Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB
[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

Christ Church.

Latin Essay." De Tribunitia apud Romanos Potestate." Fred. Oakelay, English Essay." Language in its Copiousness and Structure considered as a Test of National Civilization." J. W. Mylne, Balliol.

SIR ROGER NEWDIGATE'S PRIZES.

Latin-" Incendium Londinense anno 1666." E. P. Blunt, Corpus. English-The Temple of Vesta at Tivoli." R. C. Sewell, Magdalen.

An annual prize of Twenty Guineas (secured upon an estate at Horspath, in the county of Oxford) was founded during the last year by Dr. Ellerton, Fellow of Magdalen College, for the encouragement of theological learning, for the best English Essay on some doctrine or duty of the Christian Religion, or on some of the points on which we differ from the Romish Church, or on any other subject of theology which shall be deemed meet and useful.

All Members of the University, who have passed their examination for their first degree of A. B. or B. C. L. and who have commenced their sixteenth Term from their Matriculation inclusively, for the space of eight weeks previous to the day appointed for sending in the Essays, and not exceeded their twenty-eighth Term from their Matriculation inclusively, on the day on which the subject of the Essay shall be proposed in each year, are entitled to write for this Prize.

The President of Magdalen College for the time being, and the Regius Professor of Divinity for the time being, and the Lady Margaret's Professor of Divinity for the time being, are the three Judges, who are every year to select the subject of the Essay, and award the Prize.

If any of the three Judges shall be prevented by sickness or unavoidable absence from the University, from assisting in adjudging the Prize, or selecting the subject of the Essay, such Judge shall appoint, with the consent of the Vice-Chancellor and Proctors, and of the other two Judges, a Member of the University, of the degree of B. D. or D. D. to act for him in this behalf, provided that the three Judges who award the Prize be in all cases, if practicable, Members of three different Colleges or Halls.

If at any time hereafter the President of Magdalen College shall be a Layman, or happen to be either Regius, or the Lady Margaret's Professor of Divinity, then, and in that case only, the Master of University College shall act as Judge, instead of such President, to all intents and purposes whatsoever. Any difference of opinion among the Judges to be decided by a majority. The subject of the Essay to be proposed in Michaelmas Term the first year, and in Act Term before the Commemoration in all future years; the Essays to be sent in on or before Wednesday in Easter week next ensuing.

If in any year none of the Essays sent in be deemed worthy of a Prize, in that case the proceeds are to be reserved for rewarding, at the discretion of the Judges, the writers of the second best Essay in any two future years, by a donation of Ten Guineas to each.

The Essay to which the Prize may be adjudged is not to be published, except in cases where the Judges shall unanimously approve of the publi

cation.

The writer of a second best Essay, rewarded with a donation, is subject to a similar restriction as to the publication of his Essay.

The Essay to which the Prize shall have been adjudged, is to be read before the University, in the Divinity School, on some day and hour to be fixed by the Vice-Chancellor in the week next before the Commemoration of the Benefactors of the University in each year.

No person to whom the Prize shall have been adjudged can again offer himself as a Candidate.

[blocks in formation]
[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

English Verse." Sculpture," E. G. Lytton Bulwer, Trinity. Latin Essay." De Statu Futuro quænam fuere veterum inter Græcos et Romanos Philosophorum dogmata ?" John Buckle, Trinity.

PORSON PRIZE. Shakspeare's King John, Act 4, Scene 2.-" How oft the sight of means" to "an innocent child." John Hodgson, Trinity. SIR W. BROWNE'S MEDALS. Greek Ode.-W. Selwyn, St. John's. Latin Ode.-Robert Snow, do. Epigrams.-B. H. Kennedy, do.

SEATONIAN PRIZE." The Building and Dedication of the Second Temple."

John Overton, M. A., Trinity.

LAW CASES

LAW CASES AND NARRATIVES

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, WEST-
MINSTER, FEB. 4.

Joseph v. Pebrer.

THIS was an action for money paid by the plaintiff for the defendant's use, which was tried before Mr. Justice Littledale, at Guildhall. It appeared that the plaintiff had purchased for the defendant ten shares in the Equitable Loan Bank Company, at a premium of 5l. 10s. per share, making a deposit of 17. on each. Of the precise object of the society there was no evidence; but Mr. Marryat, the counsel for the plaintiff, in his opening, described it " as a very benevolent institution, proposing to lend small sums to the poor at 8 per cent., and thus to protect them from the exorbitant charges of pawnbrokers." It appeared, from a printed prospectus, that the capital was to be two millions; that the stock was to be divided into 40,000 transferable shares of 50l. each; and that the shareholders were to be subject to the orders and regulations made by the vice-presidents and committee, and to participate in all the benefits of an act of parliament, to be applied for in furtherance of the designs of the projectors. The plaintiff had delivered to the defendant a note, stating, that he had purchased ten shares for him "for the coming-out," at 5l. 10s. premium, and 17. deposit. The defendant refused to accept the shares, on the ground that the VOL. LXVII.

certificates were not in fact tendered to him at "the coming-out," but several days afterwards, when they had fallen in value. It was also objected, on his behalf, that the plaintiff had no right to recover, because the whole transaction was illegal, as relating to the purchase of shares in an illegal company, within the 6th Geo. 1st, c. 18, commonly called "the Bubble Act." The learned judge, reserving this point, left the jury to say, whether the plaintiff had used due diligence in obtaining and delivering the certificates: and they, on this direction, found for the plaintiff. In a former term a rule nisi was obtained for a nonsuit, on the ground of illegality, or for a new trial, on the ground of the plaintiff's neglect to deliver the certificates in time, according to the bargain.

Mr. Marryat and Mr. Andrews now showed cause against the rule. They contended that no evidence was adduced at the trial, from which the court could infer that the society was within the words or the purview of the statute of George 1st. Here was money actually advanced at the defendant's request; that advance must be taken to be made for something admitted to be of value by the party who authorized and requested it; and the object must be considered legal, until the contrary was shown. If the defendant, after employing the plaintiff to make this purchase, wished to inA*

« AnteriorContinuar »