INDEX TO PRINCIPAL SUBJECTS IN NOS. XLVI. TO LXII. OF THE LAW EXAMINATION JOURNAL. DIGEST OF CASES, 39-40, 75-80, 119-120, 158-160, 199-200, 240, REVIEWS OF BOOKS, Bedford (Final Examination Guide to the Law of Probate and Divorce), 320. Brett (Bankruptcy), 558-559. Clerke & Brett (The Conveyancing Act, 1881), 1st ed., 124; 2nd ed., (The Conveyancing Act, 1882), 320. Coote (Common Form Practice in Probate and Administration), 439. Kelly (Draftsman), 2nd ed., 118. Mozley (The Married Women's Property Acts), 354. Seaborne (Vendors and Purchasers), 3rd ed., 559. Stephen (Commentaries), 9th ed., 520. Underhill (Chancery Procedure), 122-124. (Settled Land Act, 1882), 1st ed., 353. (Torts), 3rd ed., 75; 4th ed., 640. (Trusts), 2nd ed., 599. Willis Bund (The Freshwater Fisheries Acts, 1878 and 1884), 600. STATUTES, Of 1881..121–122. Of 1882..397-398. Of 1883..559–560. 240. VOLUNTARY HONOURS EXAMINATION. See HONOURS EXAMINATION. AND LAW STUDENT'S MAGAZINE. I. VOLUNTARY HONOURS EXAMINATION QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS (NOVEMBER, 1880). (1.) PRELIMINARY. (11.) THE PRINCIPLES OF THE LAW OF REAL AND PERSONAL PROPERTY AND THE PRACTICE OF CONVEYANCING. 1. Q-Define and illustrate general, specific, and demonstrative legacies; and explain the practical distinctions between them. A.-A general legacy is a legacy payable only out of the general assets of the testator, and is liable to abatement in case of a deficiency of such assets to pay the testator's debts and other legacies. A bequest to A. of 1001. sterling is a general legacy; so is a bequest of 1007. Consols, without referring to any particular stock to which the testator may be entitled. A specific legacy is a bequest of a specific part of the testator's personal estate. Thus, a bequest of "the service of plate which was presented to me on such an occasion," is specific; and so also is a bequest of "1007. Consols, now standing in my name at the Bank of England." A specific legacy must be paid or retained by the executor in preference to those which are general, and must not be sold for the payment of debts until the general assets of the testator are exhausted. A demonstrative legacy is a gift by will of a certain sum directed to be paid out of a specific fund. Thus, "I bequeath to A. B. the sum of 501. sterling, to be paid out of the sum of 1007. Consols, now standing in my name at the Bank of England," is a demonstrative legacy. If, therefore, the testator in this case should sell the 1007. Consols in his lifetime, the 501. will still be payable to the legatee out of the general assets. A demonstrative legacy is accordingly more beneficial to the legatee than a specific legacy. And it is also more beneficial than a legacy which is merely general; for being payable out of a specific fund, it is not, while that fund exists, liable to abatement with the general legacies. (Wms, P. P. 10th ed. pp. 385, 386, 387; Mozley & Whiteley's Law Dictionary, pp. 115, 225, 416.) 2. Q.-A man dies intestate, leaving the following relatives: a widow, mother, uncle, brother of the half blood, nephew (child of deceased sister), two nieces (children of deceased brother), and grandnephew (grandchild of another deceased brother). How will the personal estate of the intestate be distributed under the statute? A.-First, the uncle and the grandnephew will not share in the deceased's estate; for they neither come within the class of next of kin, nor can they take by representation under the Statute of Distributions. The widow will take half the deceased's estate, he having left no issue; and the remaining half will be divided into four parts, one of which will go to the mother of the deceased; another to the brother of the half blood; another to the nephew, the child of the deceased sister, as repre VOL. IV. B senting his mother for the purposes of distribution under the statute; and the remaining fourth will be equally divided between the two nieces, children of the deceased brother, as representing their father for the purpose of distribution under the statute. Thus, the entire personal estate of the deceased will go as follows: One-half to the widow; one-eighth to the mother; one-eighth to the surviving brother; one-eighth to the nephew; and one-sixteenth to each of the two nieces. 8th ed. vol. ii. pp. 207, 208; Wms. P. P. 10th ed. pp. 403, 404.) (Steph. Com. 3. Q.-Under what circumstances can infants appoint their own guardians? What are such guardians called, how are they appointed, and what powers are given to them by law? A. An infant having lands in socage may, after fourteen, when the guardianship in socage terminates, elect a guardian for himself, if there be no other then ready to take charge of him and his property; and, according to Lord Coke, the same thing may be done in certain cases by an infant under fourteen. Such an election, at whatever age it is made, will in no case supersede the authority of the Court to interfere for the infant's protection. (Steph. Com. 8th ed. vol. ii. pp. 310, 311.) 4. Q.-A., being in expectation of death, handed to B. a desk containing the articles specified below, with an intention of making them the subject of a "donatio mortis causâ." He shortly afterwards died. How far did the gift take effect? State in detail the reasons for your answer and the law on the subject. and Bonds, promissory notes and cheques, some payable to bearer and some to A's order, Bank of England notes, country bank notes, bills of exchange, some endorsed in blank and some to the order of A., a certificate of railway stock held by A. A. (1) The gift would take effect as regards the bonds, promissory notes, Bank of England notes, and country bank notes, and as regards the bills of exchange, howsoever endorsed; also as regards all the cheques drawn by persons other than the donor; but as regards cheques drawn by the donor, only so far as they have been cashed or presented for payment in his lifetime. (2) The gift would not take effect as regards the railway stock, nor as regards the cheques drawn by the donor and not negotiated in his lifetime. This appears to be the result of the authorities on the subject, though as regards cheques the law is not fully settled. (See Byles on Bills of Exchange, 12th ed. p. 176; Snell on Equity, 4th ed. pp. 172, 173.) 5. Q.-What is the effect upon the legal positions of the vendor and of the purchaser respectively of verbal declarations, made by an auctioneer at a sale, qualifying particulars and conditions of sale, which are afterwards duly signed? A.-If the question means that the verbal declarations made by the auctioneer are afterwards reduced into writing and duly signed by the parties, it follows of course that they will form part of the contract, and will make the legal positions of the vendor and purchaser respectively what they would have been had the declarations been originally incorporated in the printed particulars or conditions of sale, save that where the vendor is selling under a power or trust, this might occasionally give rise to questions with the parties beneficially interested. (See Dart, V. & P., 5th ed. pp. 111, 112). 6. Q.-Define and give examples of a conditional limitation and a contingent remainder respectively; and state in what important respect they formerly differed. A.-A conditional limitation is defined (1) to be a limitation whereby an estate is so expressly defined and limited that it cannot endure for any longer time than till the contingency happens upon which the estate is to fail. To this class may be referred all base fees, and fees simple conditional at the common law. The phrase is also (2) applied to a use limited in derogation of a preceding estate; as if an estate be limited to A. and his heirs to the use of B. and his heirs, with a proviso that when C. returns from Rome the land shall be to the use of C. and his heirs. In this case the use in favour of C. may be called a conditional limitation, but it is more frequently spoken of as an executory interest, or a shifting or secondary use. A contingent remainder is a remainder limited either to an uncertain person or upon an uncertain event; that is, either to a person not in esse or not ascertained, or else upon an event which may not happen at all, or not until after the prior particular estate or estates is or are determined. The distinction between a conditional limitation in the first sense and a contingent remainder is that a conditional limitation, in the first sense, is a present estate, to be determined, if at all, on some future event; a contingent remainder is a future estate, to come into existence, if at all, on some future event. But the distinction formerly existing between a conditional limitation in the second sense and a contingent remainder, which is probably the distinction referred to in the question, was that a contingent remainder, being a remainder, could only come into existence, if at all, on the determination of the prior particular estate or the last of such estates; so that if the prior particular estate or estates came to an end before the happening of the contingency, the contingent remainder was destroyed; whereas a shifting use is not dependent on any prior estate. (Steph. Comm. 8th ed. pp. 295-322, 545-6, and note (a) in p. 546; Mozley & Whiteley's Law Dictionary, pp. 81-88.) As regards the destructibility of contingent remainders the law is altered by stats. 8 & 9 Vict. c. 106 and 40 & 41 Vict. c. 33. (Steph. Comm. 8th ed. vol. i. pp. 330, 546; Law Exam. Journal, Nos. 36 and 37, Vol. III. pp. 269-271, 301.) 7. Q.-A., having a contract only for a lease of 99 years, purported to demise the land to B. by way of mortgage for the whole term less three days. He subsequently acquired the lease, and demised the land to C. for the whole term less three days. What are the respective positions of B. and C.? Give the grounds of your answer. A.-B.'s title will be good against C.; for the underlease to B., though originally operating only by way of estoppel, becomes, by A.'s acquisition of his lease, an estate in interest. See Webb v. Austin, 7 Manning & Granger, 701. (The answer assumes the absence on the part of B. of any gross negligence which would give equitable priority to C.) 8. Q.-A testator, by his will, settles his copyhold estate upon his eldest son A. for life, with remainder in fee to B., his second son, and gives the power of sale during A.'s lifetime to a trustee. A. was not admitted upon the testator's death. The trustee exercises his power of sale, and the |