reports, being fair reports of what occurred in Court, were privi- leged.*"' So, too, where judicial proceedings last more than " L. K. 4 Q. B. 73 ; 38 L. J. Q. B. ^ Rex V. Wright (1799), 8 T. K. 293 ; Lewis v. Levy (1858), E. B. and E. 537 ; 27 L. J. Q. B. 282. A committee of either House of Parliament conducting an inquiry is a public court of justice. Kane v. Mulvany (1866), 2 Irish C. L. 402. 63 See Smith v. Scott (1847), 2 C. and K. 580 ; RyalU v. Leader (1865), L. R. 1 Ex. 296 ; 35 L. J. Ex. 185 ; Myers v. Defries, the Times, 27th July, 1877, cited in Odgers on Libel, p. 248. '"' Usill V. Hales and others (1879), 3 C. P. D. 319 : 47 L. J. C. P. 323. 142 THE LAW AFFE(^TINO PRINTEKS. one day, a report published in a newspaper ever)' morning of the proceedings of the preceding day is privileged."^ In all cases the report to be privileged must be a fair one — i.e. , it must be accurate and impartial. Care must be taken that the opening statement of counsel is not reported as a statement of the real facts of the case where the evidence does not fully support it, for in such case the report will not be privileged. The statement of counsel may, how- ever, be reported without fear, either in full or in brief, if only it is shown clearly that it is covmsel's statement and does not read as if it were the result of the evidence given."* But a report which gives counsel's speeches and none of the evidence is not a fair report,"* even though it states that the facts " as stated by counsel for the plaintiflFa were '' so and so.'''* A condensed report or abstract, if fair, is privileged the same as a verbatim report."^ Tt is sufficient if the report be substantially a fair account of f rttJLiCljUXi- what took place in court."- When, therefore, a report is condensed, care must be taken that it fairly represents both sides of the case ; it is too often the practice of reporters to give the plaintiff's version at length and the defendant's version very shortly : a jury may properly find that such a report is not a fair one.'"' But in all cases the whole report must be considered, and the jury must ask them- selves what effect it would have upon an unprejudiced person who knew nothing of the case beforehand. 6? Lewis V. Levy, ubi sup. «» Pinero x.Jloodlake (1866), 15 L. T. 676 ; A/hmore v. Borthwkk "' Flint ^C'Pi^\m^\ 4 B. and C 473. ■" Saunders v. Mi/h (1829), 6 Bing. 213 ; Lewis v. Wolttr (1821), 4 n. and Aid. G05. ■' Mellish L. J. in Millissich v. Lloyds (1877), 4C L. J. C. P. 404 ; 30 L. T. 423. ■« Per Lord Campbell in Andrews v. Chapman (1853), 3 C. and K. 280. ••' hunran v. '/'/luvtiten (1824), 3 B. and ( ". "i">t>, where the evidence of one witiK'BK wjih omitto•« Kane v. Mulcamj (ISGG), 2 Irish Common Law, 402. »/ Lciols V. Clement (1820), 3 B. and A. 702. "' lewis V. Levy (1858), E. B. & E. 537 ; 27 L. J. Q. B. 282. THE LAW AFKECTINO PKINTEUS. 147 to be true ; 2. That it was relevant to a sulject of public interest ; 3. That it was for the public benefit that such subject should bo publicly discussed. If he docs this he is entitled to succeed, unless the plaintili shows want of honesty on his part in publishing the libel, in which case the privilege is at once destro} ed. It was laid down by Cockburn, C. J. , in Risk Allah Bey V. Whitehouse, ^^ that if a writer in the public press writes that which turns out to be not founded upon the inferences he draws, and is unable to justify the conclusion at which he has arrived, yet if he has acted in good faith in the discharge of his duty, bringing to it the amount of care, reason, and judgment which a man who takes upon himself to discuss public questions is bound to bring, so that the jury is of opinion that he has acted reasonably and properly, he will be privileged. See also Wason v. Walter, cited on page 140. It is difficult, if not impossible, to lay down any test for "a subject of public interest," but there is not in practice much difficulty in determining whether any particular subject is of public or only of private interest. It has been held that the testimony of witnesses given in public courts on a subject of public interest is itself a matter of public interest, and that an imputation that the evidence of a particular witness is unfounded or incautious will be privileged if it comes Avithin the rules as to honesty of criticism."'^ So, also, where an action was brought for the publication iJi a newspaper of a report of an inspector of charities under the Charitable Trusts Acts, containing a letter, written some years before, reflecting on the plaintiff in his management of a college, it was held that the matter was one of public interest. °^ So, too, the publications of a man who professes to be in possession of a specific to «» (18G8) 18 L. T. N. S. 615. xo Ucdleij V. Barlow (lf,G5), 4 F. and F. 224. »i Cox V. Fciney (18Ga), 4 F. and F. 13. 148 THE LAW AFFECTING PKINTERS. cure maladies are matters of public interest. °- On the other hand, the circulation and position of a newspaper have been held not to be matters of public interest. ^^ (J) Fair Comment. *' The publication of defamatory matter is privileged when such matter consists in fair comments upon any person who takes part in public affairs, provided such fair comments are confined to the public conduct of such person in such affairs, "It is also privileged when the matter complained of consists in fair comments on any published book or other literary production, or any composition or work of art or performance publicly exhibited, or any other communica- tion made to the public on any subject, if such comments are confined to criticism on such book or literary produc- tion, comi^osition, work of art, performance, or communica- tion ; but the privilege does not extend to or justify the publishing of defamatory matter on any person other than the author, artist, or publisher of such book or literary production or composition or work of art, or the performer, manager, or conductor of such performance, or the maker of such communication ; and further, the privilege does not extend to or justify the publishing of defamatory matter on such author, artist, publisher, performer, manager, conductor, or maker, except so far as it fairly arises out of such criticism." With regard to criticism of persons taking part in public affairs, very great latitude is allowed. The only restric- tions arc that the critic must be fair, and must confine himself to the public conduct of the person criticised. The strong observations on the conduct of tliis or that states- man constantly found in the public press are privileged on this ground, and the immunity enjoyed by the publishers " Hunter v. Sharpe (18GG), 4 F. and F. 983 ; 15 L. T. N. S. 44. »' Latimer v. Western Moi-ning News Co. (1872), 25 L. T. N. S. 44. THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 149 of Punch and other satirical papers in respect of their cartoons and caustic observations is referable to the same rule. The private conduct of public men is not open to public criticism, except in so far as it affects their public relations.'-'^ All persons who take part in public affairs lay them- selves open to public criticism, e.g., statesmen, magis- trates,^^ clergymen,"" barristers (at least if holding office under the Crown),''" waywardens, '•'^ vestrymen, public agi- tators,"" candidates for public offices,^ petitioners to Parliament.^ In IVasun v. Walter,^ it was decided that public comment on the conduct or motive of an individual is privileged if it has been made with an honest belief in its justice, and the writer has brought to the task a reasonable degree of judgment and moderation so that the result may be what a jury shall deem, under the circumstances of the case, a fair and legitimate criticism on the conduct and motives of the party who is the object of the criticism. The right to comment on the public acts of public men belongs to every citizen, and is U'jt the peculiar privilege of the Press.* With reference to the criticism of Utcranj 2^>'ouuctions, " Wilson V. Reed (18G3),3 F. and F. 149 ; Seymour v. r%Mr worth (1862), 3 F. and F. 372. » Hibhins v. Lee (1SC4). 4 F. and F. 243. 9» Kelly V. Tialinj (1865), L. R. 1 Q. B. 693 ; 35 L. J. Q. E. 940. " Seymour v. Butterworth, ubi supra. 9» Hark v. CaUherall (1866), 14 L. T. SOI » Odgcr v. Mortimer (1873), 28 L. T. 472. » Davis V. Duncan (1871), L. E. 9 C. P. 393; 43 L. J. C. P. 143. ' Wason V. Walter, ubi infra. ' (1863) L. R. 4 Q. B. 73 ; 33 L. J. Q. B. 31. The judgment of the Lord Chief Justice Cockburn in this case deserves careful Etud_v, reviewing as it does several phases of the law of libel. * Kan: v. Mulvant/ (1866), 2 Ir. C. L. 402. 150 THE LAW AFFECI'ING PRINTERS. tlie following cases may be referred to : Carr v. Ilood,^ where it was held that not only a book, but its author as such might be held up to ridicule ; Madcod v. Wakeley,^ where it wa^ decided that whatever is fairly written of a work and can be reasonably said of it, or of its author, as connscted with it, is not actionable, unless the defendant, under the pretext of criticising the work, takes an oppor- tunity of attacking the character of its author ; Strauss v. Francis/ where it was laid down that a condemnatory criticism upon a litei-aiy work, however sti'ong, and even though imputing profanity or indecency, is j)rivileged, unless it is so unfair and reckless in its character that it may be presunied to have been published, not honestly but maliciously. Oil the other hand, if the critic in criticising a work goes out of his way to attack the jn'ivate character of the author, this is a libel for which both he and the printer and pub- lisher of it can be held responsible.® And a writer in one newspaper is not justified in making calumnious attacks on the private character of a writer in another paper.'' The same principles apply to the criticism of worls of art publicly exhibited, published mnsical productions, articles sent for revieio or publicly advertised, and public per- form'inccs of all kinds. Therefore, when a critic wrote of a painting exhibited at the Royal Academy that it was *' a mere daub," it was held that no action would lie, it being the critic's honest opinion of tlie painting, although others might differ from liim.'" And where a firm of (1808) 1 Camp. 3:>o. ' (1828) 3 C. and P. 311. ' (ISGG) 4 F. and F. 1107 ; lo L. T. G74. • Frascr v. Ikrkeku (1830), 7 C. and V. C21. » iitaart v. Lovdl (1817), 2 Starkic 03. •' •Ihompron v. l liing. 7 19 ; Warren v. Warren (1834), 4 Tyr. 830, 1 0. M. and 11. 15i) ; Shipkn v. Todhnnter (1830), 7 C. and P. 080 ; see Rex v. Bimhlt (1820), 4 B. and Aid. 95, and Steplien'8 Digest of Criminal Law, note to art. 270. ^' Dale of Briimwickw. llarmer\\%\% 14 Q. B. 185 ; 19 L. J. Q. B. 20 ; Johnson v. Jfiid.on (1830), 7 A. and E. 233n. THE L.VW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 155 Under certain circumstances, however, a person who has published a libel may be liable in damages, and yet not liable to 2)unishment ; and, again, in some cases the respon- sibility which 2^r>-inu facie rests upon a person in respect of a libel may, under certain circumstances, be got rid of. We will consider all these matters. However gross a libel may be, the defendant in an action, or in a criminal prosecution, cannot be made liable in respect of it unless it be proved that he published it or procured it to be published. Formerly a master was under all circumstances held liable, both civilly and criminally, for the acts of his servants in and about his business. In 1727 a woman was held liable at a criminal trial for jiublishing a libel when the facts were that the paper containing it was brought into her shop and sold at a time when she was ill in bed and knew nothing of what was going on ! '^^■^ The law is now, happily, more reasonable, for, by Lord Campbell's Act (6 & 7 Vict., 0. 90, s. 7), it is provided that "whensoever upon the trial of any indictment or information for the publication of a libel, under the pie?, of not guilty, evidence shall have been given which shall establish a presumptive case of publication against the defendant by the act of any other person by his authority, it shall be competent to such defendant to prove that such publication was made without his authority, consent, or knowledge, and that the said publication did not arise from want of due care or caution on his part." In order to deal with the subject clearly, we will divide libels into three classes : 1. Libels merely written and not multiplied ; 2. Libels written and copied ; and 3. Libels printed. Class 1. Libels merely ivritten ani not multiplied. — Here the only persons who can be charged as libellers are (a) the author, (6) the amanuensis (if any), (e) any person who ^'•' Nutt's Case, Fitzgibbon, 47. 156 THE LAW AFFECTING PKINTEttS. shows or reads the libel to a third, {d) the postman or other person who carries the libel from one to another. If the libel be not seen by a person other than the person defamed, the writer of it is not liable in civil proceed- ings. If the author of a libel, before letting any one see it, puts it away in a proper place, and some one goes to that place and sees it — if there is no negligence on the part of the author, he is not liable. ^^ If the author gets the libel written for him, it is sub- mitted that he is liable, both civilly and criminally, though it never be sent anywhere : he has published it to his amanuensis. If the libel is sent by the author or the amanuensis (if any) to a person other than the person defamed, and it is seen and understood by such person, both the author and the amanuensis o,re liable, civilly and criminally ; and this even though it was sent to such tliird person by mistake, as where it was intended for the person defamed, but was by inadvertence put in an envelope addressed to another person.^' If the libel is sent in a sealed envelope addressed to the person defamed, and by mistake some one else opens it and reads it, the author of the libel is probably liable. ''"' If the libel is sent in a sealed envelope addressed to the person defamed, but it is known to the author that that person habitually has his letters opened by his clerk, the author may, by the jury, be held liable in either a civil or criminal ])roceeding ;^^ and the amanuensis (if any) will probably be liable too. »* Odgers on Libel, p. 154. *' Fox V. Brodtrick (1804), 14 Irish Hep. Com. Law, 453. " Sec Jltr. V. Pairw (109r>), 5 Mod. lf)3. "Wlicrcvcr tlio author is not liable, ii fortiori he who has simply acted as amanuensis is not liable. '■I Delacroix v. Thcvenot (1817), 2 Stark. C3. THE LAW AFFECTING PIUNTEKS. 157 If the libel after being received by the person defamed is read out or shown by him to a third person, the author is not civilly liable for this, neither is the amanuensis (if any) ; for it is the own fault of the person defamed that such third person knew anything of the matter. But they may be punished criminally, as the libel tends to a breach of the peace. ■''•^ Any person other than the person defamed who shows or reads the libel to a third is liable, civilly and criminally, if at the time of so reading or showing it he knows or has reason to suspect the nature of the writing. The post- man or other person who carries the libel is not liable if he is ignorant of its contents.*'' Probably a postman is free from liability under all circumstances, because he has no option but to carry and deliver a letter or postcard. Class 2. Libels ivritten and copied. — The persons who may be charged are the same as in Class 1, and the copyist in addition. The liability of the persons mentioned under Class 1 remains the same, with this addition, namely, that the author and the amanuensis (if any) are both liable, civilly and criminally, as soon as the libel is seen by the copyist.*^ The copyist is liable, both civilly and criminally, if after becoming acquainted with its nature he permits the libel to be published. Class 3. Libels printed. — This is by far the most im- portant class, as well as the one which chiefly concerns printers and newspaper men. Inasmuch as the law of libels inserted in newspapers and other periodicals difl'ers in some particulars from that of libels contained in other printed matter, it is desirable to divide the class into two divisions — viz., (1) Libels contained in periodicals, and (2) Libels not contained in periodicals. 3!> Barrow V. leiveUin (1646), Hob. 62. *» Day V. Bream (1837), 2 M. and Eob. 54. " Kicnev. Euf 1855). 1 Clarke (Iowa), 482. 153 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. (1) Libels contained in periodicals. — By periodicals is meant newspapers, reviews, magazines, and other prints or writings periodically published. Here we have, in addition to the persons who may he liable under classes 1 and 2, and whose liability remains as there stated, a number of other persons of whom the most important are the com- positor, the proof-reader, the pressman, the overseer of the printing-office, the master pi'inter, the editor, the reporter, the publisher, the publisher's assistant, the proprietor, and the newsvendor. We will consider the matter shortly with reference to all these, assuming throughout that they have acted in the usual course of their business. Each of the persons mentioned is liable both civilly (i.e. , in damages) and criminally {i.e., in punishment) where he can be said to have " published " the libel, or to have aided and abetted in its publication. This involves at the present day (1) knowledge on the part of the defendant at the time of the "publishing" of the nature of the matter com- plained of, actually acquired, or which, but for the negli- gence of the defendant, might have been acquired ; or (2) authority to publish the libel either actually given or pre- sumed by law to have been given by the defendant.*- Thus the compositor and the proof-reader are each liable, civilly and criminally, if they knew wli^it they were setting up or passing for press ; in other words, if they understood the phrases and sentences used. It is no defence for them to say that they did not know that those phrases and sentences constituted a libel, for it is their duty to know what amounts to a libel. The writer does not know of proceedings ever being taken against the mere workmen engaged in printing a libel, but there is no reason why such proceedings should not be taken if the i)arty aggrieved s(j pleased. The defence in the case of a compositor would probably be that he set up the matter mechanically, not troubling himself about its meaning, and if the jury so *'• See L'mmens v. Pollle, infra ; Ji'j. v. Holbrook (1878), 4 Q. B. D. 42 ; 4S L. J. Q. B. 113. THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTEnS. 159 tiiought they would find a verdict in his favour. The proof- reader might have more difficulty with a defence of this sort, for it is his duty to discover the sense of the words. As to the pressman, his case is even better than the com- positor's : all he looks to is to get a proper impression : it is no concern of his to discover the literary nature of the formes he is working off. Still, if he does discover it, and lets it go, he will be liable, for it is no answer to an action or prosecution for a wrong committed that the party com- mitting it did so at the bidding of another or as his servant,^^ unless, indeed, he be forced under grievous threats, so as not to be a free agent. As to the overseer, much would depend upon the extent of his duties. If they wci'e simply to look after tlie mechanical production of the work executed in the printing-office, he would be excused, unless he had actual knowledge of the nature of the matter com- plained of, or knew that it was likely to bo libellous. The same applies to the j^ublishcr's assistants and to the nexvsvcndors. When they disseminated the matter complained of, did they know its nature, or were they negligently ignorant of it, or had they or ought they to have had any reason to suppose that the periodical published by them, and containing the matter complained of, was likely to contain libellous matter ? The onus of showing knowledge, negligent ignorance, or authority by the defendant to publish is upon the prosecu- tion in criminal trials for libel, but in civil actions the burden is on the other side ; there the defendant is jirima /acie liable if shown to have technically " published " the libel, and it is for him to show absence of knowledge and absence of negligent ignorance, &c. The law on this part of our subject was laid down by the Court of Appeal in 1885 in the case of Emmens v. I'uttie.'^^ There the defendants were newsvendors in a large way of business at the Royal Exchange, London, and one of their *^ See ante, under Master and Servant, page 97. 4' IG Q. B. D. 354 ; 55 L. J. Q. E. 51. 160 THK LAW AFFECTING PraNTERS. assistants had in the ordinary course of business sold to one Clarke copies of a periodical called Money, and thereby made a slight profit. The copies contained a libel on the plaintitf, and he sued Messrs. Emmens for damages for disseminating it. At the trial before Mr. Justice Wills and a jury, the jury, in answer to questions put to them by the judge, found " that the defendants did not, nor did either of them, know that the newspapers at the time they sold them contained libels on the plaintiff ; that it was not by negligence on the defendants' part that they did not know that there was any libel in the newspapers ; and that the defendants did not know that the newspaper was of such a character that it was likely to contain libellous matter, nor ought they to have known so." Upon these findings the judge ordered judgment to be entered for the defendants. The plaintiff appealed, and urged that inasmuch as the proprietor of a newspaper is liable in damages for a libel contained in it, even though the publica- tion takes place in his absence and without his knowledge, so, on the same principle, a man who makes a profit by the sale of the newspaper should be held liable for a libel in it ; that a newsvendor ought not to be allowed to disseminate a libel without being responsible for it, and that a man who deals in dangerous articles ought to be liable for any injury which is caused by them. In giving judgment, Lord Esher, M.R., said: "I do not intend to lay down any general rule as to what will absolve from liability for a libel persons who stand in the position of these defendants. But it is a material element in their position that the jury have found in their favour as they have done. I agree that the defendants are primva facie liable. They have handed to other people a newspaper in which there is a libel on the jilaintiff. I am inclined to think that this called upon tlie defendants to show some circumstances which absolve them from liability, not by way of privilege, but facts which show that they did not publish the libel. We must consider what the position of the defendants was. The THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTEKS. 101 proprietor of a newspaper, who publishes the paper l)y his servants, is the publisher of it, and he is liable for the acts of his servants. The printer of the paper prints it by his servants, and therefore he is liable for a libel contained in it. But the defendants did not compose the libel on the plaintiff, they did not write it or print it ; they only dis- seminated that which contained the libel. The question is whether, as such disseminators, they published the libel ? If they had known what was in the paper, whether they were paid for circulating it or not, they would have pub- lished the libel, and would have been liable for so doing. That, I think, cannot be doubted. But here, upon the findings of the jury, we must take it that the defendants did not know that the paper contained a libel. I am not prepared to say that it would be sufficient for them to show that they did not know of the particular libel. But the findings of the jury make it clear that the defendants did not publish the libel. Taking the view of the jury to be right, that the defendants did not know that the paper was likely to contain a libel, and, still more, that they ought not to have known this, which must mean, that they ought not to have known it, having used I'easonable care — the case is reduced to this, that the defendants were innocent disseminators of a thing which they were not bound to know was likely to contain a libel. That being so, I think the defendants are not liable for the libel. If they were liable, the result would be that every common carrier who carries a newspaper which contains a libel would be liable for it, even if the paper were one of which every man in England would say that it was not likely to contain a libel. To my mind the mere statement of such a result shows that the proposition from wliicli it flows is un- reasonable and unjust." Lord Justice Cotton concurred in the judgment of the Master of the Rolls, and Lord Justice Bowen said : " The jury have found as a fact that the defendants were innocent carriers of that which they did not know contained libellous matter, and which they had M 102 THE LAW AFFECTING PKINTEKS. no reason to suppose was likely to contain libellous matter. A newspaper is not like a fire : a man may carry it about without being bound to suppose that it is likely to do an injury. It seems to me that the defendants are no more liable than any other innocent carrier of an article which he has no reason to suppose likely to be dangerous. But I by no means intend to say that the vendor of a newspaper will not be responsible for a libel contained in it, if he knows, or ought to know, that the paper is one which is likely to contain a libel. " This case is of such great importance that we offer no apology for setting out the judgments at length. It will be observed that Messrs. Emmens escaped because fc he jury were able to find as they did. Newsvendors are not bound to read through a copy of every issue of every periodical they sell, but they ought to make themselves acquainted with the natures of the paj^ers they deal in. Tliey should therefore look at the first two or three numbers with tlie object of doing so, or they may have a difficulty in satisfying a jury that their want of knowledge of the character of the paper is not due to their negligence. Most newspapers and magazines may be sold with impunity, but some of the so-called " Society papers " which trade on scandal are circulated at the peril of the sellers. yLjnan who gives or lends another a periodical contain- a libel is in the same position as a newsvendor. The editor is responsible civilly for any libel contained in any issue whicli he has actually edited. If he should not have edited the particular issue containing the libel he is not liable, but the acting editor is. A sub-editor is respon- sible civilly if the libel is in that part of the issue which he lias actually sub-edited. In order to make an editor (or Bul)-editor) criminally responsible for a libel which has been pnlilishcd in a periodical edited (or sub-edited) by him, it is necessary to show not only tliat he is editor, but tliat he directed the insertion of the libel in question.''^ " Itcff. v. Raima!/ (1883), 15 Cox C.C. 231. THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTEK.S. 1()3 A reporter is author of liis report, and if it bo libellous he is responsible both civilly and criminally, his criminal liability, however, being subject to the provisions of the Newspaper Libel Act, 1881, respecting reports of public meetings (see siipra, page 140). The master })r inter is responsible both civilly and crimin- ally for all libels published in papers printed by him or his servants. He makes a profit out of the printing, and it is his duty to make himself acc^uainted with what is printed in his printing-office. Ignorance on his part will not excuse him. The '■'■ puhlisher'" of the periodical is equally responsible with the master printer, both civilly and criminally, for every libel in a periodical of which he is the publisher, and for similar reasons. In London the publishers of the chief newspapers are mere servants of the proprietors, yet they are responsible both civilly and criminally.'"' The proprietor of a periodical is always responsible in damages for any libel published therein. He used to be held responsible criminally also, but of late years the iniquity of holding criminally responsible a man, or it may be a woman, who has taken no part in the conduct of the paper has led to a change in, or sliall we rather say a better interpretation of the law. The leading case on this subject is Reg. v, Holbroolc,^' decided in 1878 by Lord Chief Justice Cockburn and Mr. Justice Lush against the opinion of Mr. Justice Mellor. That was a criminal information for libel against the proprietors of the Portsmouth Gazette, and it appeared that the defendants intrusted the editorial de- partment of the paper to one Green, who stated in evidence that they appointed him with general authority to conduct the paper, that they left it entirely to his discretion what should be put in the paper, and that they never took notice of his articles one way or the other. The libel in question « See Usill V. Hales (1S78), 3 C. P. D. 179— a civil action where the defendants were publishers of tlie class referred to. '' 4 Q. B. D. 42 ; IS L. J. Q. B. 113. 164 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTEKS. was in the form of a letter, and was inserted by Mr. Green without the knowledge or express authority of the defen- dants, one of whom was absent from Portsmouth at the time. It was contended that these facts entitled the de- fendants to a verdict under sect. 7 of Lord Campbell's Libel Act (6 & 7 Vict. , c. OG)."'* The judgments are of con- siderable length, and in the result the Court decided that the general authority given to the editor was not by itself evidence that the defendants had authorised or consented to the publication of the libel. The criminal responsibility of proprietors and vendors of newspapers and other periodicals is defined in the Draft Criminal Code, and although in some heads of law the Draft Code proposes to make changes, it is believed that the following extracts state the law at present existing on the subject in hand : — "Every proprietor of any newspaper, review, magazine, or other writing or print periodically published (herein- after called periodical) is prima facie criminally responsible for defamatory matter inserted or published therein : pro- vided that such ^jrtma facie liability may be rebutted by proof that the particular defamatory matter was inserted in such periodical without such proprietor's cognizance, and without negligence on his part. "General authority given to the person actually insert- ing such defamatory matter to manage or conduct as editor or otherwise such periodical, and to insert therein what he in his discretion thinks fit, shall not be negligence within the proviso lastly hereinbefore contained, unless it be proved that the proprietor, when originally giving such general authority, meant that it should extend to inserting and publishing defamatory matter, or continued such general autliority knowing that it had been exercised by inserting defamatory matter in any number or part of such periodical." "No one shall be guilty of an indictable offence by *■* Set out on page 15.5. THE LAW AFFECTING PniNTEItS. 1G5 selling any number or part of such periodical, unless he knew either that such number or part contained defama- tory matter or that defamatory matter was habitually con- tained in such periodical. " Upon any trial for publishing a defamatory libel con- tained in a periodical, after evidence of the publishing of the number or part of the periodical containing the alleged defamatory matter is given, sufficient in the opinion of the Court for such purpose, other writings or prints purporting to be other numbers or parts of the same periodical pre- viously or subsequently published shall be admissible in evidence for the prosecution or the defence without further proof." (2.) Printed Libels PnbUshed otheriviae than in Periodicals, — These include libels in printed letters, circulars, leaflets, pamphlets, and books. As regards all of these the liabilities of author, amanuensis, compositor, reader, overseer, and master printer are tlie same as in the case of a libel in a periodical. The customer or employer of the printer is also liable as a publisher of the libel, for whoever procures an act to be done by others is responsible as if he had done it himself. As regards printed letters, circulars, and the like, the only other persons who can incur liability for libels therein are the disseminators of them, and it is conceived that their liability would depend upon the principles laid down in respect of news vendors — namely, upon whether they knew or ought to have known the character of the matter they disseminated. In the case of a mere office lad no one would impose upon him the duty of finding out the nature of a circular he was ordered to fold and post, but in that of a more responsible servant, such as a clerk or shopman, there would be more difficulty, and his case would probably be governed by the same rules as that of a bookseller or bookseller's assistant, which we shall consider directly. As regards pamphlets and books, it may be taken gene- 1C5a the law affecting piuxtet;s. rally that the jJH?)//,s/if)- of them— tliat is, the person whose name is on the title-page, or who procures them to be disseminated — is civilly liable for any libel they may contain, because it is his duty to find out the nature of works before he publishes them. And there are few cases in Avhich he could escape criminal liability also, for ho would be liable prima facie, and could only get a verdict in his favour if he could prove — what would generally be very difficult — that the publication was made "without his authority, consent, or knowledge, and did not arise from want of due care or caution on his part."''^ A master hookseller would generally be in much the same position as the publisher, for it is his duty to make himself acquainted with the. nature of the books he sells. ^'^ But having regard to the decision in Emmens v. Pottle,^^ it is hardly likely that a bookseller would now be held liable, if he, with no knowledge of its nature, sold a libellous work written by an author who had previously published many •works none of them libellous. It can hardly be seriously contended now, as it was in Bex v. Cutliell,^^ that a book- seller is bound to read all the books he sells, or that he sells them at his peril. In that case the defendant was a seller of books, chiefly classical and none political : he had sold some non-political works for the Rev, G. Wake- field, and when the latter sent him for sale another work, which turned out to be a seditious libel, he sold it believing, -as he swore, that it was similar in kind to the previous works of that author, who had, in fact, never before written any political work, or intimated his intention of doing so. The book had been printed elsewhere for Mr. Wakefield, who sent some copies to Cuthell and other •w Lord Campbell's Act, sec page 155. « Rex V. Cuthdl (179!)), 27 How. St. Tr. (■)42. ■''■' Ante, p. 15!). ''^ Ubi istip7'a. THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 166 booksellers for sale. Mr. Cutliell began to sell them without due examination, but stopped the sale upon the first intimation of the nature and character of the work. He was prosecuted for selling the book, and, though de- fended by Ei'skine, found guilty. The liability of a bookseller's assistant would be deter- mined upon the same principles ; but it would generally be considered that his duty to become acquainted with the books he sold would be less than that of his master. Procedure in Libel Cases. As has already been stated, a person libelled may proceed against the offender either civilly or criminally ; that is, he may either bring an action to recover damages, or may prosecute to get the offender punished by fine or imprison- ment, or bound over to keep the peace. In certain classes of cases aho the repetition of a libel may be restrained by injunction. Actions for libel may not be brought in a County Court ; ^^ they must be instituted in the High Court, or in one of the local courts having jurisdiction, e.g., the Lord Mayor's Court, and the Salford Hundred Court. Criminal proceedings ought not to be resorted to unless the libel is a bad one, or the remedy by action would be inadequate. Proceedings in an Action for Damages. The procedure in a libel case in the High Court is the same as in any other action for damages. The action commences with a writ, served on the defendant, directing him to enter an appearance or submit to judgment. If the defendant admits the libel he may suffer judgment to go by default, and in this case the plaintiff will cause a jury to be summoned in the Sheriff's Court to assess the damages he is entitled to. A day f^r the hearing will be "- and 10 Vict., c. 95, s. 5S. 1G6a the law affectixg printers. fixed, and the defendant will have notice of it, and then both sides will be entitled to give evidence and to be heard by counsel. The hearing will, in fact, be similar to that at a trial in Court, save that the only question to be decided on is what amount of damages the plaintiff is to receive : it must be something, but it may be anything from a farthing upwards. Where the libel is unquestionable it is often good policy for the defendant to allow judgment to go by default, but each case must be considered on its own merits, and dealt with accordingly. If the person served with the writ wishes to defend he enters an appearance, and then the plaintiff serves his Statement of Claim, setting forth the libel and alleging that the defendant published it, and thereby caused damage to the plaintiff. The defendant in answer puts in his Defence, the plaintiff replies, and the case is then set down for trial, and comes on to be heard in its order. Either party may be made, pending the trial, to dis- close to the other all documents in his possession or power relevant to the case, and to answer interrogatories. The hearing may be before a judge alone, but either party can, by giving the proper notice, insist on having a jury, and it is usual to do so. Tlie Dejenccs to an Action for Libel. The defendant in a contested action for libel has severa t- courses open to him when he puts in his defence. He may deny that the words alleged are libellous, or that he published them, or that he i)ublished them maliciously or in the defamatory sense imi^uted, or that the publication of the libel caused the damage complained of. Further, he may, if so advised, plead in the alternative, or as his only plea, that the defamatory words are true in substance and in fact. This is called a plea of justification, and it should never be pleaded unless there is a strong probability of its being 8U.staii:cd by the evidence, for an unproved plea of justifi- THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTEKS. 107 cation is a ground for increasing the damages. Tlien ho may plead "privilege"; that is, that the defamatory words were published under such circumstances that tlio defendant is not responsible for damage resulting from the publication (see page 130). Again, he may pay a sum of money into Court and plead that that is enough to compen- sate the plaintiff, and if the jury think it is, the defendant will get a verdict. With the exception shoitly to be noticed, any of these pleas may be pl3aded together or alternatively, and if any one of them is sustained the defendant wins the case. The exception is that a defen- dant in an action for libel or slander is not now allowed to deny his liability and at the same time, as an alternative, pay money into Court.*'' A special plea is allowed by Lord Campbell's Act^" in the case of newspaper libels, namely, that the libel was inserted in the newspaper without malice or gross negligence, and that at the earliest opportunity an apology for it has been inserted or offered to be inserted. Tiie following are the words of the section : " And be it enacted that in an action for a libel contained in any public news- paper or other periodical publication, it shall be competent to the defendant to plead that such libel was insez'ted in such newspaper or other periodical publication without actual malice, and without gross negligence, and that before the commencement of the action, or at the earliest opportunity afterwards, he inserted in such newspaper or other periodical publication a full apology for the said libel, or, if the newspaper or periodical publication in which the said libel appeared should be ordinarily published at intervals exceeding one week, had offered to publish the said apology in any newspaper or periodical i^ublication to be selected by the plaintiff' in such action ; and tliat every such defendant shall upon filing such plea ba at liberty to *'■' Rules of the Supreme Court, 1883, Ord. xxii. , r. 1. "^ GanJ 7 Vict., c. 90,' s. 2. 1G8 THE LAW AFFECriNG rillNXi:! ,S. pay into Court a sum of money by way of amends for the injury sustained by the publication of such libel, and such payment into Court shall be of the same effect and be available in the same manner and to the same extent, and be subject to the same rules and regulations as to payment of costs and the form of pleading, except so far as regards the pleading of the additional facts hereinbefore required to be pleaded by such defendant, as if actions for libel had not been excepted from the personal actions in which it is lawful to pay money into Court ynder an Act passed in the session of Parliament held in the fourth year of his late Majesty, intituled ' An Act for the further amendment of the law and the better advancement of justice ' ; and that to such plea to such action it shall be competent to the plain- tiff to reply generally, denying the whole of such plea." It was held in O'Bneu v. Clement,^^ that this plea would not be allowed with one denying liability. But payment of a sum of money into Court under this plea is not to be taken by the jury as an admission of liability in damages to at least that amount.''^ By the same statute, a somewhat similar protection is afforded in the case of slanders and libels not published in newspapers. Section 1 provides : " That in any action for defamation it shall be lawful for the defendant (after notice in writing of his intention so to do, duly given to the plaintiff at the time of filing or delivering the plea in such action) to give in evidence, in mitigation of damages, that he made or offered an apology to the plaintiff for such defamation before the commencement of the action, or as soon afterwards as he had an ()i)portunity of doing so, in case the action shall have been commenced before there was an opportunity of making or offering such apology." " (184G) 15 M. and W. 435. " Jones V. 3racJcle (18()7), L. H. 3 Ex. 1 ; 37 L. J. Ex. 1. Wliore tlio libel lias been inserted in two papers belonging to the defendant, is not enough to insert the apology in one of tlieni only. THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 169 jfVte Damages. In libel cases the amount of the damages depends upon the circumstances. It is the jury's province to assess the amount, and their decision in the matter will never be interfered with unless they have manifestly erred, and erred considerably, in which case a new trial will be directed. The jury must consider the injury done to the plaintiff and the circumstances in which the libel was pub- lished. If they find there was express malice on the part of the defendant they will naturally award more than if ho was guilty of mere negligence. If he has done his best to atone for the injury he will be treated more leniently than if he has persisted in the charge. A plea of justifi- cation may be taken into consideration as evidence of malice to heighten the damage,''^ and even the language of counsel in court, if instructed to persist in the charge, may aggravate the damages. ^^ Either party may, with a view to the damages, give evidence to prove or disprove the existence of a malicious motive for tlie publication of the defamatory matter,"^ as the presence or absence of such a motive Avill enhance or reduce the damages. To show malice a plaintiff may adduce evidence that the defendant knew the defamatory matter was false, that he had caused it to be gratuitously circulated, or that he had published it in an unusual way. So, too, anything connected with the libel which discloses a course of conduct adverse to the plaintiff may be given in evidence to enhance damages. Thus letters or other copies of the same news- paper, whether published before the libel complained of or afterwards, and even if published after the action is brought, may be made evidence for this purpose.^" And Simpson V. Robinson (1848), 12 Q. B. 511 ; 18 L. J. Q. B. 73. " lb. and Derby v. Oiisclcy (18.56), 25 L. J. Ex. 230 ; and Risk Allah Bey v. Whitehurst (18G8), 18 L. T. N. S. 015. " Gathercole v. Miall (184G), 15 M. & \V. 319. '" Simpso7i V. Robinson (1818), 12 Q. B. 511 ; Barrett v. Long (1851), 3 H. L. Cas. 395 ; Macleod v. Wakley (1828), 3 C, an4 P. SU- 170 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. persistence in an accusation made, or refusal to apologise, may be shown for the like purpose. But a plaintiff cannot give evidence of his good character until the defendant has adduced evidence to impeach it.^'' In mitigation of damages the defendant may prove pro- vocation on the part of the plaintiff, e.j/. , that the plaintiff had libelled the defendant f^ he may also prove facts tending to justify the libel, though not amounting to a complete justification of it.^^ He may show, too, that he did not originate the libel, e.g., tliat he copied it from some other newspaper, '''' though if he have put it forward as new and ori- ginal matter of his own this will not avail him ; or that the matter was published through inadvertence, or the incom- petence, not then known, of some person in his employ.^' But a defendant in a case of newspaper libel cannot give in evidence in mitigation of damages the fact that the plaintiff has already recovered damages from another newspaper proprietor for the same libcl.''- Whether evidence of the plaintiff"s general bad character can be given by the defendant is a moot question. The balance of opinion seems to be that it can."* Where an apology and amends have been made or tendered, the fact should be taken into account in assessing the damages. As to the statutory provision for pleading apology and payment into court, see ante, pages 167 and 108. When the matter complained of is defamatoiy in itself " Cornwall v. Richardson (1825), Ry. and M. 305. '" Kelly v. Sherlock (18G5), L. li. 1 Q. B. 080 ; 35 L. J. Q. B. 209. »" C/uilmersv. ShacJcell (1834), C. and P. 475; Speck v. Phillips (is:!'.)), 5 M. and W. 27'J. "' Bennett v. Bennett (1834), C. anil P. 588. Mnllett v. Ilulton (1803), 4 Esp. 248. Saunders v. Mills (1829), (! Bing. 213. Davis v. Cutbush (185;)), 1 F. and F. 487. Creci-y v. Ca>T(1835), 7 C. and P. 04. »' Smith V. Scott (1847), 2 C. and K. 580. "■■ Crccry v. 6V(rr (1835), 7 C. and P. 04, *" Sec Taylor on Evidence, 4tli edition, as. 35t, et scq. Maync on Damages, 4th edition, j). 457, THE LAW AFFECTINO, PKINTERS. 171 the plaintiff need not give evidence of having sustained actual damage, and the jury may give substantial damages, for loss is the natural result of injury to character, and they may take into consideration not only the injury that has arisen, but that which may arise from the defamation.^* Where the words complained of are not actionable without special damage, the actual damage sustained must be alleged in the pleadings and proved at the trial. But where they are actionable in themselves no evidence of any specific loss sustained in consequence of them may be given unless that specific loss is laid in the statement of claim,"* and special damage, which is the result of a repetition of the libel, and not of the defendant's publication of it, cannot be recovered from the defendant."'' Where the defendant does not by his defence assert the truth of the statement complained of, he is not entitled on the trial to give evidence in chief, with a view to mitigation of damages, as to the circumstances under which the libel was published, or as to the character of the plaintiff, with- out the leave of the judge, unless seven days at least before the trial he furnishes particulars to the plaintiff of the matters about which he intends to give evidence."'' The Costs. Where the action is tried without a jury the costs are in the discretion of the judge, and if he makes no order each party has to bear his own costs. He may order the un- successful party to pay all or part only of his opponent's costs, but he cannot make a successful party pay the costs of the action to the other side."'' When the action is tried with a jury the costs follow the event unless for good cause «' Ingram v. Lawson (1840), G Bing. N. C 212. *' See Mayne on Damages, 4th edition, p. 452. "« Ward V. Weeks (1830), 7 Bing. 211, Mayne on Damages. " K. S. C. 1883, Ord. xxxvi., r. 37. o» p. S. C.1883, Ord. Ixv., r. 1. 172 THE lAW AFFECTING PKINTEES. the judge otherwise orders. ^^ Where the jury return a verdict for the plaintiff, damages one farthing, the defen- dant has to pay the costs of the action, unless the judge, for good cause, otherwise orders."" Injunction. After a jury has decided that certain statements are libellous, the Court can and will restrain further publication of them by its injunction."^ Whether before the case has been tried the Court will issue an interlocutory injunction is not quite clear. Before the Judicatux'e Acts, 1873, it was held that there was no power to do so, but since that Act the Court of Appeal has declared that there is jurisdic- tion to do so,"- and it has been done in a few cases^^ where the libels were damaging property, or a business, or a friendly society or joint stock company, but up to now" there is no reported case of an interlocutory injunction being granted to restrain libels on personal character, and in one case when such an injunction was asked for it was refused.''" Criminal Proceedings for Libel. Libel can be punished criminally in two ways : 1, By indictment ; 2, By criminal information, ® R. S. C. 1883, Ord. Ixv., r. 1. As to what is " good cause," see Jones V. Curlinr; (1885), 13 Q. B. D. 2G2 ; 53 L. J. Q. B. 373, and Hughes v. Merrltt (187G), 17 Q. B. D. 373, where Lord Coleridge deprived of costs a plaintiff who recovered only a farthing damages for libel. ■° Garnet v. Bradley (1878), 3 App. Cas. 914 ; 48 L. J. Ex. 18G. " Saxhy V. Eastcrbrook (1878), 3 C. P. D. 339. « Quartz Hill, dc., Mining Co. v. Bcall (1882), 20 Ch. D. 501, 51 L. J. Cl>. 874. ■^ Thorleiji Cattle Food Co. v. Massum (1877), G Ch. D. 582 ; 4G L. J. Ch. 713. mil V. Hart Daviess (1882), 21 Ch. D. 798 ; 51 L. J. Ch. 845. Hayward and Co. v. Hayward and Sons (ISSG), 34 Ch. D. 198. » 1887. '» Armslronyx. .Wmit (188G), 2 Times Law IJojiorts, 887. THE LAW AFFKOTING PRINTERS. ITiJ In proceeding by indictment the defendant is first sum- moned to appear before justices or a stipendiary magistrate, and if a case is made out the accused is committed for trial, or if the Court declines to commit for trial the prosecutor can elect to be bound over in recognisances to prefer an indictment. In either case an indictment is preferred setting out in cxtenso the defamatory words, and where they are not in themselves clearly defamatory charging a libellous meaning by innuendo. The indictment is preferred to the grand jury at the Central Criminal Court or the Assizes, and they, after investigation, return " a true bill "or " no true bill." In the event of a true bill being returned the trial in the ordinary course takes place before a judge and jury of twelve, at the Old Bailey or the Assizes, as the case may be. But if the case is of importance, or there be other sufficient reason, it is open for either side to apply to the Queen's Bench for a certiorari to have the indictment, in the event of the grand jury returning a true bill, removed into the High Court of Justice for trial, and if the Court, after reading affidavits and hearing arguments on both sides, makes the order asked for, it will be so removed, and in such event it is possible to have it tried by a special jury, which otherwise is not available. The defendant pleads to the indictment either "guilty " or "not guilty," and if the latter he can plead a justifi- cation, i.e., that the words are true in substance and in fact, and that it is for the public benefit that they were published.'"'' The plea of justification must be in writing, and must set forth the particular fact or facts by reason whereof it was for the public benefit that the matters charged should be published, and if there is no plea of justification the truth of the statement is not to be in- quired into."' The plea of " not guilty " puts the prosecu- tion to the proof of all matters necessary to procure a '« 6 and 7 Vict., c. 9G, s. 6. See also ante, page 135. " Ibid. 174 THE LAW AFFECTING PKINTERS, conviction, viz., that tlie words complained of are libellous, and that the defendant published them, or caused them to be published, while the defendant is at liberty to show that the publication was privileged. The trial of a criminal prosecution for libel is like that of an action for the same with the exception that the defendant cannot give evidence, and that every matter necessary to be proved must be proved strictly, no admis- sions, to save such proof, being possible. The punishment for libel is fine or imprisonment, or both, and the offender may be required to find sureties to keep the peace : — a. If the defendant be convicted of simply publishing the libel, the maximum punishment is one year's imprisonment (without hard labour) and the payment of such a fine as the Court may impose. "^^ b. If he be convicted of publishing the libel knowing it to be false, the maximum punishment is two years' imprisonment and the payment of such a fine as the Court may impose."^ c. If he be convicted of " blackmailing," i.e., of pub- lishing or threatening to publish any libel, or directly or indirectly proposing to abstain from or ofi'ering to prevent the printing or publishing of any matter or thing touching any person with intent to extort money or security for money, or any valuable thing from such or any other person, or to induce any person to confer or procure for any person any apj^ointment or office of profit or trust, the maximum punish- ment is three years' imprisonment with hard labour.^" The amount of the fine is entirely in the discretion of the Court, so long as it is not "excessive" within the meaning of Magna Chaita. '• G and 7 Vict., c. 90, s. 5. " Sect. 4. '•> Sect. 3. THE LAW AfFECTING rillNTERS. 175 The trial is conclusive, except it be instituted in or removed inlo the High Court (Queen's Bench Division), when, under certain circumstances, a new trial may be obtained. Criminal proceedings for newspaper libels are regulated by the Newspaper Libel and Jiegistration Act, 1881 (44 and 45 Vict., c. GO), which provides — 1, Tliat no criminal prose- cution for newspaper libel shall be instituted until the fiat of the Attorney-General or Director of Public Prosecutions has been obtained ; 2, That courts of summary jurisdiction may in cases of newspaper libel inquire whether the libel was true or for the public benefit, and deal with them accordingly ; and 3, That such courts may, with the consent of the defendant, deal summarily with cases where the libels appear trivial. The sections of the Act which deal with these matters are as follows : — Section 3. — " No criminal prosecution ^^ shall be com- menced against any proprietor, publisher, editor, or any person responsible for the publication of a newspaper *- for any libel published therein, without the written fiat or allowance of the Director of Public Prosecutions in England, or Her Majesty's Attorney-General in Ireland being first had and obtained." Section 4. — " A court of summary jurisdiction, upon the hearing of a charge against a proprietor, publisher, or editor, or any person responsible for the publication of a newspaper, for a libel published therein, may receive evidence as to the publication being for the public benefit, and as to the matters charged in the libel being true, and as to the report being fair and accurate, and published without malice, and as to any matter which under this or ^' A criminal information for libel is not a criminal prosecution within this section. Yates v. The Queen (1885), 14 Q. B. D. 648 ; 54 L. J. Q. B. 258. 8- For the definition of a " newspaper " for the purposes of this Act, sec ante, page 144. 176 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. any other Act, or otherwise, might be given in evidence by way of defence by the person charged on his trial on indict- ment, and the Court, if of opinion after hearing such evidence that there is a strong or probable presumption that the jury on the trial would acquit the person charged, may dismiss the case." Sections. — "If a court of summary jurisdiction, upon the hearing of a charge against a proprietor, publisher, editor, or any person responsible for the publication of a newspaper for a libel published therein, is of opinion that, though the person charged is shown to have been guilty, the libel was of a trivial character, and that the offence may be adequately punished by virtue of the powers of this section, the Court shall cause the charge to be reduced into writing and read to the person charged, and then address a question to him to the following effect, ' Do you desire to be tried by a jury, or do you consent to the case being dealt with summarily ? ' and if such person assents to the case being dealt with summarily, the Court may summarily convict him, and adjudge him to pay a fine not exceeding fifty pounds." " Section 27 of the Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1870, shall, so far as is consistent with the tenor thereof, apply to every such proceeding as if it were herein enacted and extended to Ireland, and as if the Summary Jurisdiction Acts were therein referred to instead of the Summai'y Jurisdiction Act, 1848."" Section 6. — "Every libel or alleged libel, and every offence under this Act, shall be deemed to be an offence within and subject to the provisions of the Act of the session of the twenty-second and twenty-third years of the reign of Her present Majesty, cliapter seventeen, intituled " Section 27 of the Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1879 (42 and 43 Vict., c. 40), enacts regulations as to indictable offences authorised to be dealt with summarily. THE LAW AFFECTIN(J PUINTERS. 177 ' All Act to prevent vexatious indictments for certain niii- demeanours.' "^* Criminal Inform ttiorif. The proceeding by way of criminal information is a more stately way of binnging a libeller before tlie Court for punishment, and it is only to be resorted to in serious cases. In it the High Court of Justice (Queen's Bench Division) is "informed" of the libel, and the defendant is thereupon summoned before it to answer. Criminal informations are of two kinds — one where the information is laid by the Attorney-General in virtue of his office, and the other where it is laid by the Master of the Crown Office on the initiative of some person. Where the At- torney-General takes the initiative, he, without any leave, files a written information of the misdemeanour in the Crown Office, and notice of it is given to the defendant, who enters an appearance and pleads to it as to an in- dictment. The subsequent proceedings are like those in an ordinary trial, save that the Attorney-General may demand that the case be tried at bar, i.e., before three j udges. Where a person other than the Attoiniey-General desires a criminal information for libel to be laid, he must file affidavits of the facts and instruct counsel to move the Court for a rule calling upon the defendant to show cause why the information should not be filed. On this rule being granted it is served on the defendant, who thereupon files affidavits and instructs counsel to show cause. After argument the Court either discharges the rule nisi — i.e., gives judgment for the defendant — or makes it absolute, in which case the prosecutor causes the information to be filed " The effect of this is that no indictment for libel can be preferred before a grand jury until the case has first been investigated in a police court or before justices of the peace, and the accused has been committed for trial, or the prosecutor has been bound over to prefer such indictment. N 178 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. at the Crown Office, To this the defendant appears and pleads, and then the case is ti'ied at the Royal Courts in London, with a special jury if so desired. The Court has lately laid it down"^ that it will not grant a criminal information for libel except where the applicant holds some public office or position. In Reg. v. Laboiichcre (1884), 12 Q. B. D. 320, 53 L. J. Q. B. 362. THE LAW AFFECTINO PKINTEllS. 170 CHAPTER XII. LIBEL ON PROPERTY AND SLANDER OF TITLE. Though in strictness a thing cannot be libelled, an action will lie for an unlawful depreciation of a person's property, and for what is called "slander of title." Thus, if an owner puts up property for sale by auction and another person goes to the sale and maliciously asserts that the property is his, or that the owner has a less interest in it than that he is oflering for sale, an action for damages may be brought.^'' In order to maintain such an action it is necessaiy to prove that the words uttered are false, that special damage has resulted from them, and that they were uttered in bad faith.^'' " The bona fides of the communication, and not whether a man of rational understanding would have made it, is the question to be canvassed. "^'^ To publish of a tradesman falsely and without lawful occasion that the goods in which he trades are inferior in quality to goods in which his rivals trade, is actionable if special damage results. ^'^ Thus, where defendants, makers of artificial manures, sent some of their own and plaintiffs' goods to an analyst, and published his report, in which the plaintiffs' goods were said to be much inferior to defendants', it was held that an action would lie if the analyst's report was false, and the plaintiflfs could show loss resulting from it."** And where a business circular or advertisement contains 8« See Comyn's Digest, Action on Case for Defamation (Slander of Title) ; Addison on Torts ; Odgers on Libel. s; Brooh v. Rawle (1849), 4 Excli. 524 ; 19 L. J. Ex. 114. ^ Per Lord Ellenborough in Pitt v. Donovan (1813), 1 M. & S. G4S. ^ Western Counties Manure Co. v. Laioes' Chemical Manure Co. (1874), L. K. 9 Ex. 218 ; 43 L. J. Ex. 171. ^ Tlwrleys Cattle Food Co. v. Massam (1880), 14 Ch. D. 763 ; 49 L. J. Ch. 180 THE LAW AFFECTING PKINTERS. statements depreciating the goods of a rival whicli are untrue and calculated to injure his trade, or statements concerning an action against a rival whicli are untrue and calculated to injure his trade, the Court will grant an injunction against the continued issue of such state- ments. It is not necessary in order to get an injunc- tion to show that actual damage has residted from the publication of the statements, "^ and if the falsity of the statements can be shown, and the Court can see that they are calculated to injure the plaintiff, an interlocutory in- junction will be granted, i.e., an injunction pending the hearing of the action.^^ Similar rules apply to circulars, &c., sent to a rival's customers alleging infringement of patent or trade mark, and threatening legal pi'oceedings if they continue to sell such rival's goods. To get an injunction the party com- plaining must prove that the defendant's statements are false, that they are calculated to injure the plaintiff's trade, and that they have been issued without good faith,^^ and if damages are to be obtained it should be shown also that actual damage has resulted from them. The following enactment in the Patents, Designs, and Trade Marks Act, 1883 (46 & 47 Vict., c. 57), provides for cases like those just above mentioned : "Sect. 32. Where any peison claiming to be the patentee of an invention, by circulars, advertisements, or otherwise, threatens any other jjerson with any legal proceedings or liability in respect of any alleged manufacture, use, sale, or purchase of the in- vention, any person or persons aggrieved thereby may bring an action against him, and may obtain an injunction »' Thomas v. Williams (1880), 14 Ch. D. 864 ; 49 L. J. Ch. 605. Ilaipvard and Co- v. Ilai/ward and Sons (1880), 34 Ch. D. 198. ■« Halsey v. Brotherhood (1881), 19 Ch. D. 386 ; 51 L. J. Ch. 233. Anderson v. Lichvjs Extract of Meat Co. (1882), 45 L. T. 757- IJaijward and Co. v. Ilaij ward and Sons, ubi sup. '^ Ibid. ; nuriHd V. TaJ: (1SS2), 4" L. T. 743. THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 181 against the continuance of such threats, and may recover such damage (if any) as may have been sustained thereby, if the alleged manufacture, use, sale, or purchase to which the threats related was not in fact an infringement of any legal rights of the person making such threats : Provided that this section shall not apply if the person making such threats with due diligence commences and prosecutes an action for infringement of his patent." A printer or newspaper proprietor need not fear much to print or publish any circular or advertisement reflecting on goods (not involving the character of the maker or owner of such goods) or threatening proceedings in case of imitation or infringement, if he acts in good faith in the matter, and the name and address of the person issuing the circular or advertisement appear upon it. The writer knows of no case in which a printer or newspaper pro- prietor has been made, or even sought to be made, liable in such circumstances. 182 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. CHAPTER XIII. BLASPHEMOUS, SEDITIOUS, AND OBSCENE LIBELS. Any one who publishes a blasphemous, seditious, or obscene document is guilty of a misdemeanour, and is liable to fine and imprisonment in the discretion of the Court. It is hard to define blasphemy in these days. In 1857 it was laid down to be the uttering of words or matter relating to God, Jesus Christ, the Bible, or the Book of Common Prayer, intended to wound the feelings of man- kind or to excite contempt and hatred against the Church by law established, or to promote immorality. The inten- tion seems the gist of the ofi'ence, and the fact that the words or matter are calculated or even likely to wound, &c., is not sufiicient.^* A seditious libel is a libel ^^ published with intent to bring into hatred or contempt, or to excite disaff'ection against, the person of the Sovereign, or the Government and Constitution of the United Kingdom as by law establislied, or either House of Parliament, or the administi-ation of justice, or to excite the Queen's subjects to attempt, other- wise than by lawful means, the alteration of any matter in Church or State by law established, or to raise discontent or disaftection amongst the Queen's subjects, or to promote feelings of ill-will and hostility between difi'erent classes of such subjects.^" " Intent " here has a difi'erent meaning from that attached to the word in the preceding paragraph ; it has indeed the usual legal meaning, and by law every person is generally deemed to intend the conse([uenccs which would naturally follow from his conduct at the time and in the circum- Btances in which he conducts himself. "' See Stephen's Digest of the Criminal Law, Art. 1(31. '^'' For definition of libel, see imge 132. "" See Stephen's Digest of the Criminal Law, Art. 50. THE LAW AFFECTING PKINTEKS. 183 The expression " obscene libel " covers an obscene or indecent book, paper, print, writing, picture, drawing, photograph, and the like. The publication of indecent matter is sometimes justifi- able, but unless justified is a misdemeanour. It does not cease to be an offence because the person publishing it is actuated by honest motives.'''^ It is difficult to lay down a precise definition of obscenity, but in lieif. v. Hickliii Lord Chief Justice Cockburn said : " I think the test of obscenity is this. Whether the ten- dency of the matter charged as obscenity is to deprave and corrupt those whose minds are open to such immoral influences and into whose hands a publication of this sort may fall ; " and this is generally conceived to be the true test. It is still more difficult to say under what circumstance the publication of obscene matter is justifiable. Many of the classics contain matter which, if inserted in a book or newspaper published for the first time to-day, would con- stitute the publication an offence, and yet no one thinks of prosecuting the publishers of such classics ; and so with pictures and sculptures. The matter is discussed by Mr. Justice Stephen in his Digest of the Criminal Law,^^ and while he admits he is not able to explain satisfactorily the anomalies above referred to, he submits the following as the conclusion of his researches and arguments : "A person is justified in publishing obscene l^ooks, papers, writings, prints, pictures, drawings, or other representa- tions if their publication is for the public good, as being necessary or advantageous to religion or morality, to the administration of justice, the pursuit of science, literature, or art, or other objects of general interest ; but the justifica- tion ceases if the publication is made in such a manner, to such an extent, or under such circumstances as to exceed =" Reff. V. Hicklin (1868), L. E. 3 Q. B. 360; 37 L. J. M. C. 89. "' Art. 172 and note thereto and Note xi. 184 THE LAW AFFECTING PKINTEKS. ■what the public good requires in regard to the particular matter published." It is quite certain, for instance, that many passages and illustrations in medical and surgical works, which are necessarily lawful when confined to such works, would be unlawful if circulated broadcast among the people. A person convicted of publishing an obscene libel may be sentenced to hard labour. ^■' If a full report of judicial proceedings would contain obscene matter, the obscene matter must be omitted, or the publisher will commit an offence.^ Under Lord Campbell's Act of 1857, for the suppression of obscene publications,^ any person may go before a magistrate or two justices of the peace and swear that he has reason to believe, and does believe, that obscene publications are kept in a place within the magistrate's jurisdiction for the purpose of sale or distribution, exhibi- tion for purposes of gain, lending upon hire, or being otherwise published for purposes of gain, and that one or moi'e articles of the kind have been sold, &c., at or in connectifjn with such place, and thereupon the magistrate or justices, being satisfied that the complainant's belief is well founded, and being also satisfied that any of such articles so kept for any of the purposes aforesaid are of sach a character and description that the i:)ublication of them would be a misdemeanour and proper to be prosecuted as such, give authority by sp^jcial warrant to any police officer to enter such place and search for and seize all such books, papers, &c., found there, and to carry them before the magistrate or justices, who shall thereupon issue a summons calling upon the occupier of the place to appear within seven days before the magistrate's court to show cause why the articles so seized should not be destroyed, ■-9 14 and m Vict, c. 100, s. 29, > Sleek V. Brannan (1872), L. R. 7 C. P. 261 ; 41 L. J, M. C. 8.5. ••^ 20 and 21 Vict, c. 8.3, s. 1. THE LAW AFFEOTINO PRINTERS. 185 and if the party summoned docs not appear, or if he appears and the magistrate or justices are satisfied that such articles or any of them are of the character stated in tlie wai'rant, and have been kept for the purposes afore- said, he or they are to order them to be destroyed at the expiration of the time allowed for appealing, and in the meantime to order them to be impounded. ^ An appeal to quarter sessions may be lodged within seven days of the order of the magistrate on entering into recognizances to pay costs, &c.* 3 As to the form of the order, see Fxp. Bradlmigh (1S78), 3 Q. B. D. 509 ; 47 L. J. M. C. 107. The death of the complainant does not cause the proceedings to lapse, Rej. v. Truelove (1880), 5 Q. B. D. 33G. 4 Sect. 4 of the Act. 186 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTEKS. CHAPTER XIV. COPYRIGHT. Copyright is, like Libel, a subject which has been discussed at considerable length in books specially devoted to it.* The intention here is to deal with it, not exhaustively, but in a manner sufficient for all the ordinary needs of those for whom this work is written. Copyriglit is almost entirely the creature of Statute Law, and the Acts of Parliament now in force relating to it are twenty in number.^ The chief Act concerning books is that of 1842 (5 and 6 Vict., c. 45). ■• See Copinger on Copyright, and Shortt's Law of Literature and Art (each 30s.); also see the Digest of tlie Law of Copyright, by Sir James Stephen, api)ended to the Report of the Eoyal Commission on Copyright, 1878 (Eyre and Spottiswoode, Is.). 5 The Acts are: (1) Books, Lectures, Music, d-c, 15 Geo. Ill, c. 53 (Perpetual Copyright of Universities in Books bequeathed to them) ; 5 and G Will. IV., c. 65 (Lectures) ; 5 and G Vict., c. 45 (Term and Register of Copyright — Delivery of Books to Libraries —Remedy for Piracy, &c.). (2) Works of Art, 8 Geo. II., c. 13 (Term of Copyright— Remedy for Piracy) ; 7 Geo. III., c. 38 (Amendment of above Act) ; 17 Geo. III., c. 57 (Further Amend- ment) ; 54 Geo. III., c. 50 (Busts and Sculptures) ; G and 7 Will. IV., c. 59 (Further Amendment of 8 Geo. II., c. 13) ; 25 and 26 Vict., c. G8 (Paintings, Drawings, and Photographs). (3) Drama, 3 and 4 Will. IV., c. 15 (Right of Author to Representation). (4) JJes'Kjns, 5 and G Vict-, c. 100 (Terms of Copyright — Registration — Remedy for Piracy, &c.); Gand 7 Vict., c. G5 (Register of Designs,&c.); 13 and 14 Vict, c. 104 (Provisional Registration, &c.) ; 21 and 22 Vict., c. 70 (Further as to Registration — Jurisdiction of County Courts) ; 24 and 25 Vict., c. 73 (E.\tension of Acts to Works done Abroad) ; 38 and 39 Vict., c. 93 (Transfer to Patent Commissioners of Powers of lioard of Trade). (5) Inkmational, 7 Vict,, c. 12 (Reci])rocal Copyright, &c.) ; 10 and 11 Vict., c. 95 (Protection in tlie Colonies); 15 Vict., c. 12 (Unauthorised Translation.*!, &c.) ; 38 Vict., c. 12 (K.\emption of Dramatic Pieces) ; 49 and 50 Vict., c. 33 (Amending Act), THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 187 The law is not wholly satisfactory, and in 1878 a Royal Commission proposed various alterations in it. Since that date a Bill to consolidate and amend it has been inti-oduced into Parliament almost every Session, but has not yet been passed. Cojyyright Defined. — Copyright is the exclusive right of multiplying copies of an original work or composition, and consequently preventing others from doing so." What may J>c the ^uhject of Copyright. — All literary com- positions, including speeches or lectures, musical composi- tions, dramatic compositions, sculpture, paintings, photo- graphs, engravings, and the like, may be the subject of copyright. There must be some amount of originality about the work, or there can be no copyright in it. Thus there can be no copyright in a mere copy or extract, but a new arrangement of old matter is the subject of copyright, and so is a new compilation, or a new treatment of old matter, or of matter open to any one, such as a chronological table, a map, a court calendar, a road book, a directory,'' an epitome, a law digest, a selection from poets, a translation, and it has even been held that where a person simply makes corrections in and additions to a work in which he had originally no interest, he acquires a copyright in them and may bring an action if they are pirated. '^ There can be no copyright in anything which is immoral, irreligious, seditious, or libellous \ ^ nor in anything which " Per Lord St. Leonards in Jefftnjs v. Boosey (1854), 4 H. L. C. 815 ; 24 L. J. Ex. 81 ; also 5 and G Vicb., c. 45, s. 2. ' In this, and the examples immediately preceding, it is only in the individual work that there can be copyright, for necessarily, if accurate, one map and one directory must convey the same informa- tion as another relating to the same part of the world. •* Carey v. Longman (1801), 1 East 358. See various authorities for these propositions in Fisher's Digest, title " Copyright (Compihx- tions)." s StocMale v. Onwhyn (1826), 5 B. & 0. 173 ; Laivrence v. Smith (1822), Jacob, 471 ; see also Forbes v, Johnes (1802), 4 Esp. 97. 1.88 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. professes to be what it is not, in such a way as to be a fraud upon purchasers of it.^" There is no copyright in mere news, or in the mere record of facts ; but the re-publication by one Colonial paper of telegrams from Europe procured by another was restrained by the Supreme Court of Melbourne, Victoria.^! There is no copyright in mere ideas or theories, ^^ and a person who purposes bringing out a publication under a particular title gains no right by registering the intended title of it. 13 Having proceeded so far generally, we must now divide the subject. Copyright in TTnpuhlished Works. The author or owner of any unpublished literary com- position or work of art is entitled to restrain others from publishing it, or any copy of it.^* If the author or owner publishes it to a certain limited extent, he parts with his right partially only. Thus, if a person gives lectures to pupils, or to persons admitted by ticket, any one present may take down the lectures for his own use, but may not publish them for profit ;i^ and where a photographer lent photographs to a friend for a particular purpose, and the friend became bankrupt, it was held that the purchasers of the photographs from his assignees 10 Wright V. Tallis (1845), 1 C. B. 893 ; 14 L. J. C. P. 283, where the book alleged to have been pirated purported to be the transla- tion of a work by a German author who never wrote any such work. See also Hogg v. Eirhy (1803), 8 Ves. 226. " See Copinger on Copyright, 2nJ edn., p. 101. It is doubtful whether tliis decision would be followed in England. '2 Pike V. Nicholas (18G9), L. R. 5 Ch. 251 ; 39 L. J. Ch. 435. " Hogg V. Maxwell (1SG7), L. R. 2 Ch. 307 ; 36 L. J. Ch. 433. '* Prince Albert v, Straw/c (1849), 1 Mac. & G. 25 ; IS L. J. Ch. 120. '■'■ Abcriutki/v. Ilutchlmou (184S) ; 1 Ilall & Twells 28 ; Nichols v, rilm/tn (1884), 26 Ch. D. 374 ; 53 L. J. Ch. 552 ; Caird v. Simc (1886), 13 Ct. of Ses3. Ca. 23. is-^^n -L^M- THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 189 inijjht not publish coi)ies of them without the consent of the photographer who lent them.^'' The cojjyright in a letter written by one person and sent to another remains in the writer, but the original letter vests in the person to whom it is addressed and sent, and he may destroy it, or sell, bequeath, or give it away.^'^ Copyright in Books, Newnpaper Articles, &c. " Book " is defined by the Copyright Act, 1842 (sect. 2), to mean and include every volume, part or division of a volume, pamphlet, sheet of letterpress, sheet of music, map, chart, or plan separately published. A newspaper is a "book" within the meanincf of the Act, ^* although it was, in one case, held not to be.^^ The face of a barometer displaying special letterpress was held not to be within the definition.-*' The wood engravings in a work are covered by the Act, even wood engravings or other illustrations in a trade catalogue. Thus, in Bogue v. Hoidston,^^'' where the wood- cuts used to illustrate the letterpress had been copied, the plaintiffs were protected. In Maple v. Junior Army and Navy Stores,^^ the plaintiffs had issued an illustrated catalogue of furniture, for which they had had engravings specially made, and the defendants pirated these engrav- ings ; it was decided that the engravings were the subject of copyright, notwithstanding that the letterpress in con- nection with them could not be, and the plaintiffs were '« 3Ia7/aU V. Hhbej/ (18G2), 1 H. & C. 148 ; 31 L. J. Ex. 329. '" Gee V, Pritchard (1819), 2 Swanst. 452. IS Walter v. Howa (1881), 17 Ch. D. 70S ; 50 L. J. Ch. 621. •3 Cox V. Land and Water Journal Co. (18G9), L. R. 9 Eq. 324 ; 39 L. J. Ch. 152. ?o Davis V. Comitti (1886), 54 L. J. Ch. 419 ; 52 L. T. 539. See also Cable v. 3Iarks (1883, "The Christograph "), 52 L. J. Ch. 107 ; 47 L. T. 432. -O' (1852), 5 D. G. & Sm. 2G7 ; 21 L. J. Ch. 470. 21 (1882J, 2L Ch. D. 369 ; 5J L. J. Ch. 67. 190 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. held entitled to an injunction restraining the defendants from publishing any catalogue containing illustrations copied from the plaintiffs' books. Who may obtain Copyright i)i Books, dec. — To obtain copyright under the Act the author, or other the person in ■whom it first vests, must be : 1. A subject of the British Crown, natural born or naturalised ; or 2. A foreigner who at the time of the publication is resident in some part of the British Dominions ; -^ or (possibly) 3. An alien friend who, while residing out of the British Dominions, publishes a book in the United Kingdom.-^ Publication Abroad. — If a book is first published in a foreign country, the author can gain no copyright in the United Kingdom save under the International Copyright Acts.-^ But simultaneous publication here and abroad confers copyright.-'^ The Copyright Act extends to all the British Dominions,-" but the Law Lords in Botdledge v. Low-'' said that to obtain copyright under the Act the first publication must be in the United Kingdom. The point has now been settled otherwise by statute, and all the Copyright Acts are applied to the Colonies with slight modifications.-^ Copyright in Title. — There is no copyright in the title of a book or newspaper unless it conveys an original idea, but there is vested in the proprietor a right analogous to ■ that of trade mark or trade name. So that if A.'s book or 22 Routledge v. Loiu (1868), L. K. 3 H. L. 100 ; 37 L. J. 454. 23 Per Lords Westbiiry and Cairns in Routledge v. Loiu. See Buxton V. James (1851), 5 D. G. and S. 80. '-' 7 and 8 Vict., c. 12, s. 19, see 2iost, title "International Coijyrif;ht ." '■" Cocks V. Purday (1848), 5 C. B. 800 ; 2 C. & K. 209. Buxton V, James (1851), 5 D. G. and S. 80 ; 49 and 50 Vict., c. 33, s. 3. ■•* 5 and Vict., c. 45, s. 29. '" Uhl svpra. ■•=" 49 and 50 Vict., c. 33, s. 8. THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 191 newspaper has become known to the public under a certain title, and B. publishes a book or newspaper with a title so similar that it is calculated to deceive the public into a belief that B. 's book is A.'s, A. may restrain B. from using such title. -^ The right is capable of assignment.''*' Duration of Copyriglit. — When the "book" is published in the author's lifetime, the copyright endures for the author's life and seven years after, or for 42 years from the date of first publication, whichever is longest. When the book is published after the author's death, the copyright endures for the term of 42 years from the first publication.^'- In JUiom Vested. — When the "book '' is published in the author's lifetime, the copyright is in the author or his assigns. When it is published after his death, it is in the proprietor of the author's manuscript from which the book is first published and his assigns.^- If one person employs and pays-'^ another to write a "book'' on the terms that the copyright therein shall belong to the employer, the employer has the same copy- right therein as if he had been the author. ^^ The copyright in an article, essay, or other portion, written for a newspaper, review, magazine, encycloptedia, periodical work, or work published in parts, belongs to the ••' See also infra, Chapter XV.; Dicks v. Yates (1881, "Splendid Misery "), IS Cli. D. 7G (C. A.). See also Maxwell v. Ilogg (18G7, '■Belgravia" Magazine), L. E. 2 Ch. 307; 36 L. J. Ch. 433; Wddoii V. Dicks (1878, " Trial and Trmmpli "), 10 Ch. D. 247 ; Schoove V. Schmincke (1886, "The Castle Album"), 33 Ch. D. 546 Walter v. Emmott (1885, "The Morning Mail " ), 54 L. J. Ch. 1059. ''" Kelly V. Ilutton (1868, " Sporting Life "), L. K. 3 Ch. 703 37 L. J. Ch. 297. " 5 and 6 Vict., c. 45, s. 3. ^2 md. ^^ Actual payment is necessary, agreement to pay is not enough Brown v. Cooke (1846), 16 L. J. Ch. 140^ ^' 5 and 6 Vict., c. 45, s. 18, as stated by Stephen J. 192 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. writer of such article, essay, &c. , unless he was employed and paid^^ to write it on the terms that the copyright in it should belong to the employer, in which case it does belong to the employer exclusively^'' ; or unless he was employed and paid'''' to write it on the terms that the copyright in the newspaper, review, &c.,^^ should belong to the publisher or proprietor thereof, in which case the copyright in the article, essay, &c., belongs to such publisher or proprietor, with these reservations : — 1. After 28 years from the first publication, the right of publishing the article, essay, &c. , in a separate form reverts to the author for the remainder of the term {i.e., the remainder of the author's life plus 7 years, or of the 42 years). 2. During the 28 years the said publisher or proprietor may not publish the article, essay, &c., separately or singly without the consent of the author or his assignees.^^ But the author of the article, essay, &c., may by contract (expressed or implied) with the publisher or proprietor of the newspaper, &c., reserve to himself the right of publishing the article, essay, &c., in a separate form, and if he does so he has the copyright in the separate publication M ms/wj) o/mnf.rd v. Griffin (1848), IG Sim. 190 ; 17 L- J. Ch. 210. 35 In Piatt V. Walter (18G7), 17 L. T. 157, it was said that it was open to doubt if the section of the Act relating to reviews, maga- zines, periodical works, &c., included newspapers, because they were not specifically mentioned, but it is conceived that it does. '' Actual payment is necessary, liichardson v. Gilbert (1851), 1 Sim. N. S. 33G ; 20 L. J. Ch. 553. ^^ 5 and 6 Vict., c. 45, s. 18, as construed in Broicii v. Cook: (18iG), IG L. J. Ch. 140. '" 5 and G Vict., c. 45, s. 18. The proprietor or publisher cannot evade this provision by republishing the article in question with others, new or old ; he can only reprint entire the number of his newspaper, &c., which originally contained such article. Smith v. Jj'tiisoii{im:^), 4Giff. G32 ; 33 L. J. Ch. 137. The author may get an injunction without registering at Stationers' Hall. Mat/hew v. M-ietvM (18G0), 1 J. and H. 312. THE LAW AJ<'FKt'TI.N', the title of the book, with reference to the page of the registry-book in which the original entry is made ; c, the names of the assignors ; and d, the names of the assignees. In the absence of a special contract to the contrary, the assignor of a copyright is entitled after the assignment to continue selling copies of the work printed by or for him before the assignment and remaining in his possession.*^ Agreements are commonly made by authors with pub- lishers whereby without assigning the copyright in their books they give the publishers an intei'est in their production and sale. The relations between authors and publishers will form the subject of a separate chapter. Copyright is personal property, and on the death of the proprietor it devolves on his legal personal representatives. It is transmissible by bequest.*'' On bankruptcy it passes to the trustee.*" " Lcyland v. Stewart (187(5), 4 Ch. D. 419 ; 40 L. J. Ch. 103. " (1859) 3 Macq. H. L. Gas. Oil ; 18 Ct. of Sess. Gas. 910. " (1807) 15 L. T. 512, «' 5 and Vict., c. 45, s. 13. «H Taulur V. Pilhw (1809), L. K. 7 Ecj. 418. «" Ihid., 8. 25, ;_ w Mawman v. Tcgg (1820), 2 lluss, 385, 39?, THE LAW AFFECTING PKINTEKS. 195 Registmtiun. — A copyright register is, pursuant tu the Act of Parliament,"^ kept at Stationers' Hall, London. In it are entered, on payment of a fee of 5s., and on handing L.n the statutory form properly filled up, particulars of the title of a book, the time of the first publication thereof, the name and place of abode of the publisher, and the name and place of abode of the proprietor of the copyright of the book or of any portion of such copyright. The register is open to public inspection on payment of a fee of one shilling for each entry searched for or inspected. A certified copy of any entry can be obtained by any one on payment of five shillings, and such certificates are prima facie evidence of the proprietorship or assignment of the copyright.^- But such evidence may be rebutted. Any person aggrieved^-' by any entry may apply by motion to a court or judge of the High Court of Justice to have it expunged or varied. ^^ It is a misdemeanour to make, or procure to be made, a false entry in the register, or wilfully to produce in evidence a false copy of any entry. ^^ The statutory form of request to register is as follows : — ''•' I, A. B., of , do hereby certify that I am the proprietor of the copyright of a book intituled Y. Z., and I hereby require you to make entry in the register 5' 5 and 6 Vict. , c. 45, s. 11 . 52 Ibid. " I.e., any person whose title conflicts with that of the person registered. Chappdlv. Purday (1843). 12 M. & W. 303; re Graves (1869), L. K. 4 Q. B. 715 ; 20 L. T. 877 ; Exp. Hatchlnfjs and Romer (187S), 4 Q. B. D. 90 ; 48 L. J. Q. B. 20. " Sect. 14. The person registering may himself apply. Exp. Poi lion (1884), 53 L. J. Q. B. 320. « Sect. 12. ^ The forms can be purchased at Stationers' Hall. 19G THE LAW AFFECTING I'KIM'EK.S. book of the Stationers' Company of my propvietorsliip of such copyright according to tlie i)articalars under- written . Title of Book. y. z. Name of Piiblislier and riace of Publi- cation. Name and Place of abode of the Proprietor of the Copyright. A. B. Date of First Publication. Dated this day of , 18 Witness, C. D. (Signed) A. B. With regard to registration, the following points have been decided : — A forthcoming " book "■^" cannot be registered. The entry must be made after publication.-''' The day of the first publication must be stated : it is not enough to give the month. '''■' The day given must be correct, or the registration will be bad.*"*^ The publisher, whose name and place of abode is to be given, is iho first publisher of the book.''^ The place of business of the publisher or of the proprietor is a sufficient "place of abode."''- The trade name of the firm of publishers is a sufficient " name."^-* The person to be entered as proprietor of the copyright is the person whose the copyright is at the time of regis- tration, and there is no need to state who was the first M For meaning of " book," see page 189. i« Maxwell v. i/oy.y (1SG7), L. 11. 2 Cli. 307 ; 36 L. J. Ch. 433 ; Henderson v. Maxwell (1877), 5 Ch. D. 892 ; 40 L. J. Ch. 891. '•'' Mathicson v. Harrod (1809). L. R. 7 Eq. 270; 38 L. J. Ch. 139. 0" Pa(/e V. Wlsdju (1809), 20 L. T. 43.5 ; 17 W. R. 483. laintiffs copy- right."'' When one author copies fnnu or makes use of the work of anotlicr in such a way as to infringe that other's cojjy- right, the fact that he has in his work made full acknoiv- hdymcnt uf the orl'jiiuil, and has had no dishonest intention '0 (1838) 3 Myl. & Cr. 711. '■ (1807) 1 Camp. 01. '» ,SVj«< v. Jkmliij (lS5t), 10 C 15. l.'.l) ; 24 L. J. C. T. 173. '" Brwlburu v, lloltm (1872), L. U. 8 Ex. 1 ; 42 L. J. Ex. 28. THE LAW AFJ-'KCTING rUINTERS. 201 will not excuse him wliere the ett'ect is of necessity to s ipersede the sale of the original work, or even to injure it/« Remr.ihj for Infrin'jement. — The remedy for Infringement of coi)yright is by action for damages or an injunction or both. As already stated,^' no action will lie unless the work alleged to have been pirated has been duly registered. Any one who prints, or causes to be printed, a work infringing a copyright is liable to be sued, but a mere bookseller or private person is liable only if lie sells it, or hires it out, or has it in his possession for sale or hire, knowing it to be an infringement of a copyright. The words of the statute*^^ are as follows : " That if any person shall in any part of the British dominions after the passing of this Act print or cause to be printed either for sale^'^ or exportation any book in which there shall be subsisting copyright, Avithout the consent in writing of the liro2:)rietor thereof, or shall import for sale or hire any such book so having been inilawfully printed from parts beyond the sea, or knowing such book to have been so unlawfully printed or imported, shall sell, publish, or expose to sale or hire or cause to be sold, published, or exposed to sale or hire, or shall have in his possession for sale or hire, any such book so unlawfully printed or imported, without such consent as aforesaid, such oflender shall be liable to a special action on the case at the suit of the proprietor of such copyright, to be brought in any s' Scott y. SldinJurJ (1S(J7), L. E. 3 E(i. 718; 3G L. J. Ch. 729; Bohi V. Bo(,ue (184G), 10 Jur. 420. "• Page 197. *- 5 and 6 Vict., c. 4o, s. 15. ^ Notwithstanding the words "for sale," it was held in NorcIJo Ludlow (1852), 15 C. B. 177, that where a copyright work was reprinted for gratuitous circulation the owner of the copyright could, by the common law, maintain his action. 202 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. court of record in that part of the British dominions in which the offence shall be committed." The defendant is by sec. 10 of the statute bound to give the plaintiff notice of the objections on which he means to rely. " The defendant on pleading thereto [i.e., to any action for infringement of copyright] shall give to the plaintiff a notice in writing of any objections on which he means to rely on the trial of such action ; and if the nature of his defence be that the plaintiff in such action was not the author or first publisher of the book in which he shall by such action claim copyright, or is not the pro- prietor of the copyright therein, or that some other person than the plaintiff was the author or first publisher of such book, or is the proprietor of the copyright therein, then the defendant shall specify in such notice the name of the person who he alleges to have been the author or first publisher of such book, or the proprietor of the copyright therein, together with the title of such book, and the time when and the place where such book was first published, otherwise the defendant in such action shall not at the trial or hearing of such action be allowed to give any evidence that the plaintiff in such action was not the author or first i)ublisher of the book in which he claims such copyright as aforesaid, or that he was not the proprietor of the copyright therein ; and at such trial or hearing no other objection shall be allowed to be made on behalf of such defendant than the objections stated in such notice, or that any other person was the author or first publisher of such book, or the proprietor of the coi)yright therein, than the person specified in such notice, or give in evidence in support i)f his defence any other book than one substantially corresponding in title, time, and place of publication with the title, time, and place specified in such n otice."^* *"' On this section see Boose'/ v. Pnrday (1.S47), 10 Jur. 1038 ; Leader v. Purda;) (1848), 7 C. 15. 4 ; 18 L. J. (J. V. !»7 ; Booscy v. Davidson (184.S), 13 t^ B. 257 ; 18 L. J. Q. \i. 174 ; Hole v. Bradbury (1870), 12 Cli. D. 88G ; 48 L. J. Ch. (i73 ; Coote v. Judd (1884), 2.-i Ch. D. 727 ; 53 L. J. Ch. 30. THE LAW AFFECTING PEINTEKS. 203 Where a "book "' has bi3eii tirst composed or written or printed and published in the United Kingdom, no one but the proprietor of the copyright in it may (during the existence of such copyright) import or cause to be imported copies of it from abi'oaJ, on penalty of forfeiture of such copies and of £10 for every offence/^ and double the value of every copy so imported.**" Persons who knowingly sell, or hire out, or have for sale or hire books so unlawfully imported are subject to like penalties.^'' Proceedings under the Copyright Act (except for getting books for the British Museum and the four other privileged libraries) must be commenced within twelve calendar '* months next after the ott'ence complained of. But this does njt prevent an action for an injunction to restrain the infringement of a copyright by continued sale of a book published more than twelve months before the commence- ment of the action.^" In order to give sufficient evidence of pahllcation, a copy of a work whereof the publication is to be proved must, as a rule, be produced in court and identified. The state- ment of Avitnesses that they have seen such is not enough if the book itself is possibly producible."** The Damages in a case of infringement of copyright are estimated thus : the defendant is to account for every copy of his book sold as if it had been a copy of the plaintiff's, ^'' Two or more offences agaiust this law (which re-enacts a statute of Geo. II.) may be committed on the same day, Brooke v. Millikiii (1789), 3 T. R. 509. •*" 5 and 6 Vict., c. 15, s. 17. Customhouse officers are by the same section empowereil to seize such books and destroy them. Hence the inquiry for Tauchnitz editions on arriving at an English port after Continental travel. ^' Ibid. *" Sect. 26. «' Hogg V. Scoit (1874), L. R. 18 Eenalty of one penny for every sheet of the book infringing the copyright (half to go to the Crown and half to the informer), and the forfeiture of the sheets themselves."' liiij]tts of Public Libraries. — A copy of the first edition of every "book" published in any part of the British Dominions, and a copy of every subsequent edition thereof containing additions and alterations, must be delivered at the British Museum on a business day, between 10 and 4 o'clock : {<() if published in London, within one month of ])ublication ; ('*) if published elsewhere in the United Kingdom, within three months ; and (c) if published else- where, within twelve months of publication. It must be on the best paper used, must be perfect, with all maps, &c., and must be bound, stitched, or sewed. If demanded, a cr)i)y of every edition of every book pub- lished must be delivered to the proper officer at Stationers' Hall for each of the following libraries : the Bodleian at "' Pike V. Nicholas (18G9), L. K. 5 Ch. 200 ; 39 L. J. Ch. 435. "■- 5 and G Vict., c. 4r>, s. 23 ; Colburn v. >s';,i>w.< (IXi?,), 2 Hare 543 ; JJelfe V. Jhlamoltc (1■ .]//<„• (1872) I. K U K.i. i:!l ; II L. J. Cli. 7^1. THE LAW AFKECTINC PKINTKllS. 215 the 2)laiiitifts were not entitled to an injunction because the mode of treating of subjects by question and answer was very old, and because the title of the second book was not so similar to that of the first as to be calculated to deceive.^'* Tn Kelly v. Bijles,^^ the plaintiffs had for years brought out "Post Office" Directories of many towns, including Bradford, and the defendants having announced that they were about to bring out " The Bradford Post Office Direc- tory," an action was brought to restrain them from doing so. It was held by Vice-Chancellor Bacon and the Court of Appeal that the plaintiffs had no exclusive right to the words " post office,'' ^" and the defendants' work bearing no similarity in appearance or price to the plaintiffs', the action was dismissed. In Maxwell v. Hogg,^^ the dispute was about the title " Belgravia " for a magazine. Messrs. Hogg had in 18G3 conceived the idea of bringing out a magazine entitled "Belgravia : a magazine of fashion and amusement," and they the same year registered that title at Stationers' Hall, but did not publish the magazine. In 18GG Mr. Maxwell arranged to bring out "Belgravia: a London magazine," and advertised that he would issue the first number on a given day. Messrs. Hogg thereupon hastily prepared a number of a magazine and issued it, under the title of " Belgravia," a few days before Mr. Maxwell's came out, and on the publication of the latter there were cross- actions. It was decided that neither party was entitled to an injunc- tion. Messrs. Hogg got no right by registering a bare 38 Jarroldv. Houlston (1857), 3 K. & J. 708. '' (1880) 13 Ch. D. GS2 ; 49 L. J. Ch. 181. ^^ There were "Post Office Directories" at Bath, Edinburgh, and other places not published by the plaintiffs, and there were two "Post Office Directories " of London, one by the plaintiffs and the other by another publisher. ^' (1SC7), L, IJ. 2 Ch. 307 ; 3(J L. J. Ch. 433, 216 THK LAW AFKEl'TINO I'RINTKKS. title or idea,^'- and Mr. Maxwell gained no exclusive right to the title " Belgravia " because he had first advertised it ; then, too, Messrs. Hogg, although their magazine was out before Mr. Maxwell's, could not restrain Mr. Maxwell from bringing out a luagazine under the same title, l^ecause their magazine had lieen out too short a time to have become known to the public, and therefore the publishing of the second "Belgravia'' could not deceive. Thus the tinal result was that each party was held entitled to publish a magazine called " Belgravia," leaving the trade and the public to distinguish ])etween the two as they could. Bee ante, p. 188. THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 217 CHAPTER XVI. RELATIONS BETWEEN AUTHORS AND PUBLISHERS. Few books are brought out by tlieir autliors without the intervention of a publislier. Tlie terms between autlior and publisher are entirely matters of agreement. Thus, the publisher may employ the author to write the book for him, and then the copyrigLt will belong to the publisher if that was expressly or im- pliedly part of the bargain, but otherwise it will belong to the author.^'' Or the autlior may employ the publisher to publish his work, in which case, in the absence of agreement to the contrary, the copyright and the profits will belong exclu- sively to the author, and the publisher will be entitled to charge him a reasonable sum for the work he does in addition to all proper expenses. But where the copyright is not purchased out and out by the publisher it is usual that there should be an agreement between him and the author as to outlays and profits. A common agreement is that the publisher shall at his own risk and expense print and publish the work in question, and that he shall pay the author a royalty on each copy sold. Another common agreement is that the iiublisher shall at his own risk print and publish the work, and shall pay the author one half of the net profits. Reade v. Bentley ** was a very instructive case on one of these agreements. There Mr. Charles Reade, the well- known author, entered into an agreement with Mr. Bentley, the publisher, that the latter " should publish at his own expense and risk a work called 'Peg Wofhngton,' and after deducting from the produce of the sale thereof the charges for printing, paper, advertisements, embellishments, if any, *^ See ante, p. 193, and Siveet v. Benning and Walter v. Hoive, there cited. '* (1857) 3 Kay & J. 271 ; 27 L. J. Ch. 254. 218 THE LAW AKFP:('TIN-0 PKINTEIIS. and other incidental expenses, including the allowance of £10 per cent, on the gross amount of the sale for commission and risk of bad debts, the profits remaining of every edition that should be printed of the work were to be divided into two equal jiarts, one moiety to be paid to Mr. Reade and the other to belong to Mr. Bentley ; the books to be accounted for at the trade sale price, reckoning twenty- five copies as twenty-four, unless it was thought advisable to dispose of any copies, or of the remainder at a lower price, which was left to the judgment and discretion of Mr. Bentley." The questions which arose were : 1. Whose was the copyright ? 2. Could the agreement be put an end to at any time ? and if so, when and by whom ? 3. What control had the author over print, paper, binding, or price ? and 4. What constituted an "edition" ? It was decided by Vice-Chancellor Wood : 1. That the copyright belonged to Mr. Reade exclusively, and that the agreement in nowise amounted to an assignment of it ; 2. That the agreement could be determined by Mr. Bentley at any time by his refusing to publish any more, and that it could be determined by Mr. Reade on the completion of any edition, by giving notice to Mr. Bentley to that effect before any expense had been incun^ed towards another edition ; 3. That the form, price, time, number, &c., of every edition were left to the sole judgment and discretion of Mr. Bentley ; and 4. That " edition " meant every quantity of books issued to the public or the trade at one time, and that when the advertisements, the printing, and otiier well- known expenses and acts by a publisher bringing out such quantity of copies in the ordinary way are closed, that con- stitutes the completion of the edition, whether the copies are taken from type or from stereotype, and whether the type is broken up or not, and whether all the copies printed arc given forth and advertised for sale or retained and stored in the warehouse of the publisher. A "half-profits" agreement between an author and a publisher has l)een held to be a personal one, and there- THE LAW AFFEC'TINC PKINTEirs. 210 fore in the absence of express provision to tlie contrary, the publisher cannot assign his interest to another. ^^ Where an autlioress agreed with a publisher that he should publish a work at his own ex})ense and pay her a royalty on the copies sold, and before all the copies printed were sold she arranged with another publisher to bring out a second edition, it was held that the first publisher could not restrain her or the second publisher, for there was no implied agreement on her part not to bring out a new edition.^" But where a publisher purchased the coj^yright of and the right to use tJie name of the defendant in " Beeton's Christmas Annual," and the defendant agreed to give his Avhole time to the service of the publisher, and not to engage in any other business, the defendant was restrained from advertising a rival woik.^" And where tlie author of a work which had run through nine editions agreed that a certain publisher should pub- lish the tenth edition of 2,500 copies at a fixed price per copy, it was decided that the publisher could restrain any interference on the part of the author with the sale of such edition.^** It seems that unless there is a special contract, express or implied, reserving to the author a qualified copyright, the purchaser of a manuscript is at liberty to alter and deal with it as he thinks proper. ^^ But where the publisher and proprietor of the copyright of "Archbold's Practice" got to edit an edition of that work a person who did his work very badly, and the book was advertised as "Archbold's Practice" without *' Stevens v. Benning (1855), G De G. M. & G. 223 ; 24 L. J. Oh. 153 ; Hole v. Bnidbun/ (1870), 12 Ch. D. 886 ; 48 L. J. Ch. G73. « Warne v. Routledge (1874), L. R. IS Eq. 497 ; 43 L. J. Ch. G04. Ward V. Beeton (1875), L. K. 19 Eq. 207. " Sioett V. Cater (1841), 11 Sim. 572, ^^ Cox V. Cox (1853), 11 Hare 118 (per V.-C. Wood). 220 THE LAW AFFKCTINC PKINTEKS. intimation that Mr. Arclibold was not the editor of that edition, it was held that damages could be recovered from the publisher for injury to the author's reputation.''" No action lies against the executors of an author who has contracted to write a book and who dies before com- pleting it f^ and a bankrupt author cannot be compelled by his creditors' trustee to finish a work."- Where the author is proprietor of valuable artistic de- signs, and employs and pays a publisher to lay them down on litliographic stones, and to print copies therefrom, the property in the work on the stones belongs to the former, and the printer or publisher is not at liberty to rub the designs off, although the stones themselves belong to him ; but the proprietor of the designs may insist on having the stones delivered up to him with the designs upon them on paying the market price of the stones as plain stones ; and if the printer or publisher improperly rubs off such designs he will be liable to pay damages.'-' It is doubtful whether this holds good as regards com- mercial lithographic work. so Archhold v. Sweet (1832), 1 M. k Rob. 02 ; .5 C. k P. 219. s> Marshall v. Broadhur&t (1831), 1 Tyr. 349. i2 Gibson V. Carnithers (1841), 8 M. k W. at page 343. » Verc FoMerv. Marcus Ward and Co. (1882), 9 L. 11. Ireland 440; see also Hole v. Brudbiirii (1879), 12 CIi. D. S80 ; 48 L. J. Cli. 073 (as to blocks). TriE LAW AFFECTINO PRINTERS. 221 CHAPTER XVII. THE NOISE OF PRINTING MACHINERY, ETC. The noise made by printing and other machinery is some- times so great that it amounts to a nuisance, and in such case the working of the machinery will be restrained by in- junction, and occasionally damages also will be awarded to the party complaining."^ If I erect and work noisy machinery in close proximity to houses used as private residences, it is not unnatural that I should be held liable for disturbing the rest and quiet of the inhabitants, and for injuring the value of the property adjoining. But it is not so natural that I should be liable if I liave for years worked noisy machinery in certain buildings remote from othei'S, and then the owner of land adjoining mine, with full knowledge of my machinery, choo&es to put up a dwelling-house or other building so close to mine that my machinery is a nuisance to the persons who inhabit his building. Yet I am equally responsible in this case as in the other. The law on this point was laid down by the late Master of the Rolls (Sir G. Jessel) and by the Court of Appeal in the case of t^turges v. Brldgiiuui.'"'-' There the plaintifi' was a physician who lived in a house in Wimpole Street with a short garden behind it, at the bottom of which garden were the premises of the defendant, a confectioner, who used three large pestles and mortars for pounding materials for his business. These pounding machines were worked for very many years without annoyance to the doctor, until tlie latter built out on his garden a new consultation-room, and then the noise and vil;)ration much disturbed him whenever he used that room, and interfered with his auscultatory •'' Crump V. Lambert (1867), L. E. 3 Eq. 409 ; Fenwick v. i. Land, li;/. Co. (1875), L. K. 20 Eq. 544 ; Stiirges v. Bridgman (1870), 11 Ch. D. 852, 48 L. J. Ch. 785. " (1879) 11 <-'li. D. 8.-12 ; 8 L. J. Oh. 785. 222 THE LAW AFFEOTINO PRINTERS. examination of patients. He accordingly brought an action claiming an injunction. The defendant pleaded that his pounding machines had been used where they were, one for sixty years and the other for twenty-six years, and he , claimed to be entitled to a prescriptive right to use them. There was no disjiute as to the nuisance, and the only question was whether the defendant had as against the plaintiff acquired a right to make the noise. It was held that he had not. Until the new consulting-room was built there was no actionable nuisance at all, and therefore the length of time the machinery had been used availed nothing. Judgment was accordingly given for the plaintiff. It is no answer to any action for nuisance that the plaintiff chose to come to it.'''' If I have a piece of land next to a forge, so long as I make no use of it I cannot ask to restrain the noise of the forge ; but on the other hand the blacksmith cannot prevent me from using my land as I please, and if I build a house next to his forge and am then distui'bed it is no answer to my action for an injunction to restrain the nuisance for him to say that ho has been there many years, and that I might liave known what to expect. If it were an answer, then, without buying my land or making me compensation, the blacksmith might practically prevent my making use of my property.^'' But if after the noise or other nuisance has become actionable the plaintiff", or those who preceded him in occu- pation or ownership of the property affected, have ac(]uiesced in it for a considerable period, such acquiescence will be a bar to any action in respect of the nuisance. " When you find a man doing an act which is a manifest injury to another, such as fouling a stream by pouring the refuse of a manufactory into the bright trout stream of his neighbour, and his neighbour allows that to go on for a great number of years, it is not unreasonable to presume that he did it *» Tipping v. St. Helen's Smelting Co. (1866), T,. K. 1 Ch. 66. "' Bee per .Fossnl, ^^. It., in Sliirf/n^ v. /Iriilr/mxii. The law affecting pkinteks. 225 under some right. If he has done it openly, and his neigh- Lour does not compLain of that injury, although it is a very serious injury, it is not unreasonable to suppose that they did come to terms at some antecedent period for granting a right." ''** But " in general a man cannot establish a right by lapse of time and acquiescence against his neighbour, unless he shows that the party against whom the right is acquired might have brought an action or done some act to put a stop to the claim without an unreasonable waste of labour and expense."'^'' By general acquiescence of the inhabitants of particular districts, noisy and ofiensive trades may by degrees law- fully be carried on there. A man could not now by build- ing a house on a vacant i:)lot of land in Bermondsey, or going into occupation of one already built there, get an in- junction against the offensive smell of the tanneries which are so numerous in that locality. " Whether anything is a nuisance or not is a question to be determined, not merely by an abstract consideration of the thing itself, but in reference to its circumstances. What would be a nuisance in Belgrave Square would not necessarily be so in Ber- mondsey, and where a locality is devoted to a particular trade or manufacture carried on by the traders or manu- facturers in a particular and established manner not con- stituting a i^ublic nuisance, judges and juries Avould be justified in finding, and may be trusted to find, that the trade or manufacture so carried on in that locality is not a private or actionable nuisance." ™ But if another nuisance be added to existing and per- mitted nuisances in such a way as to considerably increase *" Per Jessel, M. R., in Sturyes v. Bridgman. '"> Per Willes, J., in Wchh v. Bird (1861), 10 C. B. N. S. 2G8 ; 30 L. J. C. P. 384. 'i' Per Thesiger, L. .J., in Strmjcs v. Brid7-2), h. R. 8 L'h. X ; 42 L. J. i'h. 122 ; Shir;ir.s v. liriihniinn, ul>i sup. THE LAW AFFECTING X'KINTERS. 225 woode (April, 1886) ; Deakin and Smith v. Jaffray — Bir- mingham Daily Post case — (May, 1885; Aug., 1885, and May, 188G). The ringing of bells and the blowing of steam whistles to summon workpeople has been restrained by injunction when it has amounted to a nuisance/'^ « See Soltau v. De Held (1851), 2 Sim. N, S. 133. Hardman v. Hol- hertov, W. N. 1886, p. 379. Also ante, p. 119. 226 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. CHAPTER XVIII. MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS. To attempt to deal with the whole of the law which should regulate the conduct of printers and newspaper proprietors in their businesses in a single small book would, as stated in the preface, be ridiculous. There are, however, some matters which may properly be referred to here, because of their special importance to those for whom this work is written. Contracts. — On contracts the rights and liabilities of printers and newspaper proi:)rietors are the same as those of other people, except so far as they may be varied by well-established exigencies and customs of the trade. Thus, if I order 140 lb. of raisins I must take them, big and little, just as they come out of the barrel, and I cannot be made to take more than 140 lb. But if I order 140 lb. of pica tyjie I am entitled to expect a proper projiortion of each letter of the alphabet, and if the fount sent me weighs 143, or even 148 lb. , I am bound by the custom of the trade to take it, and to jiay for the full weight ; because it is Avell known that in making up a fount of type the weight ordered cannot always be accurately ai-rived at. Cuidracts, Written and U}iwrittcn. — Unless required by some statute, no simple contract, except a Bill of Exchange, need be in writing. The Act of Parliament which chiefly affects tliis matter is the Statute of Frauds, 29 Car. II., c. 3, and of this statute the most important sections are the 4th and the 17th. The 4t]i section enacts " That no action shall be brought whereby to charge any executor or administrator upon any special promise to answer damages out of Iiis own estate ; or whereby to charge the defendant upon any special promise to answer for the debt, default, or miscarriage of another person ; or to charge any person ui)on any contract made in consideration of marriage ; or upon any contract or I THE LAW AFFECTINc; rHINTElW. 227 sale of lands, tenements, or hereditaments, or any interest in or concerning them ; or upon any agreement that is not to be iierformed within the space of one year from the making thereof ; unless the agreement upon which such action shall be brought, or some memorandum or note thereof shall be in writing, and signed by the party to be charged thereAvith or some other person thereunto by him lawfully authorised." The 17th section enacts "That no contract for the sale of any goods, wares, or merchandise for the price [value] of ten pounds sterling or upwards shall be allowed to be good, except the buyer shall accept part of the goods so sold, and actually receive the same, or give something in earnest to bind the bargain, or in part payment, or that some note or memorandum in writing of the said bargain be made and signed by the parties to be charged by such contract or their agents thereunto lawfully authorised. " This statute has given rise to hundreds, and perhaps thousands of decisions, and long treatises have been written upon it. As regards the 4tli section, the points chiefly to be remembered by tradesmen are (1) That a guarantee is of no value unless it be in writing signed by the guarantor or his duly authorised agent ; (2) That where a contract cannot be performed within one year from the making of it, it cannot be enforced unless it be in writing signed as aforesaid. Thus, if I engage a servant for a year, service to commence to-day, no writing is neces- sary ; but if I engage him for a year from to-morrow, the contract cannot be enforced by action unless it be reduced into writing, notwithstanding that it can be determined by notice within the year.'^'^ Only contracts which cannot be pei'formed on either side within a year are within the statute. Thus, a contract to sell and assign a patent to be paid for by instalments extending beyond a "■ Dvbson V. CoUU (1S5G), 1 H. & N. SI ; 25 L. J. Ex 2G7 228 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. year was held not within the statute because it might be performed by the seller within the year.'''' But a contract to take in a literary work (to be published periodically) in parts extending over more than a year, and to be paid for as the parts are delivered, requires to be in writing.^'' And it would be the same with contracts for the insertion of advertisements extending over more than 12 months. As regards the 17th section, if a man gives me an order for goods of the value of £10 and upwards without partly paying for them or giving earnest money, and he after- wards refuses to accept them, I am without remedy unless his order, or some note thereof, was in writing signed by him or his agent. By reason of the Statute of Frauds and of the Stamp Act (to be mentioned shortly), it sometimes becomes im- portant to ascertain whether a particular contract is one for work and materials or one for the sale of goods, Avares, or merchandise. If it be the former a verbal order suffices, if the latter it will not suffice if there should be a repudiation. The question was raised in Clay v. Yates,'^^ whether the contract entered into by a printer to print for the defendant a second edition of a woi'k previously published by the defendant, the plaintifl' to find the pajier and other materials, was a contract for work and materials or a contract for the sale of goods. It was held that it was I)roperly a contract for work and materials, the true ground of the decision being that the icJwle of the materials required were not suj^plied by the piiuter : the [literary] composition — a substantial ingredient — was supi)lied by the defendant,"^ and belonged to him already, and therefore it could not be sold to him by the jn-inter. But where a dentist contracted to make and supply to a lady a set of teeth for a certain sum, this was held a con- «« C/icrr;/ v. Jlcmiiirj (ISii)), I Ex. 031. «■ Boydell V. Drvmmond (1^01)), 11 East 142. " (18.5(1) 1 H. & N. 73 ; 25 L. J. Ex. 237. <" Benjamin ou Sales, 2iul El., p. 87. THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 2£9 tract for the sale of goods — all the materials were to be supplied by him, and the contract would result in the sale of a chattel.™ Therefore, if a printer contract to print any literary or other work whereof the "copy" is supplied by the em- ployer, the contract need not be in writing, although the bill for the work will come to £10 and upwards ; but if he undertake to supply so many copies of such and such a work, and the employer furnishes no "coi)y," nor any appreciable part of the materials, it is a contract for the sale of goods, and within the 17th section of the Statute of Frauds. By another Statute (9 Geo. IV., c. 14) a promise to pay a debt barred by the Statute of Limitations must be in writing signed by the party making it. Agreement Stamp — ivJien reqitired. — Every ordinary agree- ment in writing (with some exceptions, the most important of which will be noticed later) is required by the Stamp Act, 1870, to bear a sixpenny stamp.'''- This may be either an adhesive or an impressed stamp. If the former it must be cancelled at the time of making the agreement by the pei'son hrst signing putting on the stamji his name or initials, or the name and initials of his firm, and the date.''' If it be not so stamped, the document may be imprftssed with a stamp (at Somerset House or other Inland Revenue office) either before execution or after. If after execution, it must be brought to be stamped within 14 days from its date if it bears one, or from its execution if it does not bear a date, or it will not be stamped without payment of a penalty. The penalty is £10, but if within a year of the first execution of the document the Commissioners of Inland Revenue be memorialised, and a good excuse be '» Lee V. Griffin (ISGl), 1 B. & S. 272 ; 30 L. J. Q. B. 252. '' An agreement to let or take a house, office, &c., requires stamping as a lease : a sixpenny stamp is generally of no use. '2 Stamp Act, 1870 (33 and 34 Vick., c. 97), s. 24. 230 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. offered for not stamping the document in time, the penalty- will be mitigated, though there is hardly ever less than 10s. penalty to pay. If a document which requires a stamp be unstamped, it cannot be received in evidence in any court of civil proce- dure unless the stamp duty, and the full penalty of £10, together with £1 more, be handed to the ofhcer of the court. '^ And where the terms of a contract are in writing, the writing nmst be given in evidence. Where the con- tract is made by two documents — say letters — it is suffi- cient if one of them bears a sixpenny stamp ; but for pru. dence' sake each party to the contract should stamp (with. an impressed stamp) the letter or other document which is in his jjossession. Agreements which do not require a Stamp. — 1. " Agreement or memorandum, the matter whereof is not of the value of £5." 2. "Agreement or memorandum for the hire of any labourer, artificer,''^ manufacturer, or menial servant." 3. "Agreement, letter, or memoi'andum made for or re- lating to the sale of any goods, wares, or merchandise." "^ If one party puts in writing the terms on which he will contract with another, and that other assents verbally, the writing Avill be admitted in evidence without a stamp.''' From what has been written above, it follows that a con- tract to print a work from ''copy" sup2)lied by the employer need not be in writing, but that if it is, it must be stamped with a Gd. stamp if the value of the matter of the contract be £5 or more. ■3 Ibid., s. IG. " An overseer of a printing oHico was lield an "artificer" in Bls/tojj V, Letts (1858), 1 F. & ¥. 401. " Stamp Act, 1870, Scheilule tit. "Agreement." ••' Drant v. Brmon (182.5), 3 B. & C. C(i5 ; Haickins v. Warde (1825), 3 B. & C. GOO ; Hudspeth v. Yarnold (1850), !) C. B. G25 ; Chn, v Crofts (1851), 20 L. J. Ex. 3G1. THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 231 An order for an advertisement, accepted verbally, or impliedly by the inseition of the advertisement, does not require a stamp. But where the order is for a series of advertisements ex- tending over a period of time, and it amounts in value to £5 and upwards, it is prudent to get a Gd. stamp impressed upon it ; though if it be verbally assented to, or fully executed, it does not, in the writer's opinion (based upon the cases cited), require one. A contract for the supply of newspapers or books is a "contract for the sale of goods, wares, or merchandise," "within both the Statute of Frauds and the Stamp Act. Executory Contracts. — If one man contract with another to sell and deliver goods, or to make or do anything for him, and nothing be said as to the time within which the contract is to be fulfilled, the law implies a reasonable time. What is a reasonable time is a question for the jury, or judge if there be no jury — in each case having regard to all the circumstances. Thus, where the plaintifl's agreed to make for the defen- dants a special facing and boi-ing machine for £730, the same to be completed as soon as possible — " say about eight or nine weeks " — and the machine was ready for delivery and tendered eight months after the order for it was given, when it was refused on the ground of the delay, it was held that the defendants were justified in refusing to accept it.''' When goods are ordered to be delivered by a certain day, -and the time of delivery is an essential part of the bargain, if they are not delivered by that day the purchaser can refuse to take them at all, and may claim damages for the vendor's breach of contract. So, too, if one man employs another to do work for him to be finished by a certain time, and through no fault of the employer the time is exceeded, the employer may " Muir V. Anglo-American Brush Electric Lighting Corporation (per Grove, J., and Huddleston,B.), Times, Nov., 1883. 232 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. claim, or set off against the charges for the work, damages for the delay. Damages. — The damages recoverable for a breach of con- tract are such as are the natural result of the breach, or as are presumed to have been in contemplation of the parties at the time of making the contract. They may sometimes be very much less than the loss actually sustained from the breach. For instance, suppose a printer agrees to print an engineer's illustrated catalogue and deliver it by a certain day ; he fails to do so, and in consequence of not having the catalogues the engineer loses an order out of which he would have made £1,000 profit : the printer is not liable to make good this lo? s. Damages under Sub-Contrads. — It is a common thing for a printer to undertake work the whole of which he cannot perform himself, and to give out some of it to a sub- contractor. Sometimes the printer contracts to get the work done by a certain time, and he is prevented from carrying out his contract by reason of the default of one of his sub-contractors. The question then arises whether he can recover from such sub-contractor the damages which he sustains. It does not at all follow that he can. It depends upon these matters : first, whether such damages are the natural consequence of the sub-contractor's default apart from all consideration of the head contract. If they are, then he can recover them from such sub-contractor ; if they are not, then he can only recover from the sub-contractor the amount of the damages which are the natural consa- quence of that sub-contractor's default apart from consideration of the head contract, unless at or before the time when the sub-contract was entered into the sub- contractor was informed of the head contract, and of the effect a breach of contract on his part would have upon the head contractor. Thus, suppose I enter into a contract to print a work m letterpress with coloured plates, and to deliver it bound THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 233 by a certain day under penalty of £10 a day as liquidated damages for every day's delay. The chrouio work I give to Smith, ordering him to have it ready by a fixed day, giving me ample time to fulfil my contract if he fulfils his. He fails and is a week late, whereby I have to pay £50 in penalties. I cannot recover from Smith more than the ordinary damages for delivering his work a week late, which would perhaps be a few sliillings only. But if before Smith took the job, I told him what my contract was, and what penalty I was under, then, if his default was the reason for my having to pay the £50, I could recover that sum from him. The same principles would apply if I con- tracted with X. to make for him a certain thing by a certain day, and I gave an order for some part of that thing to Z., who made default and thereby made me break my con- tract, in consequence of which X. refused to take the goods. I could only get from Z. as damages the full mea- sure of my loss of profit if, before he undertook the work gave him, I informed him of the nature of my contrac with X."8 Warranty. — A warranty may be either express or implied. It must be made at the time of the bargain or it will (generally) be of no avail."'* If the terms of the bargain be in writing the warranty must also be in the writing, or it will be of no use.^** No sjiecial form of words is necessary to create a warranty, provided one is intended. The law in some cases implies a warranty, as where goods are sold by sample or by description, or are sold for a particular purpose. Where goods are sold with a warranty of quality, express or implied, and the warranty is not fulfilled, the buyer has the choice of three remedies : (1) He may refuse to '8 See Hydraulic Engineer ing Co. v. McHaffie (1878), 4 Q. B. D. 670. •^ Hopkins V. Tanquei-aii (1854), 1.5 C. B. 130 ; 23 L. J. 0. P. 1(52. s» Kain V. Old ',1824), 2 B. & C. «27. 234 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. accept the goods (except in the case of a specific chattel in which tlie property has passed to him) ; ^^ or (2) he may accept the goods and bring a cross-action for the breach of warranty ; or (3) he may accept the goods, and if he has not paid for them he may deduct from or set off against their price the proper damages for the breach of warranty, and in ordinary circumstances these damages are the dif- ference between the value of the goods delivered and the value of the goods contracted for. Sales by Sample. — A sale by sample is a sale with an im- plied warranty by the vendor that the quality of the bulk shall be equal to that of the sample. But it does not necessarily follow that where a sample is shown by the vendor about tlie time of the bargain that the sale was a sale by sample.''- In a sale of goods by sample it is an implied condition that the buyer shall have a fair opportunity of comparing the bulk with the sample, and an improper refusal by the vendor to allow this will justify the buyer in rejecting the contract. *■* Sales by DescrijiUon. — If goods be sold by description, and the buyer does not inspect them, there is a condition pre- cedent that they shall answer the description, and an im- plied warranty that they shall be saleable or merchantable.^'' Sale of Article for Spec'ifie Purpose. — Where an article is sold or supplied for a specific purpose there is an implied warranty that it is reasonably fit for that purpose, and if it is not, the vendor is liable for the damages resulting. Thus, where a carriage pole broke by reason of a defect "' He is not bound to return the goods, but need only give notice that he rejects them ; it will then be the vendor's duty to fetch tliem away. Grimoldbii v. Wells (1875), L. K. 10 C P. 3i»l ; 14 L. J C. r. 203. "'- See IJenjainin on Sales, 2nd Edn., p. 528. Lorymerv. Smith (1822), 1 B. & C. 1. '■' Benjamin on Sales, 2nd Edn., p. 530. THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 235 therein, and two valuable horses were thereby frightened and became injured, the person who supijlied the pole was held liable for the damage to the horses (£130).*^ Therefore if a printer buys a printing machine there is an implied warranty on the pai't of the seller that it will print, and if before buying it the printer informs the seller that he wants it for a certain kind of work, and the vendor sells it for that work, there is an implied warranty that it is fit therefor. Having stated so much generally, we will now consider shortly — I. The Bights and Liabilities of Printers as respects their Customers or Ernployers. — The printer who executes work for a customer is entitled to charge for it the stipulated sum, or if no sum has been stipulated for, the amount that it is reasonably worth. It is hardly necessary to say that if a man contract to do work for a certain sum he cannot charge more for it, even though he lose by the bargain. If a printer receive an order for certain work, and nothing be said as to credit or delivery, he is entitled to payment as soon as the work is finished, and the employer has notice that it is ready. If it be part of the bargain that the printer should deliver, payment cannot be de- manded until the work has been delivered ; but on the other hand, the employer cannot force the printer to part with it till he pays for it. If the work be done on credit, payment cannot be enforced till the credit has expired, and if a bill be taken for the price, no action can be brought for the price till the bill has matured and been dishonoured. Further, if a definite period of credit have been agreed upon, the printer cannot take steps to recover his debt until that period has elapsed, although he have good reason to believe that his debtor is rapidly becoming insolvent. «' Randall v. Newson (1877), 2 Q. B. D. 102 ; 46 L. J. Q. B. 259. 23G THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. But should the goods not have been actually delivei-ed, he may stop them if he have good reason to believe that his customer is insolvent, and under such circumstances he may demand payment before being compelled to deliver. If a printer have undertaken to execute a certain job by a particular time, and fail to keep his promise, he may be made to pay damages, but, as we have seen, only such as flow naturally from the breach of the contract. As already stated, it is not necessary that a contract to print a book or a job should be in writing, but if it be in writing — and it is often desirable that it should be — it must be stamped with a sixpenny stamp. If a printer knowingly print a book of an immoral, obscene, or libellous nature, he cannot recover the cost of printing ; and he will in general be presumed to know the nature of a work printed in his office.^*' But if the price of the printing is paid beforehand it cannot be recovered back again by the customer. If a printer undertakes to print a book or other work, and after he has got part of it up in type and has worked off several sheets, he discovers that it becomes libellous or immoral, he is justified in declining to go on with the work, and he can insist upon being paid for all the work he has done upon the job up to the time when he made the discovery. ^^ If a man bring libellous or obscene matter to a printer and ask him to print it, promising that if he do so he, the customer, will indemnify him from all costs and damages that may arise from so doing, this promise, even though in writing, is of no legal effect, and the printer cannot recover any expense he may be put to by reason of printing the objectionable matter ; the reason being that it is contrary to public policy to allow such a contract to be valid. ®® '" See PopUtl V. Stockdale (1825), 1 K, & M. 337 ; Fores v. Johnes (1802), 4 Esp. 07. " Chtij V. Yates (1850), 1 11. k N. 73 ; 25 L. ,T. Ex. 237. " Shache'.l v. Uosicr (1S3G), 2 liiug. N. 0. (534. 'IHE LAW AFFECTING PRINTEltS. 287 Suppose the printer of a newspaper stipulates with the proprietor, before he takes the contract to print it, that if any of its nuuibex's shall contain libellous matter the pro- prietor shall hold him harmless ; it is doubtful whether even such an agreement as this would be valid. A customer is not justified in refusing to accept a book or other job because there are a few errors in it. News- paper proprietors have even been allowed to recover the price of advertisements when they have mis-spelt the adver- tiser's name, such mis-spelling not being very serious. But if the errors are very numerous or glaring, and evince gross carelessness on the part of the printer, the customer may refuse to accept the work. So, too, if the contract be that a printer shall print a job in a certain manner, or equal to a certain sample, and it be done in some other manner, or in a way inferior to the sample, the printer cannot force his customer to take the work or pay for it. Should the customer, however, take the work, although it be not in accordance with the contract, the printer will be entitled to recover a fair price for it, not exceeding the contract price. If a person contracts to do work upon or with some pro- perty of another, and he by unskilfulness or negligence spoils or injures that property, the employer (owner of the property) can recover damages against him for the injury so done to it. An artificer who has done work upon goods is entitled to a lien on such goods till he is paid for his work^'' ; so a printer has a lien on the sheets he prints, and on the stereo plates he makes for the work, but he has no lien on the " copy," or on stereo plates not manufactured by him, but put into his hands to print from, unless by express contract between him and his employer.'^" ^' See also ante, p. 72. ^ Bleaden v. Bancock (1829), M. & ]M. 4tt.i. 238 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. A lien is lost if possession of the thing is parted with, or if a cheque or bill of exchange be taken in payment. But where a printer had printed 8,750 copies of a work, published in numbers, and had delivered about 0,000, he was held entitled to retain the rest till he was paid the whole account for printing the work, and this though a separate charge was made for printing each number."^ But if there be separate contracts as to two works, there is no lien on one work for payment due upon the other."- In 1808"'^ it was found to be the custom of the trade that a printer was not entitled to recover for pi'inting a work until the whole was worked off. And where a printer was employed to print a work, of which the impression was to be a certain number of copies, and a fire broke out and consumed the premises before the whole number (750 copies) was worked oS, the jjrinter was, by reason of such custom, not allowed to recover anything, although a part (210 copies) had actually been delivered."* But the law, when uncontrolled by custom, is that a person who performs work for another is entitled to be paid for his labour where the work is destroyed, without any fault of his, before it is completed or delivered to the employer. "^ It was proved in 1809 that there was no general custom of the trade by which printers were bound to insure for their employers the pajier of the works which they print."'^ Where a printer contracted to insure for his employer the paper sent to him for printing a work, and he etiected an insurance on the property in his printing othce in his own name, and a fire having broken out, he recovered the amount of the insurance, but less than his own loss, it was "' Blake V. Nichohon (1814), 3 M. & S. 1()7. »■-• Ford V. Bciijnton {1S.S2), 1 Dow. P. C. 357. 93 (Jilktt V. Maiomaii, 1 Tuunt. 137. »' Adland v. Booth (1835), 7 C. & V. lOS. "^ GiUctt V. Mawmaii, ubi sup. "'' Mawmaii v. (.'(V/t^ (1809), 2 T.iuiit. 325. THK LAW AFFECTINCi PRINTEKS. 239 held that that could not be set off as money rjceived on account of the employer for the printing."' But under the present law the employer would be able to set off by way of counterclaim the damages he sustained by reason of the breach of a contract to insure. When a printer is employed to print more than one number of a newspaper or magazine, it is the custom in London that the work shall not be removed from him until he receives a month's notice of the employers' intention so to remove it. The reason for this custom is to prevent the printer being left suddenly with a staff of men with nothing to do, and to enable him to seek work to replace that he is losing. A debt which has been owing more than six years, or on account of which no p?yment has been made within six years, is barred by the Statute of Limitation, unless within six years prior the commencement of an action the debtor acknowledge it in writing, signed by him, in such a way that the Qourt can from such acknowledgment infer a promise to pay it. II. The Liabilities of Printers to Third Parties. — Liabilities which do not arise out of a contract arise out of the breach of some legal duty, technically called a tort. The printer, like every one else, is responsible for all torts committed by him, or by his servant Avithin the scope of his employment.'''^ Liability in respect of torts most commonly committed by printers and publishers, such as Libel, Infringement of Copyright, and Nuisance by Noise, have been already con- sidered. There remains, however, one subject upon which a few words may be said. When a man has a place of business he is taken to im- pliedly invite thither all persons who have business to do with him, and whenever a person expressly or impliedly "' Gilictt V. Maicman (1808), 1 Taunt. 137. °* As to a master's liability for the wrongful acts of his servant, sec ante, pp. 94 U seq. 240 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. invites persons on to his premises he must take care that they do not unwittingly run risk of being injured while there. Where a man came to a factory on business, and while in such part of it as it was not improper for him to be in, fell through an unfenced hole in the floor, of the existence of which he was not aware, it was held that he could recover damages against the owner of the factory, although he had been warned by the manager that the place was dangerous, and that he had better stay close to a man who had a light.^^ But, on the other hand, where a man having no business there goes into premises — say a machine- room — and gets injured, he can recover no compensation from the owner. So, too, mere guests, or persons Avho, having no business there, are allowed to go into a printing office, and there get injured, can only recover damages from the master printer if the injury was caused by some hidden danger which they did not know of, but which the printer did know or ought to have known of.^ Take this case. A. is a master printer who has a cylinder machine the ink-table of which runs out to within six inches of the wall of the building. B. is an errand-boy who, having to wait for an answer to a message, is expressly allowed to go into the machine-room to watch the machines there. Without knowing anything of the danger, and not having been cautioned, he gets between the cylinder machine and the wall, and, while there, the ink-table runs out and crushes him : the master printer is liable in damages to the boy. Supjiose, however, the boy had gone into the machine- room, having no business there, and having received no permission (express or implied) to go there : the master printer would not be liable. If an occupier of a house have a lamp or anything else "» Indermaur v. Dames (1867), L. 11. 2 C. P. 311 ; 3() L J. C. I'. 181. ' Southcolcv. atunlrii (IS.jO), 1 H. & N. 247 ; '-'5 L. J. Ex. 33!). THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 241 overhanging the path, and by reason of its imperfect con- dition it falls and injures a passer-by, the occupier is liable n damages to the person injured. ^ So, too, if paper be hoisted by means of a crane, and the paper slip out and hurt a person lawfully underneath, he has an action for damages, unless the defendant can prove that the accident happened through no fault of his or his servants.^ Tarry v. Ashton (1876), 1 Q. B. D. 314 ; 45 L. J. Q. B. 260. ^ Byrne v. Boadle (18G3), 2 H. & C. 722 ; 33 L. J. Ex. 13. Kearney L. B. d: S. C. Ry. Co. (1871), L. R. 6 Q. B. 759 ; 40L. J. Q. B. 285. THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 243 APPENDIX A. Ant Act of Parliament cited in this book can be obtained of Her Majesty's Printers at their oiEce, East Harding Street, Fleet Street, London, E.G. Orders may be sent to them by post, accompanied by remittances in stamps or postal orders, to cover the cost of the Statute required, and the postage thereof. The following are the prices of single copies of the follo^ving Acts : — s. d. 5 & 6 Vict. c. 45 (Copyright) 6 6 & 7 Vict. c. 9G (Lord Campbell's Act, Libel) ... U 9 & 10 Vict. c. 93 (Ditto, Compensation for Injuries)... l^ 11 & 15 Vict. c. 100 (Ditto, Obscene Publications) ... 4^ 32 & 33 Vict. c. 21 (Newspapers, Printers, &c.) 3 33 & 34 Vict. c. 75 (Education) 1 6 34 & 35 Vict. c. 31 (Trades Unions) i^ 38 & 39 Vict. c. 86 (Conspiracy, Intimidation, &c.) ... 4^ 38 & 39 Vict. c. 90 (Employers and Workmen Act) ... 4} 39 & 40 Vict. c. 22 (Trades Unions) 3 39 & 40 Vict. c. 79 (Children in Employment) 1 41 Vict. c. 16 (The Factory Act) 2 4^ 43 & 44 Vict. c. 23 (Children in Employment) U 43 & 44 Vict. c. 42 (Employers' Liability Act) ... ... 3 44 & 45 Vict. c. GO (Newspaper Libel and Eegistration) 4i- 46 & 47 Vict. c. 53 (Factory Act Amendment) 4^ 244 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. APPENDIX B. 32 & 33 Vict. c. 24. The Newspapers, Printers, and Reading Rooms Repeal Act, 1869. An Act to repeal certain enactments relating to Newspapers, Pamphlets, and other Publications, and to Printers, Type- founders, and Reading Rooms. (12th July, 1869.) 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. The Acts and parts of Acts described in the fu'st schedule to this Act are hereby repealed, but the provisions of the said Acts which are set out in the second schedule to this Act shall continue in force in the same manner as if they were enacted in the body of this Act ; and this Act shall not affect the validity or invalidity of anything already done or suffered, or any right or title already acquired or accrued, or any remedy or proceeding in respect thereof, and all such remedies and proceedings may be had and continued in the same manner as if this Act had not been passed. 2. This Act may be cited as The Newspapers, Printers, and Reading Rooms Repeal Act, ] 8(19. First Schedule. Date of Act. Title of Act, and part repealed. 3G Geo. 3. c. 8.— An Act for the more effectually preventing .seditious meetings and assemblies. fin part, namely, — sees 39 Geo. 3. c. 79. in part. — An Act for the mure effectual suppression of so- cieties established for seditious and_ treasonable pnrpo.ses, and for better"' thirty-four to thirty- ])revculiiig treasonable and sedi- nine as relates to the tious i)racticcs } above - mentioned sections. fifteen to thirty- three, both inclusive, and so nuich of sees. I Section thirteen. THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 245 51 Geo. 3. c. ()o. — An Act to explain and amend an Act parsed in the thirty-ninth year of Hi.s Majesty's reign, intituled "An Act for the more effectual suppression of societies " established for seditious and treasonable purposes, and " for better preventing trea.sonable and seditious practices," so far as respects certain penalties on printers and pub- lishers. 55 Geo. 3. c. 101. in part. — An Act to") regulate the collection of stamp ' duties and matters in respect of [ In part, namely, — • which licences may be granted bj' the commissioner of stamps in Ireland GO Geo. 3. & 1 Geo. 4. c. 9. — An Act to subject certain publica- tions to the duties of stan.ps upon newspapers, and to make other regulations for restraining the abuses arising from the publication of blasphemous and seditious libels. 11 Geo. 4. & 1 Will. 4. c. 73. — An Act to repeal so much of an Act of the sixtieth year of His late Majesty King George the Third, for the more effectual prevention and punish- ment of blasphemous and seditious libels, as relates to the sentence of banishment for the second offence, and to provide some further remedy against the abuse of publish- ing libels. fin part, namely, — (5 fc 7 Will. 4. c. 7(5. in part. — An Act to Except sees, one to reduce the duties on newspapers, four (both inclu- and to amend the laws relating to- sive), sees, thirty- the duties on newspapers and four and thirty- advertisements I five, and the sche- L dule. 2 k S Vict. c. 12. — An Act to amend an Act of the thirty-ninth year of King George the Third, for the more effectual suppression of societies established for seditious and treasonable purposes, and for preventing treasonable and seditious practices, and to put an end to certain proceed- ings now pending under the said Act. f In part, namelv, — 5 & 6 Vict. c. 82. in part.— An Act to 1 The following words assimilate the stamp duties in | in sec. twenty : Great Britain and Ireland, and to | " and also licence make regulations for collecting-] " to any person to and managing the same until the | " keep any print- tenth day of October one thousand [ " ing presses and eight hundred and forty- five ... | " t^-pes for print- [_ " ing in Ireland." 246 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 9 & 10 Yict. c. 33. in part.— An Act to | amend the laws relating to corres- j pending societies and the licensuig"] of lecture rooms 16 & 17 Yict. c. .59. in part.— An Act to i repeal certain stamp duties and to grant others in lieu thereof, to J amend the laws relating to stamp \ duties, and to make perpetual cer- tain stamp duties in Ireland In part, namely, — So far as it relates to anj^ proceedings under the enact- ments repealed by this schedule. In part, namely, — So much of sec. twenty as makes perpetual the pro- visions of 5 & 6 Yict. c. 82. re- pealed by his Act. Second Schedule. The enactments in this schedule, with the exception of section 19 of 6 & 7 Will. 4. c. 76, do not apply to Ireland. 39 Geo. 3. c. 79. sect. 28 [set out on p. 17]. sect. 29 [ „ „ p. 19]. „ „ sect. 31 [ „ „ p. 17] sect. 34 [ „ „ p. 201 sect. 35 [ „ „ p. 20] sect. 36 [ „ „ p. 20] 51 Geo. 3. c. 65. sect. 3 [ „ „ p. 17] 6 & 7 Will. 4. c. 76. sect. 19. Discovery of lyroprletors, in'mters, or 2>i<^?ishers of ibervsjmjyers mar/ he enforced hi/ bill, cj'c. If any person shall file any bill in any court for the discovery of the name of any person concerned as printer, publisher, or proprietor of any newspaper, or of any matters relative to the printing or puT)lishing of any newspaper, in order the more effectually to bring or carry on any suit or action for damages alleged to have been sustained by reason of any slanderous or libellous matter contained in any such newspaper respecting such person, it sliall not bo lawful for tlic defendant to plead or demur to such bill, but such defendant shall be compellable to make the discovery required ; provided always, that such dis- covery shall not be made use of as evidence or otherwise in any proceeding against the defendant, save only in that pro- ceeding for which the discovery is made. I THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 247 2 & 3 Vict. c. 12. sect. 2 [set out on p. 16]. 2 & 3 Vict. c. 12. sect. 3. As to books or ]}a2)eo-s 2)ri7ited at the University Presses. In the case of books or papers printed at the University- Press of Oxford, or the Pitt Press of Cambridge, the printer, instead of printing his name thereon, shall print the following words, " Printed at the University Press, Oxford," or " Tiie Pitt Press, Cambridge," as the case may be. 2 & 3 Vict, c, 12. sect. 4. No actions for j^cnalties to he commejiced except in the name of the Attorney or Solicitor General in England or the Queen's Advocate in Scotland. Provided always, that it shall not be lawful for any person or persons whatsoever to commence, prosecute, enter, or file, or cause or procure to be commenced, prosecuted, entered, or filed, any action, bill, plaint, or information in any of Her Majesty's courts, or before any justice or justices of the peace, against any person or persons for the recovery of any fine, penalty, or forfeiture made or incurred or which may hereafter be incurred under the provisions of this Act, unless the same be commenced, prosecuted, entered, or filed in the name of Her Majesty's Attorney General or Solicitor General in that part of Great Britain called England, or Her Majesty's Advo- cate for Scotland (as the case may be respectively) ; and if any action, bill, plaint, or information shall be commenced, prose- cuted, or filed in the name or names of any other person or persons than is or are in that behalf before mentioned, the same and every proceeding thereupon had are hereby declared and the same shall be null and void to all intents and purposes. 9 & 10 Vict. c. 33. sect. 1 [set out on p. 20] . 44 & 45 Vict. c. 60. The Kewsjyaper Libel and Registration Act, 1881. An Act to amend the Law of Newspaper Libel, and to provide for the Registration of Newspaper Proprietors. (27th August, 1881 ) Whereas it is expedient to amend the law afifecting civil actions and criminal prosecutions for newspaper libel : And whereas it is also expedient to provide for the registra- tion of newspaper proprietors : 248 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. Be it enacted by the Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Tem- poral, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows : 1. In the construction of this Act, unless there is anything in the subject or context repvignant thereto, the several words and phrases herein-after mentioned shall have and include the meanings following ; (that is to say). The word " registrar " shall mean in England the registrar for the time being of joint stock companies, or such person as the Board of Trade may for the time being authorise in that behalf, and in Ireland the assistant registrar for the time being of joint stock companies for Ireland, or such person as the Board of Trade may for the time being authorise in that behalf. The phrase " registry office " shall mean the principal office for the time being of the registrar in England or Ireland, as the case may be, or such other office as the Board of Trade may from time to time appoint. The word "newspaper" shall mean any paper containing public news, intelligence, or occurrences, or any remarks or observations therein printed for sale, and published in England or Ireland periodically, or in parts or numbers at intervals not exceeding twenty-six days between the publication of any two such papers, parts, or numbers. Also any paper printed in order to be dispersed, and made public weekly or oftener, or at intervals not exceeding twenty- six days, containing only or principally advertisements. The word " occupation " when applied to any person shall mean his trade or following, and if none, then his rank or usual title, as esquire, gentleman. The phrase " j)lacc of residence" shall include the street, square, or place where the person to whom it refers shall reside, and the number (if any) or other designation of the house in which he shall so reside. The word " proprietor " shall mean and include as well the sole proprietor of any newspaper, as also in the case of a divided fjroprictorship the persons who, as yiartners or other- wise, represent and arc responsible for any sliare or interest in the newspaper as between themselves and the persons in like manncsr representing or responsible for tlie other shares or interests tlierein, and no other ])erson. 2. Ncn;si}a])cr reports of certain mcetiiujs prh-'tlnjed [set out on p. 140]. W. No prosecui'ion for newspaper libel n-ifliout Jiat of Attor- iici/ (I'cneral [set out on p. 175]. THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 249 4. Inquiry hy court of sunuiiary jurisdiction as to libel being for puMic benefit or being true [set out on p. 175]. 5. Provision as to sionimary conviction for libel [set out on p. 176]. G. 22 & 23 \ ict. c. \1 . made ajfplicable to this Act [set out on p. 176]. 7. Board of Trade may authorise registration of the names of only a portion of the proprietors of a newspaper [set out on p. 24]. 8. A register of the proprietors of newspapers as defined by this Act shall be established luider the superintendence of the registrar. 9. It shall be the duty of the printers and publishers for the time being of every newspaper to make or cause to be made to the Kegistry Office on or before the thirty-first of July one thousand eight hundred and eighty-one, and thereafter annually in the month of July in every year, a return of the following particulars according to the Schedule A. hereunto annexed ; that is to say, (ff .) The title of a newspaper : Q)?) The names of all the proprietors of such newspaper, together with their respective occupations, places of business (if any), and places of residence. 10. If within the furtlier period of one month after the time herein-before appointed for the making of any return as to anj' newspaper such return be not made, then each printer and pub- lisher of such newspaper shall, on conviction thereof, be liable to a penalty not exceeding twenty-five pounds, and also to be directed by a summary order to make a return within a specified time. 11. Power to ceHaiii parties to make return [set out on p. 25]. 12. If any person shall knowingly and wilfully make or cause to be made any return by this Act required or permitted to be made in wdiich shall be inserted or set forth the name of any person as a proprietor of a newspaper who shall not be a proprietor thereof, or in which there shall be any misrepre- sentation, or from which there shall be any omission in respect of any of the particulars by this Act required to be contained therein whereby such return shall be misleading, or if any pro- prietor of a newspaper shall knowingly and wilfully permit any such return to be made which shall be misleading as to any of the particulars with reference to his own name, occupation, place of business (if any), or place of residence, then and in every such case everj'' such offender being convicted thereof shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding one hundred pounds. 13. It shall be the duty of the registrar and he is hereby re- buired forthwith to register every return made in conformity 250 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. with the provisions of this Act in a book to be kept for that purpose at the Registry Office and called " the register of news- paper proprietors," and all persons shall be at liberty to search and inspect the said book from time to time during the hours of business at the Eegistry Office, and any person may require a copy of any entry in or an extract from the book to be certified by the registrar or his deputy for the time being or under the official seal of the registrar. 14. There shall be paid in respect of the receipt and entry of returns made in conformity with the provisions of this Act, and for the inspection of the register of newspaper proprietors, and for certified copies of any entry therein, and in respect of any other services to be performed by the registrar, such fees (if any) as the Board of Trade with the approval of the Treasury may direct and as they shall deem requisite to defray as well "the additional expenses of the Registry Office caused by the provisions of this Act, as also the further remunerations and salaries (if any) of the registrar, and of any other persons employed under him in the execution of this Act, and such fee shall be dealt with as the Treasury may direct. 15. Every copy of an entry in or extract from the register of newspaper proprietors, purporting to be certified by the regis- trar or his deputy for the time being, or under the official seal of the registrar, shall be received as conclusive evidence of the contents of the said register of newspaper proprietors, so far as the same appear in such copy or extract without proof of the signature thereto or of the seal of ^office affixed thereto, and every such certified copy or extract shall in all proceedings, civil or criminal, be accepted as sufficient prima facie evidence of all the matters and things thereby appearing unless and until the contrar}- thereof be shown. 16. All penalties under this Act may be recovered before a court of summary jurisdiction in manner provided by the Summary Jurisdiction Acts. Summary orders under this Act may be made by a court of sunmiary jurisdiction, and enforced in manner provided by section "thirty-four of the Summary Jmisdiction Act, 1879 ; and, for the purposes of this Act, that section shall be deemed to apply to Ireland in the same manner as if it were re-enacted in this Act. 17. The expression " a court of summary jurisdiction" has in England the meanings assigned to it by the Summary Juris- diction Act, 187!>; and in Ireland means any justice or justices of the peace, stipendiary or other magistrate or magistrates, having jurisdiction under the Sunnnary Jurisdiction Acts. The expression " Summary Jurisdiction Acts "" has as regards England the meanings assigned to it by the Summary Jurisdic- THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 251 tion Act, 1879 ; and as regards Ireland, means within the police district of Dublin metroiDolis the Acts regulating the powers and duties of justices of the peace for such district, or of the police of that district, and elsewhere in Ireland the Petty- Sessions (Ireland) Act, iSol, and any Act amending the same. 18. The provisions as to the registration of newspaper pro- prietors contained in this Act shall not apply to the case of any newspaper which belongs to a joint stock company duly incorporated under and subject to the provisions of the Com- panies Acts, 18G2 to 1879. 19. This Act shall not extend to Scotland. 20. This Act may for all purposes be cited as tlie Newspaper Libel and Registration Act, 1881. The Schedules to which this Act refers. Schedule A. \_set out on p. 23]. Schedule B. Iset out on p. 25]. 252 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. APPENDIX C. 1. — Indenture of Apprenticeship. — Cbwiwjow Form. This Indenture witnesseth that B., of, &c., with the consent of his father C, of, &c., testified by his execution of these presents, dotli put himself apprentice to A., of, &c., to Jearn his Art, and with him, after tlie manner of an apprentice, to serve from the day of the date of these presents until the fuU end and term of Seven years thence next following, to be fully complete and ended. During which term the apprentice his master faithfully shall serve, his secrets keep, his lawful com- mands everywhere gladly do. He shall do no damage to his master, nor see to be done of others, but to his power shall let or forthwith give warning to his master of the same. He shall not waste the goods of his master nor lend them unlawfully to any. He shall do no act whereby his said master may have any loss with his own goods or others during the said term without license of his said master. He shall neither buy nor sell, nor absent himself from his said master's service day or night unlawfully, but in all things as a faithful apprentice should behave himself towards his said master and all his during the said term. And the said A. in consideration thereof, and of £ (tfr live shillings), now paid to him by the said C, the receipt whereof he doth hereby acknowledge, his said apprentice in the Art of which he uses by the best means that he can shall teach and instruct, or cause to be taught and instructed, finding [or the said C. finding] unto the said apprentice sufficient meat, drink, physick, lodging, and all other necessaries during the said term. And for the true performance of all and every of the said covenants and agreements, each of the said parties bindeth himself unto the other by these presents. In witness whereof the parties above- named have hereunto set their bands and seals the day of in the year of Our Lord One thousand eight hundred and (Signed, sealed, and delivered by the aboveO A. Q named in the presence ?• B. Q of ) C. o 2.— Indenture of Apprenticesiiu', with Special Clause.s. {Copy the preceding form doivii to the words " herchij acknoii'- ledge,'' after )v/iick codinue as follows :] doth hereby covenant aiul agree with the said C, aud also with the said B. in manner following, that is THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 253 to say, that he the said A. will take and receive the said B. as his apprentice from the day of the date of these presents, for the term of seven years, and also will during the said term, to the best of his power, knowledge, and ability, instruct the said B. in tlie trade or business of a Printer ['s Compositor, Pressman, or Machine Manager], and in all things incident or relating thereto in such manner as he the said A. doth now or shall hereafter during the said term use or practise the same [and will, during the said term, provide the said B. with all neces- sary and proper board and lodging]. And will pay to the said B. during the said term, or until the sooner determination of the said apprenticeship, the respective sums following [in lieu of providing him with board and lodging], that is to say, shillings a week for the first year of the said term, shillings a week for the second year, shillings a week for the third year, &c., such payments to be made on the Friday of each week. [And will not require the said B. to attend to the business or affairs of the said A. on general holidays or for a longer period than hours in each day, unless the said B. should unavoidably be longer engaged by an extreme and unusual pressure of business.] And for the considerations aforesaid the said C. doth hereby covenant and agree with the said A. that the said B . shall faithfuUj', honestl}', and diligently serve tlie said A. as his apprentice during the term aforesaid. And also that the said C, his executors, or administrators will, at his or their own expense, find and provide the said B. with good and sufficient [board, lodging,] clothing, washing, pocket-money, medicine, medical attendance, and all other necessaries [save as afore- said] during the said term. Provided always, and it is hereby agreed as follows : — 1. That in case the said B. shall at any time during the said term be wilfully disobedient to the lawful and reasonable commands of the said A., or shall otherwise grossly miscon- duct himself, it shall be lawful for the said A. to discharge the said B. from his service [provided that in such case he shall repay to the said C. the sum of £ for every year, and a proper sum for any fraction of a year of the said term of years which shall then be unexpired]. 2. That in case the said B. shall at any time during the term of his said apprenticeship be absent from the service of the said A. from any cause whatsoever, it shall be lawful for the said A. to deduct from the weekly payments to be made by him as aforesaid, sums proportionate to the time of such absence. [And in case he shall be absent from any cause other than illness, it shall be lawful for the said A. to deduct from the said 254 THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. weekly payments sums in respect of the time of such absence equal to the average earnings of the said B. during times equivalent to those of such absence, but such deductions shall not be made at a rate exceeding shillings per week.] 3. That in case the said B. shall not commence work on any morning within a quarter of an hour of the time when the office of the said A. shall be opened for work, not being earlier than 7 o'clock between the 1st April and 31st October, and 8 o'clock at other times of the year, or in case he shall absent himself from the service of his said master at any time on any day other than at and within the regular times appointed by his said master for meals, it shall be lawful for the said A. to deduct from the said weekly payments, in respect of each de- fault or absence, a sum not exceeding three pence for any period not exceeding half-an-hour, and two pence for any further period of fifteen minutes or part of fifteen minutes. 4. That the said A. may, at his discretion, require the attend- ance of the said B. at any time on any day before or after the ordinary hours of business, paying to him therefor sums not less than d. per hour \_or such sums as he shall deem proper]. 5. That in case the said B. shall die within calendar months from the daj^ of the date hereof [or in case the health of the said B. shall within that time fail so as to incapacitate him from following the trade or business of a Printer ['s Com- positor], and such failure of health shall be certified by two duly qualified medical practitioners], the said A. shall repu-y to the said C. the sum of £ part of the said premium or sum of £ so paid to the said A. as aforesaid, and in case such death [or failure of health certified as aforesaid] shall happen after such calendar months, but within years from the date hereof, then the said A. shall repay the sum of £ part of the said premium. 6. That in case the said A. shall die before the expiration of the said apprenticeship, then the executors or administrators of him the said A. shall, as soon as may be after his decease, find and provide ffir the said B. another proper and suitable master for such residue as sliall be then Tmexpircd of the said term of his said ap]u-enticesliip upon the same terms or upon terms equally advantageous to the said B. as are contained in these presents, and in default thereof shall pay to the said C the sum of £ for every year, and a proportionate sum for any fraction of a year of the said term of seven years which shall at the decease of the said A. be unexpired. 7. That the said A. shall permit the said B., if he shall require the same in writing, to leave the service of him the said A. at THE LAW AFFECTING PRINTERS. 255 the expiration of the first years or at any time thereafter, and to employ the remainder of the said term for his own use or benefit without any interference or claim on the part of the said A. in or for any gains or savings thereafter made by the said B. in the aforesaid trade or business or otherwise. In witness whereof the parties to these presents have here- unto set their hands and seals the day of One thousand eight hundred and eighty . Signed, sealed, and delivered by the above- ^ A. Q named parties {or by the above-named A.) [■ B. Q in the presence of X. y. ... ... ...) C. Q Note. — It n-ill he ohvioi(s to the reader that it is not ■intended that every clause above given should ie included in any one Indenture. Some are inconsistent nith others, while some are framed in favour of the master, and others in favour of the ajyprentice. A j)roj)er selection must he made to S2iit each case. Several of the clauses are inserted to alter or modify the effect of the law as it exists where no provision against it is made in the Indenture (see Chapter VIII.'). Having regardto the decision in MeaMu v. Moms {ante, p. 99), it is douhtful whether the pirovisions numhered 2, 3, and 4 could he enforced. As to the proper stamp duties, see ^^a^e 99. The stamp must he impressed either before execution or within 2 montlis after. Stamped copies of the common form can he bought at the la7V stationers'. A form containing provisio7is similar to some of the special clauses above is sold hy Messrs. Field and Titer Leadenhall Street, London. INDEX. ABRIDGMENT OF COPYRIGHT WORK. When allowed 198 ABSENCE WITHOUT LEAVE. Ground for diamissing servant ... ... ... 61 ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF AUTHORSHIP. No cover for infringing copyright ... ... ... 200 In translating from foreign newspapers ... ... 210 ACQUIESCENCE IN NUISANCE 222 ADVERTISEMENTS. Certain advertisements illegal... 31 — 37 Defaming property 179 Threatening proceedings ... ... ... ... 180 Stamp duty on order for 231 AGENT. Liability of principal for acts of ... ... ... 1.55 AMANUENSIS. Liability for publishing libel ... ... ANCIENT LAWS AFFECTING PRINTERS... APOLOGY. In libel cases APPEARANCE OF BOOK, etc. Imitating APPRENTICE, see also Master and Apprentice. Definition of Assignment of Duties of ... Earnings of Master's right to punish Enlistment in Army, i&c. Damages against ... Deductions from wages Rights of Removal of Master's place of business Cannot generally be dismissed... Attainment of majority 153, 157 1 -14 167, 168 211 2U 99 100 101 102 lOG 102 102 '(32 102 02 c^' add. 103- -106 104 105 105 s PAGE APPKENTICE— fo»7nn/<'(?. Magistrates' jurisdiction over ... ... ... ... lOG Chamberlain of London's jurisdiction over... ... 107 Sunday work ... ... ... ... ... 49 Bank holidays add. APPRENTICESHIP, INDENTURE OF. "When needed ... ... ... • . 99 Stamp duty on ... ... ... ... ... ... 99 Liabilitv of Father on ICO Who entitled to Iteep 100 Mav be cancelled... ... ... ... ... ... 107 Forms of 251,252 ARTICLES IN NEWSPAPERS, REVIEWS, *c. Copyright in 191—193 Foreign, translation of ... ... .. ... .-. 210 ASSIGNMENT. Of contract for services... ... ... ... ... 58 Of apprentice ... ... ... ... ... ... 100 ATTACHMENT OF WAGES C9 AUTHORITY OF SERVANT 91 AUTHORS. Rights of 191,217—220 BAD LANGUAGE. As cauf?e for dismissal of servant BANK HOLIDAYS BANKRUPTCY. Effect of, in cases of hiring and service ,, on Apprentices BETTING. Certain advertisements relating to, illegal . BLASPHEMOUS LIBELS BOILER EXPLOSIONS. Must bo reported to Board of Trade ... BOOK. Definition of , under Copyright Act ... BOOKS, &c. Reviews of, when privileged BOOKSELLER. Liability under libel law ,, under Copyright law... BOYCOTTING 60 >1& add. 58,69 100, 101 33,35 182 116 189 149 201, 105 , 203 125 INDEX. iii BEITISH MUSEUM. Right to have copies of books ... ... ... ... '20-4 BUYER'S REMEDIES. For breach of vendor's contract ... ... 231 — 287 „ „ warranty... ... ... ... ... 233 CAMPBELL'S ACTS (LORD). Compensation for injuries ... ... ... 91,92 Libel cases 1.55,167,168 Obscene publications 184 CHAMBERLAIN OF LONDON. Jurisdiction over apprentices ... ... ... ... 107 CHARACTER. Of servants ... ... ... 93 Of plaintiff in libel cases ... ~ ... ... ... 170 CHILD. Definition of, in Factory Act 109 CHILDREN. Regulations for employment of ... ... Ill — 116 CHRISTMAS DAY ... 60, 113, & a(W. CHROMO-LITHOGRAPH. Right to produce a ... ... ... ... ... 208 CIRCULATION OF NEWSPAPER. Not a matter of public interest ... ... ... 118 CLEANLINESS. Enforced under Factory Act ... ... 110 ,, ,, Sanitary Act ... ... ... ... 118 CLERKS. Notice to end service of ... ... ... 57 CLICKERS 56 COERCION. By workmen 123,125—131 COMBINATIONS. Of workmen 122—131 COMMON INTEREST ... 138 COMPOSITORS. Customs concerning ... ... 55, 56 Liability for libel 158 COMPOSITORS' SOCIETY (London). Legal effect of rules of ... ... ... ... ... 44 CONSPIRACY 125, 127 IV INDEX. PACK CONTRACTS. When writing necessary 226 — 229 Executory 231 Breach of 231—235 COPIES OF PRINTED WORKS. Must be kept by printer 6 mouths 19 COPYRIGHT. The first Copyright Act 3 Acts now in force... ... ... ... ... ... 180 Definition of 187 What may be the subject of ... ]87 No copyright in certain matter ... 187 None in mere ideas ... ... ... 188 In unpublished ivorks ... ... ... ... ... 188 In letters ... 188 In Books, Newsjyajyer Aiiidi'.'i, d'c. ... ... ... 189 What is a " book " 189 Who may obtain copyright in Books ... ... 1^0 Copyright in Titles ...' 190,211 Duration 191 In whom vested ... ... ... ... ... 191 When author employed 191—193 Articles for magazines, etc. 191 Newspaper articles ... ... ... .. ... 193 Assignment of copyright ... ... ... ... 194 On death ... ... ... ... ... ... 195 On bankruptcy ... ... ... ... ... 195 Registration ... .. ... ... ... ... 195 Infringement ... ... ... ... ... ... 198 What amounts to 198 Remedy for ... ... ... ... ... ... 201 Who liable 201 Notice of objections 202 Importing from abroad ... ... ... ... 203 Limitation of proceedings for ... ... ... 208 Evidence of publication 204 Damages for 204 Pirate book belong to owners of copyright ... 204 University copyright 204 Rights of public libraries 204 In Music 205 Right to perform , ... 200 7)) Lt'ctures ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 206 In I'irtures, Enfiravi'ufjs, etc. ... ... ... ... 207 Draniatir Cnpi/riiiJit ... ... ... ... ... 209 Intrrnationiil ('(ip/iriiiht ... ... ... ... ... 209 Quoting froju foreign newspapers ... .. ... 210 * INDEX. V PAGE COSTS. In libel cases 171 COURTS OF JUSTICE, PROCEEDINGS IN. What are 141 Fair reports privileged ... ... ... ... ... 140 Comments on privileged ... ... ... ... 145 Malicious reporting not privileged ... ... ... 143 Right of Court to control reports ... ... ... 144 CREDIT. Sale of goods on ... ... ... ... ... ... 235 CRIMINAL INFORMATIONS 177 CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS FOR LIBEL 172 CRITICISM, FAIR. When privileged ... ... ... ... .,. 115 — 151 CUSTOMS OF TRADE. Effect of, on contracts ... ... 38 Have generally to be proved in Court DAMAGES. Against servant ... „ apprentice ,, master for non-employment of servant ,, ,, for dismissal ... , ,, for injuries to servant In libel cases In copyright cases For breach of contract ... DANGEROUS EMPLOYMENT DEAD. Libels on the DEATH. Effect on hiring and service „ apprenticeship DEBTS DEFENCES TO LIBEL SUITS DELIVERY OF GOODS. When condition precedent to payment DESCRIPTION. Sale by DISMISSAL OF SERVANT Master not bound to give a reason for Wrongful DISRESPECT. On part of servant ... ... ... ... ... 60 ,39 226 40 GI -64 02 70 70 92 169 203 ... 232 75 133 57,66 ... 101 23G, 239 166 ... 235 ... 234 59—64 ... 64 .. 70 DOMESTIC SERVICE. Customary terms of ... ... ... ... ... 56 DEAMATIC COPYRIGHT 209 DRUNKENNESS. Of servant 60 EDITION. What constitutes an 218 EDITOR. Notice to end service of... ... ... ... ... 57 EDUCATION ACTS. Bearing of , upon employment of children ... ... 115 ELECTION BILLS. Must bear name and address of printer ... 18 & add. EMPLOYERS AND WORKMEN, see Mapter AND Servant. EMPLOYERS AND WORKMEN ACT 47, 68, 107 EMPLOYERS. Liability of 65—93,94-97 EMPLOYEES' LIABILITY ACT, 1880 76-93 Who have benefit of Act ... ... ... ... 81 Who are liable 82 When they are liable 82 To what extent 83 Classes of accidents 83 Defects in ways, works, niachineiy, &c. ... ... 84 Effect of servant's knowledge of ... ... ... 85 Carrying out Rules, Bye-laws, or Instructions ... 86 Negligence of superintending servant ... ... 87 Notice of injury 89 Bringing the action ... ... ... ... ... 91 In case of death ... ... ... ... ... 92 The damages 92 ENTICING AWAY. A servant ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 94 An apprentice ... ... ... ... ... ... 102 ENGRAVINGS. Copyright in 189, 207—209 ERRORS IN PRINTING. Eifect on printer's claim to be paid 236 EXPLOSION, BOILER. Must be reported to ]5oard of Trade 116 Inquiry into cause 117 INDEX, VU PAOK FACTOEY ACTS 109—115 "FAIE HOUSE" 41 FELLOW SERVANTS 73 FENCING OF MACHINERY. Under Factory Act 110 „ Employers' Liability Act ad(L FIRE. Printers' rights and liabilities 238 FOLLOWING WORKMEN. In order to coerce ... ... ... ... ... ]28 FOREIGN BOOKS. Right to sell in Britain 209 Right to translate • 210 FOREIGN NEWSPAPERS. Right to translate from 210 FRAUD. Servant as well as master liable for ... ... . 98 FRAUDS, STATUTE OF 226 GOOD FRIDAY ... CO, 113 GRIEVANCES. Libels in seeking remedy for ... 151 HEADINGS TO REPORTS, &c. May be libellous 140 HIDING TOOLS, CLOTHES, Ac 128 HOLIDAYS 50, 5] , 113, & add. HOURS FOR WORK {see aho Overthie) ... 43, 49, 102 ■ Under Factory Act ... ... ... 112 Work done out of business hours 54 ILLEGAL WORKS. Price for printing not recoverable ... ... ... 236 ILLNESS. Of. servant 53 Of apprentice ... ... ... ... ... ... 103 ILLUSTRATIONS. Copyright in .. 189 IMITATION. Of title, appearance of book, &c 211 IMMORAL WORKS. Price for printing not recoverable 236 .INDEX. IMPORTATION. Of copyright books, Ac 203 IMPEINT.^ Eequired by Statute IC— 19 & add. iJN OUMJ:' Jl, i Jl,^ Oh/ . Of servant 64, 97 INDEMNITY. Eight of servant to To printers of libellous works 71 236 INDENTUEE OF APPEENTICESHIP Forms of 99 251,252 INFANT. May trade Contracts of ,, for hiring and service ,, for apprenticeship Actions by... .t. 15 15 42 99 ... 68 INFEINGEMENT. Of copyright Of right to title of newspaper, do. 197, 201, 206, 209 ... 211 INJUNCTION. In libel cases lu slander of title In copyright cases 172 180 201 INSPECTOE OF FACTOEIES. Eights of To have free access to printing office 110,111 110 INSURANCE. Of copy, paper, &c 238 INSUEANCE MONEY. When it affects damages for injuries... 93 INTENTION. Of parliies to contract ... Usually no evidence allowed as to .„ In libel oases 42 42 133, 134 INTEENATIONAL COPYRIGHT 209 INTIMIDATION ... 12S-131 L.\TENESS. Ground for dismissal ... ... ... ... 49, 61 LECTUEES. Copyright in ... ... ... ... 206 EoportH of 207 LETTERS. Copyright in Property iu LIBEL. 1. What is a libel ... Difference between libel and slander Who and what may be the subject of libel 2. What libels are actionable or punishable ... Justified libels Privileged libels a. Answer to inquiries, &c. Volunteered statements h. Publication in courts of justice c. Publication in Parliamentary Papers d. Reports of, and comments on Pro- ceedings in Parliament and Courts of Justice Reports of proceedings at meetings e. Discussion of matters of public interest /. Comment on public persons, i^c. Criticism of books, pictures, etc, g. Libels in seeking renaedy for grievances h. Libels published on invitation or challenge 3. What amounts to imblication... 4. Who are liable for libels Publishing by agent ,, by mistake ,, by third party (1) Libels in periodicals ... Liability of compositor „ proof reader ,, pressman... ,, overseer ... ,, publisher's assistants . „ newsvendors „ editor and sub-editor . ,, I'eporter ... ,, master printer ... ,, publisher » proprietor (2) Printed libels not in periodicals Liability of clerk „ bookseller... 189 189 132- -134 132 132 , 133 135 135 130- -153 130- -13'J 137 139 139 140- -14G 140, , 144 140 148 149 151 ;e... 152 153 154 155 150 157 158 158 158 159 159 159 159 102 163 163 104 164 105, 100 165 105 LIBEL — continued. 5. Procedure in libel cases ... ... ... ... 166 (rt) lu action for damages ... ... ... ... 105 The defeuces to an action ... ... ... 16G Lord Campbell's Act ... ... ... ... 1G7 Apology and payment into court ... ... 167 The damages 169 Enhancement of ... .. ... ... 169 Mitigation of 170 The costs 171 (/;) Injunction ... ... ... ... 172 (<■) Criminal proceedin^gs ... ... ... ... 173 Punishments for libel... ... ... ... 174 Newspaper libels ... ... ... ... 175 Criminal informations ... ... ... 177 LIBEL ON PROPERTY 179 LIBELS, BLASPHEMOUS, SEDITIOUS, AND OBSCENE 182 LIBELLOUS WORK. Charge for printing not recoverable ... ... ... 236 LIBRARIES, Public. Rights to books under Copyright Act 204 LIEN. Of artificer ... 72, 237 Of printer 237 None by servant against his master 72 LIFTS. Tobefenc3d 110 LIMEWASHING. Periodically required under Factory Act ... ... 110 LIMITATIONS, STATUTE OF 239 LITHOGRAPHIC PICTURE. Copyright in 208 Right to produce ... 208 LITHOGRAPHIC STONES. Property in work on ... ... ... ... ... 220 LOCK-OUTS. Legality of 127 LONDON COMPOSITORS' SCALE. Effect on Contracts of Hiring... ... ... ... 40 LONDON SOCIETY OF COMPOSITORS. Rules of ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 44 How far binding ... ... ... ... 40,44 INDEX. XI PAGE LOST TIME ... 53 LOTTERIES. Advertisements concerning, illegal ... ... 35—37 MACHINE MINDERS. Notice to quit service ... ... ... ... ... 56 Liability for libel... ... ... ... ... ... 159 MACHINERY. Injuries caused by ... ... , ... ... ... 7-1 Fencing of , required ... ... ... ... ... 110 Cleaning, not allowed by children ... ... ... Ill MAGAZINE. Contract to print ... ... ... ... ... 238 Copyright in title 190 „ in articles ... ... ... ... ... 191 Not within Newspaper Libel Act ... 1-15 MALICE IN LIBEL CASES. Destroys privilege ... ... ... 143 Effect on damages ... ... ... ... ... 169 MARRIED WOMEN. May trade ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 15 Actions by 69 MASTER AND SERVANT ' ' ... ' ' ... 38—98 1. The contract of Hirinrj and Service... ... 38 — -13 Regulated by Customs of Trade ... ... 38^40 Overseer may act for master... ... ... ... 38 Writing, when necessary ... ... ... ... 38 Stamps, what, and when required ... ... ... 39 Term of service ... ... ... ... 39 —41 The London Scale, effect of, on ... ... ... 40 AVomen ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 42 Infants (minors) ... ... ... ... ... 42 London Society of Compositors' rules, as to 44, 45. 2. The Service 43-55 Hours 43, 49 Wages ... ... ... 48 Piece hands ... ... ... ... ... 43—45 "Society" rules, as to ... 44,45 Changes from Piece to 'Stab, and vice versa 44, 45 Duties of servant ... ... ... ... ... 45 Liabilities of servant ... ... ... ... ... 45 Sundays and holidays ... ... 49 — 51 & add. Overtime ... ... ... ... ... 51 — 53 Lost Time 53 Sickness of servant 53 MASTEE AND SEBN ANT— continued. 3. Termination of the Service ... ... ... 55 — 59 Wheu eugagemeiit for a period ... ... .-. 55 „ ,, for a job... ... ... ... 55 Termination by Notice 55 Proper Notices ... ... ... ... ... 56,57 Effect cf death on contract ... ... ... ■■• 57 ,, taking a partner ... ... ... ... 58 Assignment of services ... ... ... ••. 58 Finding a substitute ... ... ... ... ... 58 Termination by consent ... ... ... . • 58 Instant termination ... ... ... ... ... 59 4. Tlie Master's Rirjlits against Jiis Servant ... 59 — 64 What justifies summary dismissal 59 Damages against servants ... ... ... 62—64 Removal of Master's works ... ... ... ... 64 5. The Servant's liiiihts acjain^t hi^ Master: {■9u) Arising out of the contract 65 — 72 For remuneration ... ... ... ... 65 — 70 For damages for dismissal ... 70 For indemnity 71 Lien ... ... ... ... ■•• 72 To terminate service 72 (b) In respect of Injuries sustained ... ... ... 72 By Master's personal act .. ... ... ... 73 By act of a fellow-servant ... ... ... 73 Through state of premises, etc 74 ,, machinery ... ... ... ... 74 Contributory negligence 75 Knowledge of danger 75 & add. The Employers' Liability Act (q.v.) 70—93 6. Tlie Master's Rights agaimt Third Persons ... 94 For injury to servant 94 For enticing away ... ... ... ■■■ ... 94 For harbouring a servant 94 7. JUfihts of Third Per.'mns against the Master 94 — 97 Arising out of contracts by servant 95 ,, representations by servant... ... 95 ,, wrongs by servant 96 ,, negligence of servant ... ... 97 Master liable for servant's publication of libel ... 155 8. Rights of Third Persons against the Servant ... 97 MASTER AND APPRENTICE, see also Apprentice. Geuerally 99 The Master's Rights The Apprentice's Rights Legal Proceedings between MEAL TIMES MEDICAL EXAMINATIONS. Under Factory Act MINORS, see Infants. MISCONDUCT OF SERVANT. When it justifies dismissal MISSPELLINGS. Effect on printer's right to be p.ii 1 MISTAKE. PubUcation of libsl by ... MISTAKES. In a printing job ... MOLESTATION MOTIVES. Of persons before the public, discusyion of luquii'ies into MUSIC. Copyright in Right to perform 101 & a(M. 103 & add. ... IOC) ... 113 ... Ill 59— Gl 128- 236 156 263 -131 ... 145 42, 134 ... 205 ... 206 NAME, see Title. Right to use author's 219 NEGLIGENCE. Of workman ... ... ... .. ... ... 46 Of master... ... ... ... ... ... ... 73 Of fellow-servant •.• 73 Of superintending servant ... ... ... ... 87 Contributory 74, 83 NEWS. No copyright in mere ... ... ... ... 188 NEWSPAPERS. What are, under Newspaper Libel and Regis- tration Act 22, 144 What are, under Post Office Acts 28—31 Registration I'equired ... ... 22 — 27 Affairs of, not matters of public interest 148 PAGE NEWSPAPERS- ro.>(«('Hwc(Z. Copyright in articles in newspapers ... ... 191, 193 „ in news telegrams ... ... ... ... 188 ,, in title 190 Contract to print... ... ... ... ... ... 239 Libels in, see Newspaper Libels. NEWSPAPER LIBELS. Reports of public meetings ... ... 140, 114, 145 Pleading apology and payment into Court ... ... 167 Lord Campbell's Act 167 Act of 1881 140,144,175 Criminal proceedings for ... ... ... ... 175 Fiat of Director of Public Prosecutions necessary 175 Liability of newspaper proprietors ... ... ... 163 NEWSPAPER PROPRIETORS. Names to be registered... ... ... ... .., 25 Liability of , for libel 163 ,, under copyright laws ... ... 201,207 Rights of under copyright laws ... ... 191 — 193 ,, where title imitated... ... ... ... 211 NEWSVENDORS. Liability for libel... ... ... ... .. .. 159 ,, under copyright laws ... ... ... 201 NIGHT WORK. Under Factory Act 114 NOISE. Of machinery 221—225 NOTICE. To quit service 55—57 "Wages in lieu of ... ... ... ... ... 55 Of injury (Employers' Liability Act) 89 Of starting printing office ... ... ... ... 110 Of boiler explosion 116 NUISANCES 117, 221-225 OBEDIENCE. Of servants 59 Injury resulting from 87,88,98 OBSCENE LIBELS 183 Power to search for and seize ... ... ... ... 184 Printer cannot recover for printing ... ... ... 23G OFFICES, see Prkmihf.s. ORDERS. What must bo obeyed by servants 59 Injury arising from obedience to 87,88,98 OVERCROWDING page' 110, 118 OVERSEER. Notice to end service of ... .:. 5G Disobedience to orders of 59 Liability of, for libel 159 OVERTIME. As regards workmen 01 ,, apprentices ... 102, 100 Under Factory Act 113 PArER DUTY, The 10 PARENTS. Employing own children 115 PATENTS. Threats for infringing 180 PAYMENT. Printer when entitled to 238 PERIODICALS, see aho NEWSPArcus. Libels in... ... 158—165 PHOTOGRAPH. Copyright in 207 PICKETING ... 128-131 PICTURES. Criticisms of 150, 151 Copyright in 207 PIECE HANDS 43-45 Rules of London Society of Compositors, as to ... 44 Whether work can be demanded 69,70 PLAY. Copyright in 209 POST OFFICE. Registration of Newspapers at 29 Postal regulations 28-32 ,, ,, offences against ... 32 PKEMISES. Injury from unsafety of 74, 210 PREMIUM. On apprenticeship ... 101-107 PRESSMEN. Notice to quit sei-vice 50 Liability for libel 159 PRINT. Copyright in 208 PAGE PRINTEES. Who may be ... ... ... ... ... .,, 1.5 Must print their name on the works they issue 16 — 18 Must preserve copies for 6 months ... ... ... 10 Must give notice of starting to Factory Inspector... 110 Printers and their customers, rights and liabilities 235 Liabilities to third persons ... ... ... ... 239 FEINTING. Contract for, whether writing necessary ... ... 230 „ „ stamp „ ... 230, 235 PEOCEEDINGS. Between employer and workman ... ... ... (58 ,, master and apprentice ... ... ... 10(3 In actions under Employers' Liability Act ... 89 — 92 In libel actions ... ... ... ... ... ... 165 „ prosecutions ... ... ... ... ... 172 PEOPEIETOR OF NEWSPAPEE, etc. Liability of, for libel 103 PUBLIC INTEREST. Matters of 146 PUBLIC PEEFOEMANCES. Criticism of ... ... ... ... ... ... 151 PUBLIC PEESONS. Criticism of .., .. ... ... ... ... 118 Pi'ivate affairs of ... ... ... ... ... ... 119 PUBLICATION. Of libel, what is 153 „ who liable for ...' ... ... 154 — 165 ,, by mistake ... ... ... ... ... 156 PUBLISHEE (of Newspaper, Book, &c.). Liability of , for libel 163,166 PUBLISHEES. Agreements with authors ... ... ... ... 217 PUNISHMENT. For libel 174 READEES (Proof), Notice to end service of... Liability of, for libel REGISTEE. Under Factory Act REGISTRATION. Of printing offices None now required 56 158 111 11 15 INUEX. XVU PAGE EEGISTEATION-co)i Colonics, and tlu' Ltnv in force in tlicm. By John Dennistoun Wood, E.sq., Barrister-at-Law. Ruy.il 12mo. 1884. 6s. AVERAGE. — Hopkins' Hand-Book of Average, to which is added a Chapter on Arbitration. — Fourtli Edition. By Manley Hopkins, Esq., Author of "A Manual of Marine Insurance," &c. Demy Svo. IHHl. \l.U. " 'I'lif wdik is eminently practical, and cxhihits the results of practical experience in overj- brnnili of tlic Kubjcct witli whicli it deals, and the book may properly find its I)lac(; in the library of every lawyer wlio occupies himself wth ships and shipping." — Jjiivi Joiinint. %* All standard Tmic Vorhsarc Icrpt in Sloclc, in laic calf and other lindings. 119, CHANCERY LANE, LONDON, W.C. AVE RAG E—contimied. Lowndes' Law of General Average, — English and Foreign. Fourth Edition. By Richaed Lowndes. Author of "The Law of Marine Insurance," &c. Royal 8vo. 188S. \l. 10«. BALLOT. — Fitzgerald's Ballot Act. — With an Introduction. Forming a Guide to the Procedure at Parliamentary and Municipal Elections. Second Etlition. By Geeald A. R. Fitzgerald, M.A., Esq., Bar- ristcr-at-Law Fcap. Svo. 1876. bs. 6d. BANKING,— Walker's Treatise on Banking Law. — Second Edition. By J. D. Walkee, Esq., Ban-ister-at-Law. Demy Svo. 1885. 15s. BANKRUPTCY.— Chitty's Index, Vol. \.— Vide "Digests." Haynes' Lectures on Bankruptcy; originally delivered before the members of the Liverpool Law Students' Association. By John F. Haynes, LL.D. Royal 12mo. 1884. 5s. Lawrance's Precedents of Deeds of Arrangement between Debtors and their Creditors ; including Forms of Resolutions for Compositions and Schemes of Ai-rangement under the Bankruptcy Act, 1883. Second Edition. With Introductory Chapters. By G. W. Lawkance, M.A., Esq., Barrister-at-Law. Svo. 1886. 7s. 6^. " "Will be of much use to the practitioner." — Law Quarterly Iteview, April, 1886. "_A small hut useful collection of precedents by a draftsman very familiar -with the subject." — Latv Journal. Rigg's Bankruptcy Act, 1883, and the Debtors Act, 1869, with the Rules and Forms belonging thereto, and the Bills of Sale Acts, 1878 and 1882. Edited witli a Commentary. By James McMuLLENRiGG,Esq.,Barrister-at-Law. Royal 12mo.' 1S84. I0s.6d. Williams' Law and Practice in Bankruptcy.— Comprising- the Bankruptcy Act, 1883, the Bankruj)tcy Rules, 1886, the Debtors Acts. 1869, 1878, and the Bills of Sale Acts, 1878 and 1882. Fourth Edition. By R. Vaughan Williams, W. Vaughan Williams, and EDWAEDWM.HANSELL,Esqrs.,Barristers-at-Law. Roy. Svo. 1886. 28s. "The volume is brought quite up to date, and vre can recommend it as a safe and useful guide to practitioners." — Law Quarterly Review, January, 1887. " Is a work of authority, and it expounds the principles affecting bankruptcy jurisdiction, lays down the law, and supports all propositions by decided cases, which are digested with neatness and accuracy. In this fourth edition the author and editors have brought everything up to the date of publication, and the edition will sustain, if not increase, the reputation of its predecessors." — Law Times. BILLS OF EXCHANGE,— Chalmers' Digest of the Law of Bills of Exchange, Promissory Notes, and Cheques. Tliird Edition, containing the Bills of Exchange Act, 1882, with commentary thereon. By His Honour Judge Chalmees, Draughtsman of the Bills of Exchange Act, 1882, &c. Demy Svo. 1887. 16s. " Each section having appended to it illustrations in the nature of short statements of decided cases. These are prepared with that skilful conciseness of which the learned judge is a master." — Laiv Times, July 2, 1887. " This excellent work is unique. As a statement and explanation of the law, it will be found singularly useful." — Solicitors' Journal, October 8, 1887. BILLS OF SALE,— Fithian's Bills of Sale Acts, 1878 and 1882. With an Introduction and Explanatory Notes showing the changes made in the Law with respect to Bills of Sale, together with an Appendix of Precedents, Rules of Court, Forms, and Statutes. Second Edition. By Edwaed William Fithian, Esq., Bamster-at- Law. Royal 12mo. 1884. 6s. " The notes appear thorouglily reliable." — Law Times. %* All standard Laiv Works are kept in Stock, in law calf and other bindings. A 2 4 STEVENS AND SONS' LAW PUBLICATIONS. BOOK-KEEPING.— Matthew Hale's System of Book-keeping for Solicitors, containmg a List of all Books ueeessaiy, with a coiiiprc- hensive descrijjtion of their objects and uses for the purj oso of Drawing Bills of Costs and the rendering of Cash Accounts to clients ; also showing how to ascertain Profits derived from the business ; with an Appendix. Demy 8vo. 1884. fw. M. " We think t}iis is by far the most sensible, useful, practical little work on solicitort' book-keeping- that ve have seen." — Law Students' Journal. BUILDING SOCIETIES,— Wurtzburg on Building Societies.— The Acts relating to Building Societies, comprising the Act of 1830 and the Building Societies Acts, 1874, 1875, 1877, and 1884, and the Treasury Regulations, 1884 ; with an Introduction, copious Notes, and Precedents of Rules and Assurances. By E. A. Wuetzbueg, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. Royal 12mo. 1886. 7s. Gd. " Mr. Wm'tzbuTg''s -work is clearly and sensibly done." — Law Quartar};/ Ueview. " The work presents in brief, clear, and convenient form the whole law relating to Building- Societies." CANALS, — Webster's Law Relating to Canals : Comprising a Trea- tise on Na\'igable Rivers and Canals ; and including all Legislation to the close of the last Session of Parliament, together with the Pro- cedure and Practice in Private Bill Legislation ; with a coloured Map of the existing Canals and Navigations in England and Wales. By RobeetG.Web.stee,LL.B., Barrister-at-Law. DemySvo. 1885. 11. Is. CARRIERS. — Browne on Carriers. — A Treatise on the Law of CaiTiers of Goods and Passengers by Land and Water. By J. H. B. Beq-^^'e, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. 8vo. 1873. 18*. Carver's Treatise on the Law relating to the Carriage of Goods by Sea. — By Thomas Gilbeet Caevee, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. Royal 8vo. 1885. 32«. " A cireful and accurate treatise." — Law Quarterly Beview, No. 5. " There can be no question that Mr. Carver has produced a sound and useful treatise on the branch of mercantile law upon which he has set himself to wi-ite." — Laiv Journal. •' Part I. deals -nith the Contract, Part II. with the Voyage, and Part III. with the Deliverj'. All three subjects are treated with consummate care, added to a literary skill of no mean order The work has the rare merit of being -within the limits of a student's capacity, and at the same time useful to the Admiralty practi- tioner." — Law Timfs-. CHAMBER PRACTICE.— Archibald's Practice at Judges' Cham- bers and in the District Registries in the Queen's Bench Division, High Court of Justice; with Forms of Summonses and Orders. Second Edition. By W. F. A. ARCHIBALD, Esq., Bar- rister-at-Law, and P. E. Vizaed, of the Summons and Order De- partment, Royal Courts of Justice. Royal 12mo. 1886. 15s. " Co.nnot fail to be of the grciitest service to practitioners," — Solicitors' Journal. " In its present form it is und(iul>t((]ly a valu.-iMc liandbook of the practice in the Queen's Bench Division Chanibei-s, bcfcjrc citliir a, jur\ or master, or before a district refristrar The work, as a wlmlc, .•^cciiis tliurnnjildy coinplc^to." — Law Times. " Contains a groat many forms of suiimioiiscs and urdcrs ol' iiiiu-h vise to the prac- titioner. Tlic comments on the law arc in general clear ami tru^5t worthy ." — Laiv Journal. CHANCERY, ami Vide "Equity." Daniell's Chancery Practice. — The Practice of the Chancery Division of the Higli Court of Justi(^e and on appeal therefrom, being tho Sixth EditJion of Danieirs Chiincery Practice, with altoration.s and additions, and references to a companion Volume of Forms. By L. Field, E. C. Dunn, and T. Ribxon, assisted by W. II. UrjoiiN, Barri.sters-at-Liiw. 2 vols, in 3 parts. Di'my 8vo. 1882-84. 6/. 6.s-. " There w to be found, in cveiy part of tlie book we have examined, evidence of RTc-iit cure. . . . It is exactly wliat it professes to 1)0 — a concise and carefid digest of the ijractico." — Snlieitors' Journal. " A (-oiiiplete, trustworthy, and indispensable guide to the practice of tho Chancery TJi vision." — Law Time.i. "t,* All standard Ldiv Ifur/isarc Jcrpt in Slack, in law calf and other bindings. 119, CHANCERY LANE, LONDON, W.C. 5 CHANCE RY—coniini(ed. Daniell's Forms and Precedents of Proceedings in the Chancery Division of the High Court of Justice and on Appeal there- from. Fourth Edition. With Summaries of the llules of tho SuiDreme Court, Practical Notes and References to the Sixth Edition of "Daniell's Chancery Practice." By Ciiaeles Bueney, B.A. Oxon., a Chief Clerk of the Hon. Mr. Justice Chitty. Royal 8vo. 188.5. 21. 10s. " Mr. Burney jippears to have performed the laborious task before him with gi-eat success." — Law Join-ual. " Many of the chaijtcrs have been revised by persons specially qualified to deal ■with theh- contents." — Law Qiinrlerli/ Iftview, July, 18S5. Morgan's Chancery Acts and Orders. — The Statutes, Rules of Court and General Orders relating- to the Practice and Jurisdiction of the Chancery Division of the High Court of Justice and the Court of Appeal. With Copious Notes. Sixth Edition. By the Right Hon. Geoege Osboene Morgan, one of Her Majesty's Counsel, and E. A. WuETZBUEG, Barrister-at-Law. Royal Svo. 1885. 11. lO.s'. ■" This work we have had in constant use for the last few weeks, and we have no hesitation in saying- tliat the present state of the Harmonious Whole, so far as relates to tho Chancery Di\-ision, is made to appear as intelligible as under the circumstances can rcasdualily bo expected." — Law Qiuirterly Ilf.view, July, 18b5. Peel's Chancery Actions. — A Concise Treatise on the Practice and Procedure in Chancery Actions under the Rules of the Supreme Court, 1883. Thii-d Edition. By Sydney Peel, Esq., Barrister- at-Law. Demy Svo. 1883. 8s. 6i hnv calf and other bindings. 119, CHANCERY LANE, LONDON, W.C. COSTS — continued. Scott's Costs in the High Court of Justice and other Courts. Fourth Edition. By John Scott, of the Inner Temple, Esq., Barrister-ut-Law. Demy 8vo. 1880. II. Os. Webster's Parliamentary Costs. — Private Bills, Election Petitions, Apjjeals, House of Lords. Fourth Edition. By C. Cavanagh, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. Post 8vo. 1881. 2Ua. COUNTY COURTS.— Pitt-Lewis' County Court Practice.— A Complete Practice of the County Courts, including Admiralty and Bankruptcy, embodying the Acts, Rules, Forms and Costs, with Additional Forms and a Full Index. Third Edition. By G. Pitt- Lewis, Esq., one of Her Majesty's Counsel, assisted by H. A. De Colyae, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. In '2 vols. Demy 8vo. Summary of Contents. Vol. I. History, Constitution, and Jurisdiction (including Prohibition and Mandamus), Practice in all ordinary Actions (including Actions under the Bills of Exchange Acts, in Ejectment, in Remitted Actions, and in Replevin), and on Appeals, with Appendices, Table of Cases and Index. 1887. 30«. "Vol. II. Practice in Admu-alty, Probate, Bankruptcy, and under Special Statutes, with Appendices, Tableof Cases and Index. (In the press.) " The standard County Court Practice." — Solicitors' Journal, Dec. 3, 1887. " One of the best books of practice which is to be found in our legal literature." — Jjaw Times. " Mr. Pitt-Lewis has, in fact, aimed — and we are glad to .say successfully — at providing for the County Coiu-ts' practitioner what ' Chitty'.s Ai-chbold ' and ' DanieU's Chanceiy Pi-actice ' have long been to practitioners in the High Court." — Laiu ^lagazine. CRIIVIINAL LAW.— Archbold's Pleading and Evidence in Criminal Cases. — With the Statutes, Precedents of Indictments, &c., and the Evidence necessary to support them. Twentieth Edition. By William Beuce, Esq., Stipendiary Magistrate for the Borough of Leeds. Royal 12mo. 1886. II. Us. Q>d. Mews' Digest of Cases relating to Criminal Law from 1756 to 1883, inclusive.— By John Mews, assisted by C. M. Chapman, Haeet H. W. Spaeham, and A. H. Todd, Barristers-at-Law. Royal 8vo. 1884. 11. Is. Roscoe's Digest of the Law of Evidence in Criminal Cases, — Tenth Edition. By Horace Smith, Esq., Barrister-at-Law, Recorder of Lincoln. Royal r2mo. 1884. ll.Ws.Qd. "We have looked for a considerable number of the recent cases, and have found them all coiTCctly stated." — Solicitors' Journal. Russell's Treatise on Crimes and Misdemeanors, — Fifth Edi- tion. By Samuel Prentice, Esq., one of Her Majesty's Coimsel, 3 vols. Royal 8vo. 1877. bl.lbs.&d. " What better Digest of Criminal Law 20uld we possibly hope for than ' EusseU on Crimes ' V — Sir James Fit-James Stephen's Speech on Codification. Shirley's Sketch of the Criminal Law. — By W. Shirley Shirley. Author of "Leading Cases Made Easy," assisted by C. M. Atkin- son, Esqrs., Barristers-at-Law. Demy 8vo. 1880. Is. 6d. " As a primary introduction to Criminal Law, it will be foimd very acceptable to students." — Law Students' Journal. Thring, — Ytde "Navy." DECISIONS OF SIR GEORGE J ESSEL,— Peter's Analysis and Digest of the Decisions of Sir George Jessel, late Master of the RoUs ; with Full Notes, References and Couunents, and copious Index. By Apsley Petee Peter, Solicitor, Law Society Prizeman. Demy Svo. 1883. 16.:*. %* All standard Law Works are kept in Stock, in latv calf and other hixdlngs. B 10 STEVENS AND SONS' LAW PUBLICATIONS. DIARY.— Lawyer's Companion (The), Diary, and Law Directory for 1888. — For the use of the Legal Profes.sion, Public Companies, Justices, Merchants, Estate Agents, Auctioneers, &c., &c. Edited by J. Teusteam, LL.M., of Lincoln's Inn, Barrister-at-Law ; and contains Tables of Costs in Conveyancing, &c. ; Monthly Diary of County, Local Government, and Parish Business ; Oaths in Supreme Court; Summary of Legislation of 1887; Alphabetical Index to the Practical Statutes ; a Copious Table of Stamp Duties ; Legal Time, Interest, Discount, Income, Wages and other Tables ; Probate, Legacy and Succession Diities ; and a variety of matters of practical utility. Published Annttailt. Forty-second Issue. 1888. {Now ready.) A complete List of the English Bar, and London and Country Solici- tors, with date of admission and appointments, and is issued in the following forms, octavo size, strongly bound in cloth : — s. d. 1 . Two days on a page, plain . . . . . ..5 2. The above, inteeleaved for Attendances . . . .70 3. T^vo days on a page, ruled, with or without money columns o 6 4. The above, with money columns, inteeleaved for Atten- dances .80 6. Whole page for each day, plain . . . . . .76 6. The above, inteeleaved for Attendances . . . .96 7. Whole page for each day, ruled, with or without money columns .......... 8 6 8. The above, inteeleaved for Attendances . . . .10 6 9. Three days on a page, ruled blue lines, without money columns . . . . . . . . . .50 The Diari/ contains memoranda of Legal Bmhiess tlxroughout the Year. " An excellent work." — Thi: Times. " Contains fill the information whicli could be looked for in such a work, and gives it in a most convenient form and very completely." — Solicitors' Jnurnal. " 'J'he ' Lavryer's Companion and Diary ' is a book that ought to be in the possession of every lawyer, and of every man of business." " The ' Lawyer's Companion ' is, indeed, what it is called, for it combines everything' required for reference in the lawj'er's o^ce."— Law Times. " It is a book without which no la'N^'yer's library or office can be complete." — Irish Law Times, DICTIONARY.— The Pocket Law Lexicon.— Explaining Technical Words, Phrases and Maxims of the English, Scotch and Roman Law, to wliich is added a complete List of Law Reports, with their Abbre- \-iations. Second Edition, Enlarged. By Henet G. Rawson, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. Fcap. 8vo. 1884. 6s. 6d. " A wonderful little Iciriil TMci\iiu:iry."—Ii)i/i-rmtiur's Lmr Students' Journal. *' A vfTy lianily, coiii]il(tr. and usi't'ul little work." — Sdtnrdaij lieview. " Will lie found exceedinj^ly useful to law stiidents and others." — The Jurist. Wharton's Law Lexicon. — Forming an Epitome of the Law of Eng- land, and containing full Explanations of the Technical Terms and Phrases thereof, both Ancient and Modern; including the vai-ious Legal Terms used in Comnierciial Business. Together with a Trans- lntif>n of tlio Latin Law Maxims and selected 'Titles from the Civil, Scotch and Indian Law. Seventh Edition. By J. M. Lelt, E.sq., Burristor-at-Law. Super-royal 8vo. 1883. 1/. 18.t. " On almost cvr'ry point both student and practitioner can gather infmination from this invaluable liook, which ou},'lit to be in every lawyer's ottice." — (,'ihson's Law Notes. " Ah it now stands the Lexicon contains all it need contain, and to those who value Huch a work it i» made more valuable still." — Law Times. *,• All standard Law Jf'orJcs arc kept in Stock, in law calf and other bindings. 119, CHANCERY LANE, LONDON, W.C. 11 DIGESTS.— Chitty's Index to all the Reported Cases decided in the several Courts of Equity in England, the Privy Council, and the House of Lords, with a selection of Irish Cases, on or relating to the Principles, Pleading, and Practice of Eqmty and Bankruptcy from the earliest period. Fourth Edition. Wholly Revised, Re-classified, and brought down to the End of the Year 1883. By Henry Edwaed HiEST, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. Volumes I. to V. contain the Titles " Abandomnent" to " Practice and Pleading." Royal 8 vo. 1883-87. Vols. I., II., III. and V. Iwwh, U. lis. %d. Vol. IV., 21. 2.v. (Vol. VL, in the Press.) " The practitioner can hardly afford to do without such a 'weapon as Mr. Hirst supplies, because if he does not use it probably his opponent ■will." — Iaiw Journal, October 1, 1887. " On the -whole the work is thoroughly well done. The laborious care bestowed upon the foui-th edition of ' Chitty ' deserves all praise." — Law Quarleiiy Hevieiv. " We think that we owe it to Mr. Hirst to say that on each occasjion when a volume of his book comes before us we exert some dilig-ence to try and find an omission in it, and we apply tests which are generally successful with ordinary text-writers, but not so with Mr. Hirst. At present we have not been able to find a flaw in his armoiu'. We conclude, therefore, that he is an unusually accm-ateand diligent compiler." — Law Times, January 15, 1887. Dale and Lehmann's Digest of Cases, Overruled, Not Followed, Disapproved, Approved, Distinguished, Commented on and specially considered in the English Courts from the Year 1756 to1886 inclusive, arranged according to alphabetical order of their subjects ; together with Extracts from the Judgments delivered thereon, and a complete Index of the Cases, in which are included all Cases reversed from the year 1856. By Charles Wm. Mitcaife Dale, M.A., LL.B., and Rudolf Chambers Lehmann, M.A., assisted by Charles H. L. Neish, M.A, and Herbert H. Child, B.A.. Bar- risters-at-Law. Royal 8vo. 1887. 21. 10,v. [Forms a Supplement to Chittifs Equity Index and Fisher'' & Common Law Big .y Extract fkom Preface.] — Our object in compiling- this Work has been to facilitate the study of Case Law, by presenting- to the inquirer in a novel form, convenient for reference, the history of the various cases that have been adversely discussed or speciaUy considered in the Eng-lish Coiu-ts from 1756 up to the present time. Extracts from Reviews.] — " One of the best works of reference to be found ia any library." — Law Times, July 2, 1887. " The work has been carefully executed, and is likely to be of much service to the practitioner." — Solicitors' Journal, July 16, 1887. "So far as we have tested the work, it seems very well done, and the mechanical execution is excellent. As for the utility of such a book as this, it is too ob-vious to be enlarged upon. One could -wish that there had been a ' Dale & Lehmaun' some years sooner." — Laiv Quarterly Jleview, July, 1887. "The book is divided into two parts, the fli'st consisting of an alphabetical index of the cases contained in the Digest presented in a tabular form, showing at a glance how, where, and by what judges they have been considered. The second portion of the book comprises the Digest itself, and bears marks of the great labour and research bestowed upon it by the compilers. Their plan is to give passages from the judgments in which the cases overruled or otherwise dealt -with are considered, the extracts being digested and arranged according to their subject-matter This makes a valuable -work of reference." — Law Journal, June 4, 1887. Fisher's Digest of the Reported Decisions of the Courts of Common Law, Bankruptcy, Probate, Admiralty, and Divorce, together with a Selection from those of the Court of Chancery and Irish Courts from 1756 to 1883 inclusive. Founded on Fisher's Digest. By John Me-ws, assisted by C. M. Chapman, Harry H. W. Sparhasi, and A. H. Todd, Barristers-at-Law. 7 vols. Roj'al Svo. 1884. 121. Us. *^* Annual Supplements (in continuation of Fisher's Digest and Chitty's Equity Index) for 1884, 12s. 6d. ; 1885, los. ; 1886, 15s. " To the common la-wj'cr it is, in our opinion, the most useful work he can possess." — Law Times. %* AH standard law Works are kept in Slock, in law calf and other lindinns. B 2 12 STEVENS AND SONS' LAW PUBLICATIONS. D I G ESTS — continued. Notanda Digest in Law, Equity, Banliiim(ed. Smith's Manual of Equity Jurisprudence, — A Manual of Equity- Jurisprudence for Practitioners and Students, founded on the Works of Story, Spence, and other writers, and on more than a thousand subsequent cases, comprising the Fundamental Principles and the points of Equity usually occiuTing in General Practice. By Josiah W. Smith, B.C.L., Q.C. Thirteenth Edition. 12mo. 1880. I2s.6d. " There is no disguising- the trut)i ; the proper mode to use this book is to leaiii its pages by heart." — Law ilagazine and Heview. " It -will be found as useful to the practitioner as to the student." — Solicitors' Journal. Smith's Practical Exposition of the Principles of Equity, illus- trated by the Leading Decisions thereon. For the use of Students and Practitioners. By H. Aethue Smith, M.A., LL.B., E.?q., Bari'ister-at-Law. Demy 8vo. 1882. 20s. " The book seems to us to be one of great value to students." — Solicitors' Journal. " Tliisis a most remarkable book, containing in a reasonable space more infoi-mation, and that better aiTanged and conveyed, than almost any other law book of recent times -which has come under our notice." — Saturday llevieiv. ESTOPPEL, — Everest and Strode's Law of Estoppel, By Lancelot Fielding Everest, and Edmtjnd Strode, Esqrs., Barristers-at-La-vr. Demy 8vo. 1884. 18s. " The book -will be found a useful repository of the case la-w- on the subject." — Law Journal, June 28, 18S4. EXAMINATION GUI DES,— Bedford's Digest of the Preliminary Examination Questions in Latin Grammar, Arithmetic, French Grammar, History and Geography, -with the Answers. Second Edition. Demy 8vo. 1882. 18s. Bedford's Student's Guide to the Ninth Edition of Stephen's New Commentaries on the Laws of England, — Thu-d Edition. Demy 8vo. 1884. 7s. 6d. Bedford's Final Examination Digest: containing a Digest of the Final Exammation Questions in matters of Law and Procedure determined by the Chancery, Queen's Bench, Common Pleas, and Exchequer Divisions of the High Coiu-t of Justice, and on the Law of Ileal and Personal Property and the Practice of Conveyancing, with the Answers. 8vo. 1879. 16s. " Will furnish students -witli a large armoury of -weapons -with -which to meet the attack.s of the examiners of the Incor])orated La-w Societj'." — Latu Times. Haynes' Lectures on Bankruptcy; originally delivered before the members of the Liverpool Law Student's Association. By John F. Haynes, LL.D., Author of the " Student's Leading Cases," «S:c. Eoyal 12mo. 1884. os. Haynes and Nelham's Honours Examination Digest, compri.'sing all the Questions in Conveyancing, Equity, Common Law, Bank- ruptcy, Probate, Divorce, Admiralty, and Ecclesiastical Law and Practice asked at the Solicitors' Honours Examiiuitions since their establishment to the jm^sent time, with Answei-s tliereto. By John F. Haynes, LL.D., Author of " Chancery Practice," "The Students' Leading Cases," ifcc, and Thomas A. Neliiam, Solicitor (Honours). Demy Svo. 1883. 15s. " .St.udoutH going in for lionnnrs will ihid tliis one to their advantage." — Law Times. " Aii.swii's arc aj)i)Oiided wliicli, judging from an oxauiiuation of several of them, ajijK'iir to be curcful and accurate." — -Vo/ic/i'yn'.' Jotirnal. Shoarwood's Guide for Candidates for the Professions of Barrister and Solicitor,— Second l^^dition. By Josei'ii A. Siieak- WOOD, Esq., Ban-ister-at-Law. Demy Svo. 1887. Gs. *^* All standard Latv IForksarc kept in Stock, in law calf and other bindinff.s. 119, CHANCERY LANE, LONDON, W.C. 15 EXAMINATION GUIDE S— continued. Napier's Modern Digest of the Final Examinations; a Modem Digest of the Law necessary to bo known for the Final Examination of the Incorporated Law Society, done into Questions and Answei's ; and a Guide to a Course of Study for that Examination. By T. Batesian Napiee, LL.D., London, of the Inner Temple, Barrister- at-Law. Demy 8vo. 1887. IS*-- " As far as we have tested them -we have found the questions very well framed, and the answers to them clear, concise and accurate. If used in the manner that Dr. Napier recommends that it should be used, that is, together with the text-books, there can be little doubt that it wiU prove of considerable value to students."— r/ia J?inst, March. 1887. EXECUTORS.— Macaskie's Treatise on the Law of Executors and Administrators, and of the Administration of the Estates of Deceased Persons. With an Appendix of Statutes and Forms. By Stuaet Cunningham Macaskie, of Gray's Inn, Esq., Barrister-at- Law. 8vo. 1881. 10«. 6*/. " Students may read the book with advantage as an introduction to ' "Williams,' and by practitioners not possessing the larger work it will undoubtedly be found useful." — Law Journal. Williams' Law of Executors and Administrators.— Eighth Edition By Waltek Vaughan Williams and Roland Vaughan Williams, Esqrs., Barristers-at-Law. 2 vols. Royal 8vo. 1879. SI. 16*. EXTRADITION.— Kirchner's L'Extradition.— RecueilRenfermant in Extenso tovis les Traites conclus jusqu'au ler Janvier, 1883, entre les Nations civilisees, et donnant la solution precise des difficultes qui peuvent surgir dans leur application. Avec une Preface de Me Geobges LACHAtTD, Avocat a la Com- d'Appel de Paris. Public sous les auspices de M. C. E. Howaed Vincent, Directeur des Affaires CrimineUes de la Police Metropolitaine de Londres. Par F. J. KiECHNEE, Attache a la Direction des Affaires Ci-imineUes. In 1 voL (1150 pp.). Royal 8vo. 1883. 21. 2s. FACTORS ACTS.— Boyd and Pearson's Factors Acts (1823 to 1877). With an Introduction and Explanatory Notes. By Hugh Fenwick Boyd and Aethue Beilbt Peaeson, Barristers-at-Law. Royal r2mo. 1884. 6.s. " This "is an admirable little work. The book is tersely and well written, and the comments are intelligent." — Law Journal. FACTORY ACTS.— Notcutt's Law relating to Factories and Work- shops. Second Edition. r2mo. 1879. 9*. FARM, LAW OF.— Dixon's Law of the Farm.— A Digest of Cases connected with the Law of the Farm, and including the Agricultural Customs of England and Wales. Fourth Edition. By Heney Peekins, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. 8vo. 1879. II. 6*. " It is impossible not to be struck with the extraordinary research that must have been used in the compilation of such a book as this." — Law Journal. •^* Supplement to above, containing the Agi-icultural Holdings (Eng- land) Act, 1883, with explanatory Notes and Forms ; together with the Ground Game Act, 1880. By Aubeey J. Spencee, Esq., Bar- rister-at-Law. Demy 8vo. 1883. 6s. FIXTURES,— Amos and Ferard on the Law of Fixtures and other Property partaking both of a Real and Personal Nature. Third Edition. Revised and adapted to the present state of the Law by C. A. Feeaed and W. Howland Robeets, Esqrs., Barristers-at-Law. Demy8vo. 1883. 18j. " An accurate and well written work." — Saturday Beview. " The editors have accomplished their work satisfactorily." — Solicitors^ Journal. %* AU standard Law Works are kept in Stock, in law calf and other bindings. 16 STEVENS AND SONS' I.AW PUBLICATIONS. FORMS.— Allen.— r«., ('urpus I'rofcssor of Jurisprudence in the University of Oxford ; Professor of Common Law in the Inns of Court. Vols. I., II. and III. Royal 8vo. 188;3-87. IJach, Us. ^gT" Subscription \()s. per annum, post free. [Foreigti postage 2s. Gd. extra.) *,* All standard Law Works are kept in Stock, in law calf and other bindings. 119, CHANCERY LANE, LONDON, W.C. 19 LAW R E PO RTS. — A very large stock of now and second-hand Reports. Prices on application. LAWYER'S COMPANION,— 7'(V/6' "Diary." LEADING CASES.— Ball's Leading Cases. Vide "Torts." Haynes' Student's Leading Cases, Being some of the Principal Decisions of the Courts in Constitutional Law, Common Law, Con- veyancing and Equity, Probate, Divorce, and Criminal Law. With Notes for the use of Students. Second Edition. By John F. Haynes, LL.D. Demy 8vo. 1884. l(i.y. " Will prove of gi-eat utility, not only to students, but practitioners. The notes are clear, pointed and concise." — Law Times. " We have always had much pleasure and confidence in advising students to procm-e this book." — Gibson's Law Notes. Shirley's Leading Cases, — A Selection of Leading Cases in the Common Law, with Notes. By W. Shieley Shieley, M.P., Esq., BaiTister-at-Law. Thii-d Edition. Demy 8vo. 1886. Ids. " A very popular work with students, and, we think, deservedly so If any words of praise of om-s can add to its well-deserved reputation, we give the reader carte blanche to supply them on our behalf out of his own thilUing eloquence and vivid imagination, and we will undertake to ratify them." — The Jurist, Jan. 1887. "The book is deserving of high praise, and we commend it in aU confidence." — Gihso7i's Law Xotes. " The selection is very large, though aU are distinctly ' leading cases,' and the notes are by no means the least meritorious part of the work." — Law Journal. " Mr. Shuiey writes well and clearly, and evidently imderstands what he is writing about." — Law Times. LEGACY DUTI ES.— Vide " Taxes on Succession." LEXICON,— n^e "Dictionary." LIBEL AND SLANDER.— Odgers on Libel and Slander.— A Digest of the Law of Libel and Slander : the Evidence, Procedure and Practice, both in Civil and Criminal Cases, and Precedents of Pleadings. Second Edition, with a chapter on the Newspaper Libel and Registration Act, 1881. By W. Blaxe Odgees, M.A., LL.D., Ban-i.ster-at-Law. Royal 8vo. 1887. 1^. 12i>'. "The first edition of tliis book, whicli appeared in ISSl, has well stood the test of time, and has come to be accepted as a full, acom-ate and satisfactory guide upon its subject, and, inasmuch as the author adopted the comparatively new and bold form of ' stating the law on each point in the form of an abstract proposition, citing the decided cases in smaller tj-pe merely as illustrations of that abstract proposition,' he may be considered to have achieved a more than ordinary success. " Since the appearance of the first edition the statute law has been altered by the Newspaper Act of 1881 ; tlie Rules of 1883 have much modified the practice, and the case law has been supplemented by many decisions, of which those bearing on blasphemy, the rights of mamed women (see, e.g., Seroka v. Kattenburg, 34 W. E. 542), criminal informations (see, e.g., Yates v. Beg., 33 W. E. 482), .and the liability for libelling the dead (see, e.g., lleg. v. Lahouchere, 32 W. E. 8R1), are the best known. In these and other points Mr. Odgers has fuUy (sometimes perhaps too fully) brought his book up to date, referring, for instance, to a case so recent as Spokes v. Spokes, decided only on the 2nd of June. . . Speaking generally the book continues a very good one, indeed, perhaps, one of the best in the hands of the profession upon any subject. We are glad to find that references are stfil supplied to all the current reports, and that the index and table of cases appear to have had as much labour in proportion spent upon them as the text." — Solicitors' Journal, August 6, 1887. " We have rarely examined a work which shows so much industry. ... So good is the book, which in its topical arrangement is vastly superior to the general run of law books, that criticism of it is a compliment rather than the reverse." — Law Journal. LIBRARIES AND MUSEUMS.— Chambers' Digest of the Law relating to Public Libraries and Museums and Literary and Scientific Institutions generally. Second Edition. By G. F. Chambees, Barrister- at -Law. Imperial 8vo. 1879. 8s. 6rf. %* All standard Law Works are kept in Stock, in law calf and other bindings. 20 STEVENS AND SONS' LAW PUBLICATIONS. LICENSING.— Leiy and Foulkes' Licensing Acts, 1828, 1869, and 1872 — 1874; containmo: the Lavr of the Sale of Liquors by Retail and the Management of Licensed Houses ; with Notes to the Acts, a Summary of the Law, and an Appendix of Forms, Third Edition. Including the Statutes and Cases to August, 1887, and the Law of the Licensing of Theatres and Metropolitan Music Halls. Bv J. M. Lely and W. D. I. Eotjlkes, Esqrs., Barristers- at-Law. Eoyal 12mo. 1887. 10s. Qd. LIFE ASSURANCE.— Scratchley's Decisions in Life Assurance Law. collated alphabetically according to the point involved, with the Statutes and Chapters on Points of Practice, &c. By Aethue ScEATCHLEY, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. Demy 8vo. 1887. 10s. &d- LOCAL AND MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT.— Bazalgette and Humphreys' Law relating to Local and Municipal Govern- ment. Comprising the Statutes relating to PubUc Health, Municipal Corporations, Highways, Burial, Gas and Water, Public Loans, Com- pulsory Taking of Lands, Tramways, Electric Lighting, Artizans' Dwellings, &c.. Elvers' Pollution, the Clauses Consolidation Acts, and many others, fully annotated with cases up to date, a selection of the Circulars of the Local Government Board, with a Table of upwards of 2,500 Cases, and full Inde.^. Bj'C.Noehan Bazaxgette and Geoege HuMPHEETS, Esqrs., Barristers- at-Law. Sup. royal 8vo. 18S.3. 3^.3*. "A complete collection of the law relating' to local government, intended to enable the legal ad\'iser of any local authority to tind within its backs everything: which he ■will require. . . . Exceedingly complete and careful cross references, and not unfre- quently shrewd and useful practical observations." — Solicitors' Journal. " The book is thoroughly comprehensive of the law on all points of which it professes to treat. There is a table of over 2500 cases, each of which has reference to all the reports in which it has appeared." — Laiv Journal. "We have no hesitation in recommending the work." — Local Government Chronicle. " For an officer or memlier of a local authority to have before him one volume, between the covers of which he knows everything lie desires to ascertain can be foimd, is a convenience not to be lightly estimated." — Metropolitan. " The work is one that no local officer should be without; for nothing short of a whole library of statutes, reports, and handbooks could take its place. For all practical e>ery-day purposes — that is, for assisting town clerks and others in the discharge of their ordinary duties — the work which we have under re'sriew is all that is required." — Municipal Review. MAGISTERIAL LAW.— Shirley's Elementary Treatise on Magis- terial Law, and on the Practice of Magistrates' Courts. — By W. Shieley SniELEY, M.A., B.C'.L., Esq. Roy. liimo. 1881. iJs.Qd. Wigram. — I'tde " Justice of the Peace." MARITIME DECISIONS.— Douglas' Maritime Law Decisions,— An Alphabetical Reference Index to Recent and Important Jlaritiine Decisions. Compiled by Robt. R.Douglas. I)emy8vo. 1S8S. 7*'. Grf. MARRIAGE.— Kelly's French Law of Marriage, and the Conflict of Laws that arises therefrom. By E. Kelly, M.A., of the New York Bar, Liccncie t'u Dr(}it de la Faculte de Paris. Roy.Svo. 1S85. Gs. MARRIAGE SETTLEM ENTS.— Banning's Concise Treatise on the Law of Marriage Settlements ; with an Appendi.x of Statutes. By II. T. I'AXNiNCi, ]<;sq., I'ari-istcr-at-Law. Demy 8vo. 1884. \bs. MARRIED WOMEN'S PROPERTY.— Lush's Married Women's Rights and Liabilities in relation to Contracts, Torts, and Trusts. Bv IVfoNTAruTE Lrsii, Esq., Barrister-at-Law, Author of "Thr Law of lIiL-baiid and Wife." Royal Timo. 1887. 5.v. Smith's Married Women's Property Acts, 1882 and 1884, with an Iiitrodiiftioii and ( 'ritical and E.\[>l.iiiatory Notes, together with the Maj-ried AVomcn's Property Acts, 1870 and 1874. &c. 2nd Edit. Re- vi.sed. ItylL A. SMrnr,Es(j., Barrister-at-Law. Roy. I'imo. 1884. G.v. •,* All standard Law If'orls air Jicjjt in Slock, in law calf and other biinlinas. 119, CHANCERY LANE, LONDON, W.C. 21 MASTER AND SERVANT.— Macdonell's Law of Master and Servant, Part I. Common Law. Part II. Statute Law. By John Macdonell, M.A., Esq., Barrister-at-Law. DemySvo. 1883. 11. 5s. " A work which ^W11 be of real value to the practitioner." — Law Times. MAYOR'S COURT PRACTICE,— Candy's Mayor's Court Prac- tice. — The Jurisdiction, Process, Practice and Mode of Pleading in Ordinary Actions in the Mayor's Court in London. By George Candy, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. Demy 8vo. 1879. 14s. MERCANTILE LAW, — Russell's Treatise on Mercantile Agency, Second Edition. 8vo. 1873. H.-,-. Smith's Compendium of Mercantile Law, — Tenth Edition. By John Macdoxell, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. (/« the Press.) Tudor's Selection of Leading Cases on Mercantile and Maritime Law, — With Notes. By O. D. Tudor, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. Third Edition. Royal 8vo. 18S4. 21. 2s. Wilson's Mercantile Handbook of the Liabilities of Merchant, Shipowner, and Underwriter on Shipments by General Ves- sels. — By A. W-iLSON, Solicitor and Notary. Royal Timo. 1883. 6.v. Wood's Mercantile Agreements, — The Interpretation of Mercantile Agreements : A Summary of the Decisions as to the Meaning of Words and Provisions in Written Agreements for the Sale of Goods, Charter-Parties, Bills of Lading, and Marine Policies. With an Appendix containing a List of Words and Expressions used in, or in connection with, Mercantile Agreements, and a List of Mercantile Usages. By John Dennistoun Wood, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. Royal 8vo. 1886. 18s. METROPOLIS BUILDING ACTS, -Woolrych's Metropolitan Building Acts, together with such clauses of the Metropolis Management Acts as more particularly relate to the Building Acts, with Notes and Forms. Third Edition. By W. H. Macnamaea, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. 12mo. 1882. 10s. MINES. — Rogers' Law relating to Mines, Minerals and Quarries in Great Britain and Ireland, with a Summary of the Laws of Foreigu States, &c. Second Edition Enlarged. By His Honor Judge Rogers. Svo. 1876. II. lis. 6(/. MORTGAGE,— Coote's Treatise on the Law of Mortgage,— Fifth Edition. Thoroughly revised. By Williaji Wyllys Mackeson, Esq., one of Her Majesty's Counsel, and H. Arthur Smith, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. 2 vols. Royal 8vo. 188-1. SI. " A complete, terse and practical treatise for the modem lawyer." — SoUcilors' Journal. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS,— Bazalgette and Humphreys.— Vide " Local and Municipal Government." Leiy's Law of Municipal Corporations, — Containing the Municipal Corporation Act, 1882, and the Enactments incorporated therewith, •with a Selection of Supplementary Enactments, including therein the Electric Lighting Act, 1882, with Notes. By J. M. Lelt, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. Demy 8vo. 1882. los. NAVY. — Thring's Criminal Law of the Navy, with an Introductory Chapter on the Early State and Discipline of the Navy, the Rules of Evidence, and an Apjjendix comprising the Naval Discipline Act and Practical Forms. Second Edition. By Theodore Theing, Esq., Barrister-at-Law, and C. E. Giffoed, Assistant -Paymaster, Royal Navy. 12mo. 1877. 12s. Qd. *^* All standard Law Varies are Jccpt in Stock, in law calf and other bindings. 22 STEVENS AND SONS' LAW PUBLICATIONS. NEGLIGENCE. — Smith's Treatise on the Law of Negligence. Second Edition. By Hoeace Smith, Esq., Barrister-at-Law, Re- corder of Lincoln, Editor of " Addison on Contracts," " Addison on Torts," &c. Demy 8vo. 1884. 12.^.6^/. " Of great value both to the practitioner and student of law. It is not merely a book of reference, though it is hkely to be very valuable in that CApaeity. It is not merely a digest of decisions arranged under appropriate heads ; but it really answers to its title, and is a treatise on the law of negligence."— Solicitors' Journal. NISI PRIUS.— Roscoe's Digest of the Law of Evidence on the Trial of Actions at Nisi Prius. — Fifteenth Edition. By Maueice Powell, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. 2 vols. Demy 8vo. 1884. 21. IQs. " Continues to be a vast and closely packed storehouse of information on practice at Nisi Prius." — Law Journal. " We do not observe any diminution in the care or accuracy with which the cases have been noted." — Solicitors' Journal. NONCONFORMISTS.— Winslow's Law Relating to Protestant Nonconformists and their Places of Worship ; being a Legal Handbook for Nonconformists. By Reglnald Winslow, Esq., BaiTister-at-Law. Post 8vo. 1886. 6s. NOTARY. — Brooke's Treatise on the Office and Practice of a Notary of England, — With a full collection of Precedents. Fourth Edition. By Leone Levi, Esq., F.S.A., of Lincoln's Inn, Bar- rister-at-Law. 8vo. 1876. 11. 4s. OATHS. — Braithwaite's Oaths in the Supreme Courts of Judica- ture. — A Manual for the use of Commissioners to Administer Oaths in the Supreme Courts of Judicature in England and Ireland, &c. Fourth Edition. Re- issue. By T. W. Braithwaite, of the Central Office. Foolscap Svo. 1884. Xet, 2s. 6d. " The recognised guide of commissioners to administer oaths." — Solicitors' Journal. PARISH LAW.— Steer's Parish Law; being a Digest of the Law relating to the Civil and Ecclesiastical Govemment of Parishes and the Relief of the Poor. Fifth Edition. By W. H. Macnamaea, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. Demy Svo. 1887. 18«. " An exceedingly useful compendium of Parish Law." — La^a Times. PARTNERSHIP.— Pollock's Digest of the Law of Partnership. — With an Introdaictory Essay on Codification. Fourth Edition. By Fkederick Pollock, M.A., LL.D., Esq., Bamster-at-Law. Author of "Principles of Contract," "The Law of Torts," &c. Demy Svo. 1888. 10.?. " Of tlie execution of the work we can speak in tei-ms of the highest praise. The language is simple, concise and clear." — Law Maijazine. " Praiseworthy in design, scholarly and complete in execution." — Saturday I^cview. Turner. — Vide "Conveyancing." PATENTS.— Aston's (T.) Patents, Designs and Trade Marks Act, 1883, with Notes and Index to the Act, Rules and Forms. By Tiikodore Aston, Q.C. Royal Timo. 1S84. 6.v. Johnson's Patentees' Manual. — Being a Ti-eatise on the Law and Practice of Letters Patent. Especially intended for the use of Patentees and Inventors. Fifth Edition. By James JonNSOX, Esq., Barrister-at-Law ; and J. Henry Johnson, Solicitor and Patent Agent. Demy 8v(). 1884. 10s. 6,/. Johnson's Epitome of the Law and Practice connected with Patents for Inventions; with a Reprint of the Patents Acts of 1883, l.SSo, and IS.SG, and Rules, .and a Summ.ary of the Patent Laws f)f Foreign ( 'ountrii's and British Colonies. By James John- eon, Esq., Barrister-at-Law, aiid J. Henry Johnson, Solicitor and Patent Agent. Post Svo. 18S7. Xc/, 2s. 6d. *.* All standard Law Jf'orks arc kept in Stock, in law calf and other bindings. 119, CHANCERY LANE, LONDON, W.C. 23 PAT E N TS— continued. Morris's Patents Conveyancing,— Being a Collection of Precedents in Conveyancing in relation to Letters Patent for Inventions. Arranged as follows :■ — Common Forms, Agreements, Assignments, Mortg-ages, Special Clauses, Licences, Miscellaneous ; Statutes, Rules, &c. "With Dissertations and Copious Notes on the Law and Practice. ByRoBEETMoEEis,Esq.,Barrister-at-Law. Royal 8vo. 1887. 1/. o.v. " Mr. Morris' forms seem to us to be well selected, well arranged, and thoroughly practical."— Xrtw Times, August 20th, 1887. Munro's Patents, Designs and Trade Marks Act, 1883, with the Rules and Instructions, together with Pleadings, Orders and Prece- dents. By J. E. Crawford Muneo, E.sq., Bamster-at-Law. Royal I2mo. 1884. 10s. 6«'. Thompson's Handbook of Patent Law of all Countries. — By Wm. p. Thompson, Head of the International Patent Office, Liver- pool. Sixth Edition. 12mo. 1884. ^''ft, 2s. 6d. PAWN. — Turner's Contract of Pawn, as it exists at Common Law, and as modified by the Factors' Acts, the Pawnbrokers' Acts, and other Statutes. By Feancis Txhinee, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. Second Edition. 8vo. 1883. 12s. Turner's Pawnbrokers' Act, T 872. —With Explanatory Notes. By F. Turner, Esq. Third Edition. 1883. iVrf, 2s. 6d. PERPETUITIES.— Marsden's Rule against Perpetuities. — A Treatise on Remoteness in Limitation ; with a chapter on Accumu- lation and the Thelluson Act. By Reginald G. Marsden, Esq., Barrister-at Law. Demy 8vo. 1883. IBs. PERSONAL PROPERTY,— Shearwood's Concise Abridgment of the Law of Personal Property ; showing analytically its Branches and the Titles by which it is held. By J. A. Shearwood, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. 1882. 5s. 6d. " "Will be acceptable to many students, as giving them, in fact, a ready-made note book." — Imhrmaur's Law Stuileyits' Journal. Smith, — Vide ' ' Real Property.' ' PLEADING,— Allen's Forms of Indorsements of Writs of Sum- mons, Pleadings, and other Proceedings in the Queen's Bench Division prior to Trial, pursuant to the Rules of the Supreme Court, 1883; with Introduction, showing the principal changes introduced by these Rules, and a Supplement of Rules and Forms of Pleadings applicable to the other Divisions. By George Baugh Allen, Esq., Special Pleader, and Wllfred B. Ali,en, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. Royal 12mo. 1883. 18s. " A most excellent handbook and guide . . . will be very useful to most legal practitioners." — SoUcitorn' Journal. Bullen and Leake's Precedents of Pleadings, with Notes and Rules relating to Pleading. Fourth Edition. By Thomas J. BiTLLEN, Esq., Special Pleader, and Cyril Dodd, Esq., Barrister-at- Law. Parti. Royal 12mo. 1882. [Fart II. in the press.) 1/. 4s. POISONS, — Reports of Trials for Murder by Poisoning; by Prussic Acid, Strychnia, Antimony, Arsenic and Aconitine ; including the trials of Tawell, W. Palmer, Dove, Madeline Smith, Dr. Pritchard, Smethurst, and Dr. Lamson. With Chemical Introductions and Notes on the Poisons used. By G. Tmtttax Browne, Esq., Barrister-at-Law, and C. G. Stewart, Senior Assis- tant in the Laboratory of St. Thomas's Hospital, &c. Demy 8vo. 1883. 12s. Gd. %* AU standard Law Works are kept in Stock, in hw calf and other bindings. 24 STEVENS AND SONS' LAW PUBLICATIONS. POWERS. — Farwell on Powers. — A Concise Treatise on Powers. By Geoege Faewell, B.A., of Lincolu's lau, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. 8vo. 1874. 11. Is. PRINTERS, PUBLISHERS, &,c.— Powell's Laws specially affect- ing Printers, Publishers and Newspaper Proprietors. By Aethue Powell, Esq., Ban-ister-at-Law. Demy Svo. 1887. 'is. Gel. PROBATE. — Browne's Probate Practice: A Treatise on the Prin- ciples and Practice of the Court of Probate, in Contentious and Non- Contentious Business. Revised, enlarged, and adapted to the Practice of the High Court of Justice in R-obate business. By L. D. PowLES, Barrister-at-Law. Including Pi-actical Directions to Solicitors for Proceedings in the Registry. By T. W. H. Oaxlet, of the Principal Registry, Somerset House. Svo. 1881. II. lOs. *^* Supplement to above. By L. D. Powles, Esq., Barrister-at- Law. Demy Svo. 1884. 6s. PUBLIC HEALTH.— Bazalgette and Humphreys.— 7'iVfe "Local and Municipal Government." Chambers' Digest of the Law relating to Public Health and Local Government. — With Notes of 1,260 leading Cases. The Statutes in full. A Table of Ofi'ences and Punishments, and a Copious Index. Eighth Edition (with Supplement corrected to May 21, 1887). Imperial Svo. 1881. 16«. Or, the above with the Law relating- to Hiffhwavs and Bridges. 11. PUBLIC MEETINGS.— Chambers' Han^dbook for Public Meet- ings, including Hints as to the Summoning and Management of them. Second Edition. By Geoege F. Chambees, Esq., BaiTister- at-Law. Dcmv Svo. 1886. Xct, -Is. 6d. QUARTER SESSIONS.— Archbold.— 7';V/f " Criminal Law." Leeming&, Cross's General and Quarter Sessions of the Peace. — Their Jurisdiction and Practice in other than Criminal matters. Second Edition. By Hoeatio Lloyd, Esq., Judge of County Courts, andH.F. Thuelow, Esq., Barrister-at-I^aw. Svo. 1876. 11. Is. Pritchard's Quarter Sessions. — The Jurisdiction, Practice and Pro- cedure of the Quarter Sessions in Criminal, Civil, and Appellate Matters. By Thos. Sieeell Peitchaed, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. Svo. 1875. (Published at 21. 2s.) Reduced to net I2s. RAILWAYS.— Browne and Theobald's Law of Railway Com- panies. — Being a Collection of the Acts and Orders relating to Railway Companies, with Notes of all the Cases decided thereon, and Appendix of Bye-Laws and Standing Oi'ders of the House of Commons. Second Edition. By J. H. Balfoue Beowne, Esq., one of Her Majesty's Counsel, and H. S. Theobald, Esq., Barrister-at- Law. Royal Svo. 1888. [Xfarl;/ ready.) " Contains in a very ooncise form the -vvholo law of railways."— TAe Timrs. " The learned authors seem to have presented the profession and the public with the most ample information to be found whether they waut to know how to start a rail- way, h(jw to frame its Ijye-laws, how to work it, how to attack it for injury to person or property, or liow to wind it up."— />rnt' Times. RATES AND RATING. Castle's Practical Treatise on the Law of Rating. Second Edition. By Edwaed James Castle, Esq., Barrister-at-Ijaw. Demy Svo. 1886. 25s. " A corrci^t, exliaustivi', dear aiin." — //«u> Mai/a.:iuc. " A cjircful ^juniftal of these lectures cannot fail to be of great advantage to students, iind more particularly, we tliink, to young practising solicitors." — /,atv J'imrs. %* AH standard Law M'orLs arc kept in Slock, in law calf and other bindings. 119, CHANCEEY LANE, LONDON, W.C. 31 WILLS. — Theobald's Concise Treatise on the Law of Wills. — Third Edition. By H. S. TnEOBAi,D, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. Royal 8vo. 1885. 11. 10s. " A book of great al)ility and value. It bears on every page traces of care and sound judg-ment. It is cortain to prove of great practical usefulness." ^Solicitors' Journal. Weaver's Precedents of Wills. — A Collection of Concise Precedents of Will.s, with Introduction, Notes, and an Appendix of Statutes. By Charles Weaver, B.A. Post 8vo. 1882. 5s. WINDING UP.— Palmer's Winding-up Forms.— A Collection of 580 Forms of Summonses, Affidavits, Orders, Notices and other Forms relating to the Winding-up of Companies. With Notes on the Law and Practice, and an Appendix containing the Acts and Rules. By Fran'Cis Beaufort Palmer, Esq., Barrister- at-Law, Author of " Company Precedents," &c. 8vo. 1885. 12.'!. WRECK INQUIRIES.— Murton's Law and Practice relating to Formal Investigations in the United Kingdom, British Posses- sions and before Naval Courts into Shipping Casualties and the Incompetency and Misconduct of Ships' Officers. With an Introduction. By Walter Murtox, Solicitor to the Board of Trade. Demy 8vo. 188-1. 1^. 4s. WRONGS.— Addison, Pollock, Shearwood.— 77r7^' "Torts." Ball. — "Leading Cases," vide "Torts." A large Stock, New and Second-hand. Prices on application. BzisriDinsra-- Executed in the best manner at moderate prices and with dispatch. The Law Reports, Law Journal, and all other Reports, bound to Office Patterns, at Office Prices. The Pnhlishers of this Catalogue j^ossess the largest known collection of Private Acts of Parliament {including Public and Local), and can supplg single copies commencing from a very early jieriod. For Probate, Partnership or other purj^oses. LIBRARIES PURCHASED. STEVENS AND SONS, 119, CHANCERY LANE, LONDON, W.C. STEVENS AND SONS' ANNOUNCEI^IENTS OF NEW WORKS AND NEW EDITIONS. Browne and Theobald's Law of Railway Companies. — Being a Collection of the Acts and Orders relating to Railway Companies, with Notes of all the Cases decided thereon, and Appendix of Bye- Laws and Standing Orders of the House of Commons. Second Edition. By J. H. Balfoue Browne, one of Her Majesty's Counsel, and H. S. Theobald, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. Royal 8vo. [Nearly ready.) Bullen and Leake's Precedents of Pleadings, with Notes and Rules relating to Pleading. Fourth Edition. By Thomas J. Bullen, Esq., Special Pleader, and CtiEIL Dodd, Esr[., Bamster-at-Law. Part II. [In the press.) Chitty's Index to all the Reported Cases decided in the several Courts of Equity in England, the Privy CouncU, and the House of Lords. With a Selection of Irish Cases, from the earliest period. Fourth Edition, wholly revised and reclassified by Heney Edwaed HiEST, B.C.L., M.A., of Lincoln's Inn, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. ( Vol VI. in the press.) Dart's Vendors and Purchasers, — A Treatise on the Law and Practice relating to Vendors and Purchasers of Real Estate. By the late J. Henry Dart, Esq., one of the Six Conveyancing Counsel of the High Court of Justice. Sixth Edition. By William Barber, Esq., one of Her Majesty's Counsel, Richard Burdon Haldane, and William: Robert Sheldon, both of Lincoln's Inn, Esqrs., Barristers- at-Law. 2 vols. Royal 8vo. [Nearly ready.) Macnamara's Digest of the Law of Carriers of Goods and Pas- sengers by Railway, Road and Internal Navigation,— By W. H. Macxamara, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. [In the press.) Palmer's Company Precedents. — For use in relation to Companies subject to the Companies Acts, 1862 to 1883. Arranged as follow.s : — Agreements, Memoranda and Articles of Association, Resolutions, Notices, Certificates, Prospectus, Debentures, Policies, Private Companies, Writs, Petitions, Judgments and Orders, Winding-up, Reconstruction, Amalgamation, ^Vi-rangemcnts, Special Acts. With Copious Notes. Fourth Edition. By Fe^vncis Beau- fort Palmer, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. [I/i prrpara/ion.) Phillimore's Ecclesiastical Law of the Church of England, — Second Edition. Edited by Sir AValtee Geo. Frank Phillimgee, Bart., D.C.L., Chancellor of the Diocese of Lincoln. [I)i preparation.) Pitt-Lewis' County Court Practice,— Third Edition. By George Pitt-Lewis, Es(j., one of Her IMajcsty's Coun.sel, assisted by H. A. De Colyae, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. 2 vols. [J'ul. II. in the press.) Shirley's Selection of Leading Cases in Criminal Law.— By W. S. Shirley, Esq., M.P., Barrister-at-Law. [In preparation.) Smith's Compendium of Mercantile Law. — Tenth Edition. By John Macdonell, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. (//( the press.) Thring's Law and Practice of Joint Stock and other Companies, — By Lord Tiiui.\o, K.C.B. Fifth Edition. By James Meadows Rendel, Esq., Barrirfter-at-Law. [In the press.) STEVENS AND SONS 119, CHANCERY LANE, LONDON, W.C. OL STEVENS AND SONS, 119, OHANCEKY LANE, LONDON, W.O. Addison's Treatise on the Law of Contracts.— jS^i^/i^/i Edition. By HORACE SMITH, Esq., Barrister-at-Law, Recorder of Lincoln. Author of •' The Law of Negligence," &c. Royal 8ro. 1883. (1600 pp.) Frice 21. 10s. cloth. Arnould on the Law of Marine Insurance.— aSVcc^A Edition. By DAVID MACLACHLAN, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. 2 Vols. Royal 8yo, 1887. Price 3L cloth. , ^ . . , _, Archbold's Pleading and Evidence in Criminal Cases.— With the Statutes, Precedents of Indictments, &c., and the Evidence necessary to support them. Tu-entieth ^rfifio?)-, inchiding the Practice in Criminal Proceedings hy Indictment. By WILLIAM BRUCE, Esq., Barrister-at-Law, and Stipendiary Magistrate for the Borough of Leeds. RoyalVlmo. 1886. Price II. lis. M. cloth. Woodfall's Landlord and Tenant. — With a full collection of Precedents and forms of Procedure ; containing also a collection of Leading Propositions. Thirteenth Edition. By J. M. LELT, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. Royal 8vo. 1886. Price 38s. cloth. Theobald's Law of Wills. — A Concise Treatise on the Law of Wills. Third Edition. By H. S. THEOBALD, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. PMyal 8ro. 1885. Price 11. 10s. cloth. " A work of great ability and value. It bears on every page traces of care and sound judgment." — Solicitors' Journal. Harris' Hints on Advocacy. — Conduct of Cases, Civil and Criminal. Classes of Witnesses and suggestions for Cross-Examining them, &c., &c. By RICHARD HARRIS, Barrister-at-Law, of the Middle Temple and Midland Circuit. Eiijlith Edition. Royal 12mo. 1887. Price 7s. 6d. cloth. " Well worth the study of a young practitioner at the bar." — Sir F. Pollock, Bart., Lavj Quarterly Review, April, 1887. Carver's Law of Carriage by Sea.— A Treatise on the Law relating to the Carriage of Goods by Sea. By THOMAS GILBERT CARVER, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. Royal Svo. 1885. Price 11. 12s. cloth. Castle's Treatise on the Law of Rating.— /Seconc? Edition. By EDWARD JAMES CASTLE, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. Demy 8ro. 1886. Price 25s. cloth. " A correct, exhaustive, clear and concise view of the law." — Laiv Times. Daniell's Practice of the Chancery Division of the High Court of Justice, and on Appeal therefrom ; being the Sixth Edition of Daniell's Chancery Practice, with alterations and additions, and References to a companion volume of Eorms. By LEONARD FIELD, EDWARD CLENNELL DUNN, and THEODORE RIBTON, assisted by WILLIAM HENRY UPJOHN, Esqrs., Bar- risters-at-Law. 2 Vols, in 3 parts. Demy Svo. 1882-84. Price 61. 6s. cloth. Daniell's Chancery Toims.— Fourth Edition. Forms and Precedents of Proceeding in the Chancery Division of the High Court of Justice and on Appeal therefrom. Fourth Edition. With Summaries of the Rules of the Supremo Court, Practical Notes and References to the Sixth Edition of " Daniell's Chiincery Practice." By CHARLES BURNEY, B.A. (Oxon.), a Chief Clerk of the Hon. Mr. Justice Chitty. RoyalSvo. (1260pp.) 1885. Price 21. 10s. cloth. Chitty's Archbold's Practice of the Queen's Bench Division of the High Court of Justice, .and on Appeal therefrom, lo the Court of Appeal and House of iiords in Civil Proceedings. Fourlevnili Edition. HyT. WILLES CHITTY, asHisted Ijy .J. Si. L. ivESLlE, Esqrs., Barristers-at-Law. 2 Vols. Demy Svo. 1885. J'rirc Zl. U'ju. (kl. cloth. Chitty's Forms of Practical Proceedings in the Queen's Bench Diyision of the High Court of Justice: with Notes containing the Stalutes, Knics and Ca^cs relating thereto. Twelfth Edition. Hy THOS. WIIiLKS CII ITTY, I'Vq., Barristcr-nt-Law. Demy 8tu. 1883. Price 11. ISs. cloth. Wurtzburg's Building Societies.— The Acts llelating to Building Societicii: comiiri.sing the Act of 1836, nnd the Building Societies Acts, 1874, 18/5, 1H77, 1884, iind th(! Trcii.sury Hcgxilntion.s, IHbl ; with an Introduction, Copious NotCH, and i'recedents of Rules and ABsuniiKCK. Hy KDWAHD A LIJERT WUETZBUKG, Esq., Barristor-at-Law. Royal 12wo. 1886. Prioe 7s. iid. cloth. All Stuhdard Lavj WUrLs arc k( fd in stocL; in htv) calf and other bimlinys. UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY AA 000 844 911 8 STEVENS AND SONS, 119, CHANCERY LANE, LONDON, W.C. Prideaux's Precedents in Conveyancing. — With Disserta- tions on its Law and Practice. Thirteenth Edition. By FREDERICK PRIDEAUX, late Professor of the Law of Real and Personal Property to the Inns of Court, and JOHN WHITCOMBE, Esqrs., Barristers-at-Law. 2 Vols. Royal 8vo. 1885. Price SI. 10s. cloth. " The most useful work out on Conveyancing." — Law Journal. Bazalgette and Humphrey's Local and Municipal Govern- ment. Highways Tramways, __ ^ ^, ^ . , Consolidation Acts, and many others, fully annotated with cases up to date, togethe ■ with a selection of the Circulars of the Local Government Board, with a Table of upwards of 2500 Cases, and full Index. By C. NORMAN BAZALGETTE, M.A., and GEO. HUMPHREYS, B.A., Esqrs., Barristers-at-Law. In 1 Vol. {about 1800 pp.) Super-Royal 8vo. 1885. Price ol. 3s. cloth. " A complete collection of the law relating to local government." — Solicitors'' Journal. " Thoroughly comprehensive of the law on all points." — Law Journal. Fisher's Digest of the Reported Decisions of the Courts of Common Law, Bankruptcy, Probate, Admiralty, and Divorce, together with a selec- ' tion from those of the Court of Chancery and Irish Courts. Prom 1756 to 1883 inclusive. Founded on Fisher's Digest. By JOHN MKWS, Assisted by C. M. CHAPMAN, HARRY H. "W. SPARHAM, and A. H. TODD, Barristers-at-Law. In 7 Vols. Royal 8vo. 1884. Price 121. 12s. cloth. %* Animal Supplements for 1884, 12s. 6tL ; 1885, 1886, and 1887, 15s. each, hoards. Smith's Manual of Common Law. — For Practitioners and students. Comprising the Fundamental Principles, with useful Practical Rules and Decisions. By JOSIAH W. SMITH, B.C.L., Q.C. Tenth Edition. By J. TRUSTRAM, LL.M., Esq., Barrister-at-Law. Bemy l2mo. 1887- Price 14s. cloth. Pollock's Principles of Contract. — Being a Treatise on the General Principles relating to the Validity of Agreements in the Law of England. Fourth Edition. By FREDERICK POLLOCK, Esq., Barrister-at-Law, Professor of Common Law in the Inns of Court, &c. Demy Svo. 1885. Price II. 8s. cloth. Ellis' Guide to the Income Tax Acts.— For the use of the English Income Tax Payer. Second Edition. By ARTHUR M. ELLIS, LL.B. (Loud.), Solicitor. Royal l^mo. 1886. Price 7s. Gd. cloth. Napier's Modern Digest of the Final Examinations.— A Modern Digest of the Law necessary to be known for the Final Examination of the Incorporated Law Society, done into Questions and Answers ; and a Guide to a Course of Study for that Examination. By T. BATEMAN NAPIER, LL.D., Barrister-at-Law. Demy Svo. 1887- Price 18s. cloth. The Pocket Law Lexicon. — Explaining Technical Words, Phrases and Maxims of the English, Scotch and Roman Law, to which is added a complete List of Law Reports, with their Abbreviations. Second Edition. Revised and Enlarged. By HENRY G. RAWSON, B.A., of the Inner Temple, Esq., Barrister-at-Lftw. Fcap. 8vo. 1884. Price 6s. 6cL limp binding. "A wonderful little legal Dictionary." — Indermaiir's Law Students' Journal. Wharton's Law Lexicon. — Forming an Epitome of the Law of England, and containing full explanations of the Technical Terms and Phrases thereof, both Ancient and Modern, including the various Legal Terms used in Com- mercial Business. Together with a Translation of the Latin Maxims and Selected Titles from the Civil, Scotch, and Indian Law. Seventh Edition. By J. M. LELY, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. Super-Royal Svo. 1883. Price II. ISs. cloth. Shirley's Leading Cases in the Common Law. — With Notes. Third Edition. By W. SHIRLEY SHIRLEY, M.P., Esq., Barrister-at. Law. Demy Svo. 1886. Price IQs. cloth. Goddard's Treatise on the Law of Easements.— By John LEYBOURN GODDARD, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. Third Edition. Demi/ Svo. 1884. Price 11. Is. cloth. A large Second-hand stock of Law Reports on sale. Prices on application.