in the fire to keep up the usual speed. However, as a stoker, I was
only an underling, and must obey reasonable orders. So I stoked as
bidden, and then curiously watched to see if the engine-driver would
turn on full speed. He did nothing of the sort, but sat with his back
to the boiler, and began to talk to me quite affably. Amongst other
things, he said he was quite tired of this perpetual travelling, and
that he meant to look out for a wife with a little money, and never set
foot on an engine again. There was nothing at this time peculiar in his
manner, except that he was more talkative than usual, and he would now
and then turn half-round to the engine and call out: ‘Get on, old girl,
get on!’ We had before us a run of an hour and a half, and by that time
we were due at Blinton, a big junction, at which every train must stop;
so we had plenty of time to talk.
About an hour after leaving Padlington, Morgan stopped suddenly in the
middle of a sentence, and said: ‘Well, I must get to work now.’ Then he
opened the firebox door and called out to me: ‘More coal.’
I expostulated with him, and pointed out that we were going at a high
rate of speed, and would not need more coal before Blinton; but this
seemed to excite him terribly. ‘Shovel it in!’ he roared, with an oath;
‘I’m going to make her travel.’
To pacify him, I took up a shovelful, and managed to upset a good deal
of it before I reached the firebox.
‘You clumsy fool!’ he called out; ‘here, give it to me;’ and snatching
the shovel out of my hands, he crammed on as much coal as he could get
in.
I was beginning to get alarmed; and looking out over the well-known
country—for I had travelled that journey many and many a time before—I
saw that we were much nearer to Blinton than we ought to be at that
hour. However, I thought it did not much matter, for the line was
signalled clear in front of us, and the damage done was, as yet,
simply a little waste of coal. In a few minutes, our speed increased
enormously, and I calculated we were travelling at the rate of seventy
miles an hour. I thought it was time to remonstrate; and turning to
Morgan, I noticed that the indicator showed full speed. I called his
attention to the fact, and begged him to reduce the speed, or we should
run into Blinton without being able to stop.
‘Ha, ha!’ he cried in reply. ‘Stop! I’m never going to stop again! I
told you I’d make her travel. What do you want to stop for?—Get on, old
wench, get on!’ Then he burst into a hideous peal of laughter.
A cold sweat of absolute terror broke out on me as I realised the state
of things. Here was a raving maniac, a far stronger man than myself, in
charge of a train full of people. I bit my lips and clenched my hands,
and tried to collect my scattered ideas and decide what was best to be
done. Meanwhile, Morgan sat on a rail near the boiler flourishing a
shovel and shouting uproariously. The train rushed on with incredible
speed, not steadily and evenly, but with leaps and bounds, that
threatened to cast the engine off the line at every yard. There was no
doubt the man was as mad as a man could be, and he was also master of
the situation. I made one effort to reach the handle by which the steam
is turned off; but the madman was too sharp for me. ‘No, you don’t!’ he
shouted. He brought his shovel down with a tremendous blow on the rail
at my side, just missing my head. It was plain I could do nothing by
force. Would stratagem be of any use?
I looked out to the country; time was running short; we were not
more than twenty miles from Blinton Junction; and if we did not stop
there, the whole train must inevitably be wrecked, and probably not
one passenger would escape uninjured, and but few with their lives. I
looked back to the train. Outside the windows were hands gesticulating,
and frightened, alarmed faces. At the end of the train, the guard was
waving a red flag. Something must be done, and by me, or we should all
be inevitably lost. I made up my mind. I turned to Morgan with a smile
on my face, and I said: ‘Old boy, you’re quite right; this is a fine
pace; but it ain’t quite fast enough. Look here!’ and I caught him by
the arm and led him to the side of the engine next to the double rail.
‘See!’ I cried; ‘there is another train coming up faster than us, and
she will pass us; we must go faster: but let’s see first who is driving
her; lean forward and look. Can you see?’
The poor maniac stepped outside the rail and leaned forward to look
for the imaginary train, when I gave him a sudden push, and he fell in
a heap on the side-rails and was killed on the spot. With a gasp of
relief I sprang back to the engine and turned off the steam. It was not
a moment too soon. We were well in sight of Blinton Junction before I
had the train properly under control. I pulled up at the platform all
right, and then I fainted.
When I came to, I was lying on a bench in the waiting-room, and the
inspector was standing over me, with his note-book in his hand,
prepared to take down my statement. What I stated was, that the
engine-driver had gone mad, and that, to save the lives of the
passengers, I had knocked him off the engine just in time to get
the train under control before running into the station. This was
corroborated by the guard and several passengers; and the case was
brought before the solicitors of the Company. I gave my evidence at the
inquest, and heard no more of the matter until one day the passenger
superintendent handed me ten sovereigns and a letter appointing me
station-master at Little Mudford. It was evident the directors condoned
my conduct; and I hope that my readers will agree with them, and, in
consideration of my having saved a train full of people, will acquit me
of murder, and bring in a verdict of justifiable homicide.
POPULAR LEGAL FALLACIES.[1]
BY AN EXPERIENCED PRACTITIONER.
_DEEDS OF GIFT AND WILLS.—II._
The making of a will is a much less formidable affair than the
preparation of a deed of gift. It requires no stamp; the rights of
the beneficiaries do not arise until the decease of the testator, and
therefore it does not in any way interfere with his power to manage and
dispose of his property as he thinks best in the interval during which
he retains physical and mental power to make a new will. In a case of
extreme simplicity, the testator may even dispense with professional
assistance altogether; but this is seldom advisable. As, however,
some testators _will_ make their own wills, it may be useful, while
adverting to the danger of that practice, to point out how the risk may
be lessened. It is always dangerous to use technical expressions—such
as ‘heirs,’ &c.—because a gift to the heirs of a testator has the
effect of cutting out the younger children in the same way and to the
same extent as if he had died intestate. In some cases, it may even be
worse than intestacy, depriving them of their shares of their father’s
personal estate. The intentions of the testator ought to have the
simplest form of expression possible applied to their setting forth in
the will. The names of the children who are to benefit ought in most
cases to be inserted, this having certain legal advantages in case of
death over the description of the children as a class. When property
is given to a child of the testator who dies before his father, the
gift takes effect as if he had survived his father and then died; while
in all other cases, if the beneficiary should die in the lifetime of
the testator, the devise or bequest in his favour lapses, or becomes
altogether void. Of course this might in any case be provided against
by express directions that in case of the death of the beneficiary, the
benefit intended for him should go to his children; but such provisions
are to some extent inconsistent with that simplicity which is essential
in home-made wills.
Other points requiring special attention in some cases are that the
subsequent marriage of the parents does not (in England) render
bastards legitimate, or capable of taking under the description of
‘children’ of the testator; and that the marriage of a man with
the sister of his deceased wife, or of a woman with the brother
of her deceased husband, is absolutely void, and the children of
such void marriage are illegitimate. In such cases, the difficulty
may be overcome by the use of appropriate words and full and clear
descriptions of the persons who are to be included in the will. In
many home-made wills, the distinction between the effect of the two
disposing words ‘devise’ and ‘bequeath’ appears to have been unknown.
Now, there is a real distinction here, the former word applying to real
estate (land), and the latter to personal estate (money, furniture,
&c.); and in cases within our own knowledge, the use of a word which
was not appropriate to one class of property, without any sufficient
description of what was intended to pass by the will, has occasioned
a partial intestacy, and to that extent has defeated the intentions
of the testator. The word ‘give’ is always sufficient, and has the
advantage of being safe. A common mistake is the omission of the
appointment of executors; and an equal impropriety is the appointment
of a tenant for life as sole executor. When everything which the
testator possesses is given absolutely to one person, that person
may well be appointed sole executor, in order that the power and the
beneficial interest may be combined in one and the same person; but
if an executor has only a life-interest in the income to arise from
the property, some other should be appointed to act with him as joint
executors.
The Wills Act, 1837, requires that certain formalities should be
observed as to the attestation of wills and codicils. The latter
instruments, however, scarcely come within the scope of this, as it
is very rare to find a conjunction of circumstances in which it would
be advisable for a testator to attempt to alter the effect of the
will itself by adding a codicil thereto. Although the Act does not
require the adoption of any special form of attestation, still it is
very desirable that a well-designed form should be used, because it
draws the attention of the parties to the statutory requisites, which
cannot be neglected without danger of the will becoming mere waste
paper. Such a form is the following, the insertion of which may be
allowed to supersede the necessity for a long explanation: ‘Signed by
the said A. B. C. as his last Will and Testament in the presence of
us, present at the same time, who, at his request, in his presence,
and in the presence of each other, have hereunto subscribed our names
as witnesses.’ Each witness should sign under this clause, and add his
address and occupation. Formerly, if any witness had any interest in
the will, the effect was to render the will void; but the inconvenience
of this led to an alteration of the law, whereby in case of a
beneficiary—or the wife or husband of a beneficiary—being one of the
attesting witnesses, the will remains valid, except that the witness
cannot take any benefit thereunder; nor can the husband or wife of
such witness.
Much misapprehension exists as to the effect of the marriage of a
testator on a will previously executed by him. It is generally known
that a will may be revoked by the making of a subsequent will; whether
the revocation be express—which it ought always to be—or merely by
necessary implication, the new will being inconsistent with the old
one, and not merely a codicil which is intended to be supplementary
thereto. But it is very difficult to persuade some people that _when a
man gets married, he ought to make a new will_, the marriage operating
as a revocation of the former will. There is no need to insist to any
great extent upon the fairness of this rule of law, for it scarcely
requires a moment’s consideration to see that a will which would be
quite proper for a bachelor, would be altogether unsuitable for the
altered status of the same man when, by his marriage, he had taken
upon him new duties and responsibilities. Few men would be so cruel
as to wish their wills to remain unaltered when their position had
so materially changed. Sometimes mischief is done by over-anxiety to
provide for an intended wife; a man makes a will before his marriage,
in order that his intended wife may be provided for in the event of
his decease before marriage; and in ignorance of the rule of law as to
revocation, he neglects to have his will re-copied, and then to re-sign
it, and have the new will duly attested after the nuptial ceremony
has been performed; in consequence of which neglect or omission, he
ultimately dies intestate; and his wife only becomes entitled to the
provision made for her by the law, although her husband intended her to
have a much larger share of his estate. It is only requisite for this
peculiarity to be known in order that the remedy, which is so easy, may
be applied.
As to the revocation of a will by destruction, the legal distinctions
often give rise to questions as difficult of solution as any which
affect the original validity of wills. A testator who is of sound and
disposing mind may cancel or revoke a will which he has previously
made, without making another will to supersede it; and the usual mode
of effecting this object is by the destruction of the will with the
intention of revoking it. Here, however, all the necessary conditions
must exist, or the will would not be revoked; and even if it were
destroyed so utterly that its contents were undecipherable, and so
destroyed by the testator himself, yet, if he did not intend to revoke
the will, or was mentally incapable of disposing of his property, if
the contents of the will could be proved in some other way, as from a
draft or copy, probate would be granted of such draft or copy, although
the expense of proving the will in that indirect manner would be
considerably more than an ordinary grant of probate would cost. A very
curious case was before the court some time since. A married man who
had made his will in favour of his wife, in a moment of passion arising
from his displeasure at something which she had done—nothing of any
importance—tore up his will and threw the pieces at her before leaving
the room where the quarrel had occurred. She was a wise woman, for
she gathered the fragments together and said no more on the subject
until after her husband’s decease, when probate was granted of the
pieces, the court being of opinion that the deceased had not seriously
intended to revoke his will, but had simply torn it when irritated to
the verge of madness; and in this view the fact of his not having made
a subsequent will was an important consideration.
The following brief observations as to the capacity of testators
must bring us to the end of our present subject. A married woman who
possesses any separate estate may dispose of it by will or otherwise
as if she were single. An infant cannot make a valid will, nor can a
person of unsound mind. But there are many cases in which a person
may be capable of transacting all ordinary business, and yet be so
much under the influence of some other person that his will may be set
aside in consequence of the undue influence which has been brought to
bear upon him. It is impracticable for us to enter at any length upon
this part of the subject, as we have already trespassed by exceeding
the space allotted to us. The simple rule is, that the will must be—as
its name implies—an expression of the unbiased will and mind of the
testator. Whenever the validity of the will of any deceased person is
disputed on any ground, the due execution and attestation thereof have
to be proved in court; but in ordinary cases the witnesses are not
called upon when the will is proved, unless there is some irregularity
or incompleteness in the attestation clause, or some erasure or
interlineation in the will.
FOOTNOTES:
[1] It should be understood that this series of articles deals mainly
with English as apart from Scotch law.
OCCASIONAL NOTES.
‘ATLANTIC GREYHOUNDS.’
The wonderful results achieved by the great Atlantic liners are only
stimulating men’s minds as to how the voyage may be still further
accelerated. There are torpedo boats that can steam at the rate of
twenty-two knots an hour, and enthusiasts now deem it possible to build
passenger vessels which would double that speed. Professor Thurston
proposes a steamer eight hundred feet in length, eighty feet beam,
and twenty-five feet draught of water, as the best form yet known for
quick sailing. The fast ships of to-day exert about one and a half
horse-power per ton to reach a speed of twenty sea-miles per hour;
but he anticipates some slight improvements which would reduce this
figure. Though his leviathan may be expected to demand thirty-five
thousand horse-power to make twenty knots an hour, he aspires to forty,
and at this speed the horse-power required would probably amount to
nearly two hundred and fifty thousand. The question is, whether the
time saved would compensate for the expenditure of so much extra fuel.
It appears that a vessel having a displacement of ten thousand nine
hundred and sixty tons, and an indicated horse-power of ten thousand
three hundred, consumes two hundred and five tons of coal per day;
while a smaller vessel, having only nine thousand eight hundred and
sixty tons displacement, and fourteen thousand three hundred and
twenty-one indicated horse-power, consumes three hundred and fifteen
tons of coal per day, and yet the larger vessel has accomplished the
passage in about eighteen hours longer than the smaller, and burned
about six hundred tons of coal less. The present difficulty of naval
architects is how to give greater speed with a low consumption of coal
and the same carrying capacity. If passenger vessels relied solely
on passengers, quicker voyages would be at once possible. However,
there seems a growing tendency towards divorcing goods from passenger
traffic, as railways have already done. Then light, yacht-like vessels
of modern size would, for speed, safety, and economy, probably meet all
the requirements of the passenger traffic. A high rate of speed, it
may be presumed, will not be overlooked, whatever else. Some sanguine
people believe that less than forty years will suffice to reduce the
seven days of an Atlantic trip to three and a half, and Professor
Thurston mentions about eighty hours. There are several arguments which
point to the possibility of a great reduction. If we go back forty-one
years, the _Great Britain_ made the passage from Liverpool to New York
in a little less than fifteen days, and though this was considered
good, in 1874 the _Britannic_ and _Germanic_ placed Queenstown and New
York within eight and a half days’ sail of each other. The _Etruria_
and _Umbria_ have since made the voyage in six days six hours. Again,
of the seven vessels engaged in the transatlantic trade which have
made the passage in seven days or under, not one has been fitted with
those latest aids to economy, triple expansion engines and forced
draught. As a matter of fact, there is enormous waste; and an authority
estimates that only one half of the total power exerted by the engines
is effective in propelling the vessel. In addition to this, a very
considerable portion of the heat energy of the fuel escapes through
the funnel, instead of producing steam. Something might be done here
towards securing greater economy; and by using high-pressure boilers
and triple expansion engines, there is said to be a saving of as much
as sixteen per cent. One thing seems to be pretty clear, that the fast
steamers of the future will owe their speed to the engineer more than
to the naval architect. The lines upon which modern racers are built
are scarcely likely to be much improved. When the engineer gets the
space at present devoted to cargo, for engines, boilers, and fuel,
swiftness will ensue, but at a greater cost, as a matter of course, as
may be gathered from the fact that on the Atlantic voyage a gain of
eighteen hours between two ships, in all respects equal, necessitates
an expenditure of five hundred tons of coal extra. As, however, we have
already predicted in these pages, oil may yet take the place of the
bulky and unwieldy coal.
‘ARMY PANICS.’
With reference to the article which appeared in a recent number of this
_Journal_ (No. 144), a Forfarshire parish minister sends us an incident
copied from the diary of his father, who was in the 92d Highland
Regiment, and which incident bears some likeness to that quoted from
Napier’s _Peninsular War_ in the article above referred to. The 92d
formed part of Lord Hill’s division, which seems to have included also
the 24th, the 50th, and 71st regiments, and a regiment of Guards. The
incident is told as follows:
‘Our division marched to a place within five leagues of Madrid, called
Aranjuez, where the king of Spain has a grand palace on the banks of
the Tagus. At this time, Lord Wellington was closely investing Burgos;
but the French, bringing a large army into the country, forced him
to raise the siege, and the whole of the English, Portuguese, and
Spanish troops had to fall back upon the frontiers of Portugal. Our
division, under Lord Hill, coming past Madrid in the course of our
retreat, had to cross a large bridge at midnight. It was then that a
very extraordinary thing occurred. In a moment and without any cause
for it whatever, all the troops were struck with a panic and driven
into great confusion. Some were thrown on their backs, and others had
their legs almost broken. Bonnets flew one way, and muskets another.
This unaccountable panic extended to the rear of the whole division.
A regiment that was lying asleep by the roadside was roused and
thrown into confusion at the same instant. It so happened that next
day the French came up to the bridge and a sharp contest took place.
Our artillery was at one end of the bridge, and the French at the
other. There was a very sharp fire on both sides with field-pieces and
small-arms.’
THE TWO SEAS.
‘When thou passest through the waters I will be with thee.’
Each night we are launched on a sea of sleep;
No doubts disturb us, no fears annoy.
Though we plough the waves of the darkened deep,
We know we are safe in the Master’s keep,
And the morning brings us joy.
What dread, then, should daunt us, what doubt distress,
When on Death’s dark sea we are launched alone?
In that deeper sleep, should we trust Him less?
Shall we limit to earth His power to bless?
Will the Father forsake his own?
He made us His children; He bears us to bed;
And whether our sleep be the first or last,
What matters it where our souls are led,
If our trust in the God of the living and dead
Should only hold us fast?
J. B. S.
* * * * *
The Conductor of CHAMBERS’S JOURNAL begs to direct the attention of
CONTRIBUTORS to the following notice:
_1st._ All communications should be addressed to the ‘Editor, 339
High Street, Edinburgh.’
_2d._ For its return in case of ineligibility, postage-stamps should
accompany every manuscript.
_3d._ To secure their safe return if ineligible, ALL MANUSCRIPTS,
whether accompanied by a letter of advice or otherwise, _should
have the writer’s Name and Address written upon them_ IN FULL.
_4th._ Offerings of Verse should invariably be accompanied by a
stamped and directed envelope.
_If the above rules are complied with, the Editor will do his best to
insure the safe return of ineligible papers._
* * * * *
Printed and Published by W. & R. CHAMBERS, 47 Paternoster Row, LONDON,
and 339 High Street, EDINBURGH.
* * * * *
_All Rights Reserved._