The Sun.
London, England, 1849-06-07 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF QUEEIVS BENCH, June 6.
THE QUEEN V. PARTIAbI.

This was a writ of quo warranto, issued by this
court, to ascertain by what authority Mr. Parham held
the office of judge of twelve district county courts,
under twelve different appointments in Wcrcestcrshire.
The question to be decided was whether one person was
able to hold the anointment of judge of more than one
district at a time.

Sir F. KELLY, in support of the rule, contended that
one person could not under the statute hold more than
one appointment as judge of a county court, and there:
fore that there ought to be a separate person appointed
for each district.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL, who showed cause agaiust
the rule, contended that one person was competent to
hold office as judge of 100 county courts under 100 sepa-
rate appointments, if he was able to fulfil the duties of
each office. If there was a separate appointment to
each district there would be 640 judges of county courts
iu England and Wales. The same observations he said
applied to the high bailiff's and clerks. One person
could be clerk or high bailiff to several different courts.
He submitted that Mr. Parham was entitled to hold the
several appointments.

Sir F. KELLY to-day replied.
The COURT took time to consider their judgment.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, June 6.
(Sittings in Banco.)

KINNERSLEY V. KNOTT:-A DISQUISITION ON NAMES.

In this ease the plaintiff, an endorser of a bill of ex-
change for 651. 10s., brought an action against the de-
fendant as the acceptor, and declared against him by the
name of " John M. Knott," being that by which he had
signed the note; but without stating in the declaration
that the defendant had so signed it. To this declaration
the defendant demurred specially, and assigned as the
ground of his demurrer that the declaration had not pro-
perly set forth his Christian name, nor assigned any
reason under the statute 3d and 4th Wm. IV., c. 42, fur
not doing so.
Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD, on behalf of the defendant,
said their Lordships were often told that a case rested
on a word; but here it rested on a letter only. It
was his duty to contend, both upon principle
and precedent, that this was a good ground of
demurrer. The Court had decided that the letter
" I," being a vowel and capable of pronunciation,
might be taken to be a Christian name, but they
had at the same time intimated that such would not
be the case with a consonant, which, as it could not be
sounded alone, would be deemed to be not a name but
an initial letter only. Now in this case "M" was
plainly an initial letter, fir it could not be pronounced by
itself. Standing by itself, therefore, it meant nothing.
He was sure a very eminent authoress (Miss Edge-
worth), whose loss they had recently had to lament, was
of opiuisn that all the letters of the alphabet, by the
mode in which they were explained, were ,rendered little
more (to use judicial language) than "a mockery, a de-
lusion, and a snare"—that A B C D, &c., meant A B
C I), &e., and nothing more; but even if it would avail
him, he feared his friend could not rely upon such
authority.
The Loan. CurEr JUSTICE—You say the " M" means
nothing—then let it mean nothing. Would a scratch be
demurrable ?•

Mr. Sergeant Ter.FoußD—l say that " M" by itself
cannot be pronounced, and means nothing; but here it
does mean something, which something ought to have
been stated or explained under the statute. Suppose a
person of the name of John Robins, the Court would
surely hold a declaration bad which described him by
the word John and figures of the redbreast! In like
manner the Court would hold this declaration bad, be-
cause it either put a sign for one of the defendant's
names, or described it by the initial letter.- A conso-
nant-by itself was a mere sound without meaning. The
letter H, indeed, by the custom of London and some
other places, was no sound at all—(Laughter)—though
elsewhere it protruded itself on all occasions.—(Re-
newed laughter.) _ _ _

Mr. Justice Metax—l had a policeman before me as
a witness the other day, who told me he belonged to the
" hen" division, and it was not until some further stage
in the cause that I discovered it was not a division de-
signated by the name of a bird, but by " N," the alpha-
betical letter.—(Great laughter.)
Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD—It will, probably, be con-
tended that this person might have been christened in
the manner the bill is signed, but I submit that the court
will not intend that. It is true, we often hear of absurd
Christian names, and I myself remember when many
persons insisted upon having their children christened
" Sir Francis Burdett."
Mr. Justice MauLE.—l remember a very learned and
ingenious arguna,nt by Mr. Jardine, when I sat in the
Court of Exchequer, by which he proved to the satisfac-
tion of the court, that the Christian name is the real
name, and the surname is only an addition; that in the
case of John Stiles, for instance, Joh❑ is the real name,
but Stiles was perhaps originally added only because the
ancestor lived near-one.

Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD—Thm having, I hope, con-
vinced the Court thus " M " by itself cannot be a name,
and means nothing, I submit it must be understood as
an and therefore
_that it onght to have been so
stated.

Mr. Justice MAULE—Pleadings are in writing, there-
fore the law presumes that the Court can read and know
its letters. Vowels may be names, and in " Sully's
Memoirs" a Monsieur D'O. is spoken of ; but consonants
cannot be names alone, as they require in pronounciation
the ail of vowels.

Mr. Sergeant TALFounp—Yes; hut in the case of con-
sonants they are taken to be but initials when used alone
both in law and literature. Throughout the ponderous
volumes of Richardson's novels, for instance, we find
persons spoken of in this manner. In " Clarissa Har-
low e," for instance, " Lord M." is mentioned through-
out four volumes, but it could never be understood that
this was the real name, or anything more than an initial.
Again, an author well known to the Lord Chief Justice
(Charles Lamb) wrote a farce entitled simply " Mr. II."
but the whole turns upon this being the initial only of a
name he wished to conceal. In his prologue to it, he
humorously says—
" When the dispensers of the public lash
Sett penance give; a letter and a dash—,
When vice reduced in size shrinks to a failing,
And loses half her progress by curtailing,
Faux pas are told in such a modest way,
The affair of Colonel B— with Mrs. A—,
You must forgive them; for what is there, say,
Which such a pliant Vowel must not grant,
To such a very pressing Consonant?
Or who poetic justice dares dispute,
When mildly melting at a lover's suit,
The wife's a Liquid, her good man a Mute."

And he concludes by an appeal to the consequences of
this " mincing fashion," which (said the Learned Ser-
geant) I trust will have great weight with your Lord-
ships, for he adds—
" Oh, should this mincing fashion ever spread
From names of living heroes to the dead;
How would ambition sigh and hang the head,
As each loved syllable should melt away,
Her Alexander turned into great A,
A single C her Caesar to express,
Her Scipio sunk into a Roman 5
And nick'd and dock'd to those new modes of speech,
Great Hannibal himself to Mr.
The Learned Sergeant then cited and argued upon a
variety of cases on his side of the question, and sub-
mitted that their Lordships ought to decide in favour of
his client.

Mr. F. RospisoN, on behalf of the plaintiff, said
he did not deny the right of every Englishman to be
called by every name given to him at his baptism; but
he submitted that before he claimed to be privilegd on
that account, he must show that his privilege has been
invaded. Here it was assumed throughout that the
" M." in the name " John M. Knott" was an initial
letter, but ho believed there were instances in which
persons had been christened in this remarkable way in
this country. Ile was told there was lately a bank di-
rector who was christened " Edmund R. Robinson;"
but were it otherwise in this country, did it follow that
in no other country, Jew, Turk, or heathen might not
use such names? If, however, it were an initial letter,
why did not his friend apply to have the right name
substituted? If it were a misdescription, it was plead-
able in abatement. Such a name might originate from
an error of the clergyman at the christening.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE—In the upper circles of
society it is customary to hand in the name in writing,
which prevents mistake.
Mr. Justice MAULS—The practice of the circles with
which I am conversant was, and I believe is, to give the
name verhally. There was, however, a gentleman, the
sheriff of one of the counties I went through on circuit,
Mr. John Wanley Sawbridge Erle Drax, whose name
was very probably handed in.—(Laughter.)
Mr. RomnsoN—There are many Scotch and French
names, such as M'Donald, M‘Taggart, D'Harcourt,
D'Horsey—how are such names to be set out in the
pleadings? Suppose, again, a Man's name were the
name of a river, as X ?
Mr. Justice MAULE—But that is not spelt so ; it is
idem per idem, X for ex. Beer, I believe, is sometimes
called X, but not water.

Mr. ROBINSON—There are some of our names which
are precisely those of letters, as Gee, Jay, Kay, &c.
Mr. Justice MAuLE—But here it is not sonans, only
consonans, and cannot be sounded without other letters.
Mr. ROBINSON—Their Lordships should remember
the existence of a publication called the Fonetic Nuz,
and unless they meant to give a " heavy blow and great
discouragement" to that rising science, ho hoped they
would not decide against his client.—(Laughter.) But
he had seriously to submit that by demurring to this
declaration the defendant admitted, according to legal
principles, that his name was that which was stated in
the declaration.

Mr. Justice CRESSITELL referred to and distinguished
this case from the case of "Roberts v. Moon," in 5 Term
Reports, where a plea in abatement of misnomer, begin-
ning " and the said Richard, sued by the name of
Robert," was held bad.
Mr. Justice MAULE suggested that as 651. 10s. de-
pended upon the question, it would be better for the
plaintiff to amend.
Mr. ROBINSON declined to do so. and contended no
case could be cited directly, in support of the demurrer,
and therefore the Court should decide in favour of the
plaintiff.
Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD having briefly replied,
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE —The various stages in
the argument in this case have been already discussed
and decided. The courts have decided that they will
not assume that a consonant letter expresses a name,
but they will assume it expresses an initial only
.; and
they further decided that the insertion cf an initial
letter, is ground of demurrer, and is not merely an irre-
gularity. In the case of " Nash v. Collier, this Court
decided that a demurrer to the declaration which de-
scribed the clefrndant's name as William Henry W. Col-
lier was not frivolous, and gave a strong intimation,
which the plaintiff had the good
.sense to attend to,
that he ought to emend his declaration. That decision