trates' clerk. Whether they should be his servants, or whether their appointment and removal should be in the discretion of the justices, is a question of detail not worth discussion here. We lean to the opinion that the clerk should have the absolute power to employ and discharge his subordinate officer, and be responsible for his acts. The other town districts would not require any additional clerk at all. At Doncaster or Wakefield, for example, there would be an average of between thirty and forty prosecutions a year. These would be distributed over four sessions and two assizes.* The justices' clerk would be in possession of all the facts, and physical indicia presented upon the hearing of each charge before the petty sessions; and, in the great majority of cases, its management at the sessions or assizes would be merely mechanical. But at this point a practical difficulty presents itself. The prosecution of one criminal charge from a town district not large enough to support either a deputy or clerk for prosecutions, would involve the absence for several days of the justices' clerk himself from his duties. We think that this difficulty would be obviated by arranging the lesser town districts in circles of two or more. The cases should be got up, and the briefs prepared by the justices' clerk for each town; but the justices' clerk for each town should, in his turn, conduct the whole of the prosecutions within the circle to which he is attached, except in cases of importance. The very small town districts which have an average of not more than twenty prosecutions a year, should be included in the sessional divisions.

In dealing with the county sessional and smaller town districts, we are met by two practical difficulties. In the first place, the clerks of rural or small town districts are, as a rule, far less experienced in criminal law and practice than their brethren in the towns. In the second place, the number of prosecutions from each district would be so small, that the attendance of an officer from each district at sessions and assizes would be quite out of the question. We would sug* In the particular cases given, there would also be a winter gaol delivery.

gest, that the justices' clerks for sessional divisions and small town districts should act as deputy-prosecutors for their divisions or districts, under the superintendence of a Crown attorney or county prosecutor, who should always be the justices' clerk to the magistrates for the assize town or his deputy. This official should have complete control over all the criminal prosecutions in the sessional divisions and small town districts. In cases of importance, the justices of any such division or district should have the power, through their clerk, to require his attendance at any examination before commitment. In all ordinary cases, the deputy prosecutor should, immediately after the commitment is made out, send copies of the deposition to the county prosecutor; and, thereupon, the management of the case should devolve upon him. He should have full authority to call for any further evidence that he may think necessary; and, for this purpose, it should be the duty of the deputy prosecutor to act under his directions. The discretion should also be allowed to him, which we have claimed for the borough prosecutor, of bringing a case again before the justices, after commitment, wherever he thinks that the prosecution should be dropped. The salaries of the justices' clerks, for these sessional divisions and districts, should be fixed upon the principle of commuting, for an additional salary, one-half of the attorney's fees; the other half being devoted to the payment of the county prosecutor. If, for instance, we take the North Riding of York, there were, in the county sessional divisions, ninety-seven prosecutions in the year ending 29th September, 1861,* representing, at an average of £2 for each case, a fixed salary of £194. Of this sum, one-half, or £97, would be apportioned amongst the justices' clerks of sessional districts in the shape of additional salary; the remaining £97 would be added to the salary of the county prosecutor, who, in this instance, would be the clerk to the justices of York. This official would also be the public prosecutor for the borough, where there * Judicial Statistics, 1861, table 3, p. 12.

VOL. XV.-NO. XXX.

B B

were, in the same year, twenty-three prosecutions, representing a fixed salary of £46. He would also receive a salary of £12 for conducting the Scarborough prosecutions, which amounted only to twelve; the clerk to the justices of Scarborough receiving an additional fixed salary of £12 per annum as deputy prosecutor. Upon this basis of commutation the justices' clerk at York would receive an additional salary of £155 for his new duties as county prosecutor for the North Riding. Such a salary would certainly not secure the exclusive services of an attorney engaged in a large private practice. But added to that of the clerk to the justices, it would command the attention of himself or an efficient deputy to the criminal business which it represents. This, we believe, would be the case with all the counties where the criminal business is small, and the salaries would not rise above £200 a year. In those counties which afford much criminal business, the salaries would be large enough to engage the services of men who hold a high position in the profession. For instance, if the public prosecutor for Liverpool acted for the South Lancashire district, his salary would be rather more than £2,000 a year. So, if the Leeds prosecutions were taken with the West Riding, they would afford a salary of nearly £1,000 a year. But in every case we think that it would be better, and in the end more economical, to fix the salaries of the county prosecutors on a liberal scale. The additional expense would be a merely fractional increase in the cost of prosecutions, while the presence of able and experienced officers in the capacity of Crown prosecutors would give new dignity, power, and efficiency to this branch of our legal administration. And this increased efficiency would create a saving which would far more than balance the difference between a bare and a liberal salary.

We have discussed this subject of Crown prosecutions in detail, because it involves the most important of all the reforms called for in our system of criminal procedure. believe that its introduction has been retarded because no one

We

has been at the pains to deal with it practically; and we have, therefore, endeavoured to show how the principle may be adapted to the existing system without disturbing its machinery, or adding to its working expenses.

We will only add a few words on one important moral effect which would be produced by the change we advocate. We believe that it would at once raise the character of the profession, and remove some of the worst elements that at present degrade its practice and lower its tone.

The detection of crime, the pursuit and apprehension of offenders, and the prosecution of them, are all equally the duty of the State, and form no legitimate part of the ordinary business of an attorney. The evidence given before the Select Committee showed plainly that the open field of criminal prosecutions is a nursery for low practitioners. It is work which is avoided by professional men of any standing, and is sought for only by attorneys of low caste. It is time we should be rid of a system which only helps to support a class of men who, if they have not ceased to be honest, have certainly ceased to be scrupulous, and do no credit to the profession.

There is, however, another class which claims a certain kind of vested interest in the prosecution of criminals. How would this change affect the Bar? It could certainly do no harm; probably would do good. The only abuse to which it could lead would be that of favouritism. But the standing of the public prosecutors, the control of public opinion, and the well-known ability of the Bar itself to look after its own interests, would probably counteract any such tendency. The patronage would be vested in a body of men far better qualified to exercise it fitly and fairly than is the case at present. The county prosecutor, the town prosecutors, the justices' clerks for the smaller town divisions, and the justices' clerks for the county sessional divisions, would all have some influence in the selection. Their independent position would

enable them to act without fear or favour. unjust system of "souping" would come to

The weak and be discounten

anced. Briefs would be distributed on something like a principle. And those men who attend circuit from mere vacancy of life, or love of change, or those who never should have aspired to the forum at all, would miss the undeserved guineas, and soon be missed from their accustomed seats. Here, too, in the higher as in the lower walk of the profession, the new system would serve a moral purpose. For here, too, the pettifogger and the low attorney are represented by men who have equally fallen from the high estate of their common profession; who, after a fashion, can seek for briefs as the former seek for prosecutions, and who violate the traditions of the Bar.

ART. VI.-CONVEYANCING.

BY LEWIS.

Principles of Conveyancing, explained and illustrated by concise Precedents. With an Appendix on the effect of the Transfer of Land Act, in modifying and shortening Conveyances. By HUBERT LEWIS, B.A., late Scholar of Emm. Coll. Camb., of the Middle Temple, Barristerat-Law. London: Butterworths. Hodges, Smith, and Co., Dublin.

CAN anything interesting or attractive be said about Con

veyancing? Can the nooks and corners of second and third floors in Lincoln's Inn speak so as to please and instruct? Nay, can they make themselves intelligible? Is Conveyancing an art or a craft or is it a science, as some of its more enthusiastic votaries affirm it to be? It may not be easy to answer these questions; but the transcendent importance of a legal system that so really and practically deals with the rights and titles of property appeals not less to the instincts of the multitude than to the knowledge and experience of the lawyer; and it has a history—a history of learning, and