« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »
39 & 40. C. 104. (London Court of ever inconsistent with an allegation fub. Requests.)
1941 jequent. Rex v. Stevens and A new, 41. C, 23. 5. 6. (Poor rate.)
7. 44 G. 3.
244 43. c. 55. (Compensation for lands taken by government.)
STOPPING IN TRANSITU. . c. 163. (Prize.)
30 Where A. and B., traders living in Lone
don, were in the courle of ordering goods STOCK.
of the defendants, co:ton inanufacturers 1. In an action on the case for not ac
ar Manchester, to be sent to M. and Co. cepring flock agreed to be transferred
at Hull, for the purpose of being afteron requelt, an averment that the plaio.
wards sent to the correspondents of A. tiff was ready and willing to transfer
and B. at Hamburgh; and on the 31st of and requeited the defendant to accept
Marcb A. and B. lent orders to the dethe stock, which he refused, can only be
fendants for certain goods to be sent to satisfied by thewing an actual render
M, and Co. at Hull, to be shipped for and refusal, or that the painuiff waited
Hamburgh as usual : held that as beat the Bank on the day when it was all.
tween buyer and seller the right of the derstood that the transfer was to be
defendants to stop as in tranfily was at made until the close of the transfer
an end when the goods came to the poi. books, which was the latest time when
leflion of M. and Co. at Hull; for they the transfer could be made. Bordinave
were for this purpose the appointed v. Gregory, E. 44 G. 3.
agents of the vendees, and received 2. Sembie, thac in such an action it is not orders from them as to the ulterior des. neceffary by the stat. 7 G. 2.6. 8. 5. 6.
tination of the goods; and the goods, for the plaintiff to thew that he trans
after their arrival at Hull, were to referred the stock to another at the next
ceive a new direction from the vendees. posible transfer day afrer default made
But it was competent for A. and B.,
who became insolvent some time in Ju. by the original contractor, provided the Stock ivere transferred before the action
ly, but committed no act of bankrupicy brought: though, if the plaintiff might
till the 26th of September, to agree have obtained more for the stock by a
borà fide, and not from motives of vo. tale on agv intermediate day berween luntary and undue preference, to give the original default and the actual sale, l up the goods to the defendants in the that will go in reduction of the da latier end of July. And held that the mages fustained by the plaiouit by such
circumstances of the bankrupis having default.
called a meeting of their creditors, and 3. In another case of the same kind, the
having taken legal advice, and beiog evidence being that the lock was con.
encouraged by the result of such meet. tracted to be transferred on a certain
ing and advice to give up the goods, day, and the averment in the declaration
was evidence for the jury to find that being the fame as in the above case, that the goods were given up bonâ fide, and it was to be transferred on request, the
not tiom any mouive of voluntary and Court said, that if the objection had
undue preference to the defendants; been taken at the crial there must have
though done by the bankrupts in a fitue been a nonfuit. Bordena-ve v. Barlieit,
ation of impending bankruptcy at the E. 44 G. 3.
Time; the defendants, at the time of
such giving up of the goods by the SURPLUSAGE.
bankrupts, holding poffeffion of the
goods upon a claim of right to ftop An allegation in pleading which is fenfin
them in transitu. Dixon and Olbers, ble and confiitent in the place where it
Avignees of Batrier and Son, Bankrupis, occurs, and not repugnant to antecedent
vi Baldwin ard Anusher, E. 44 G. 3. matter;cannot be reject-d as surplulage, though laid under a vidclicet, and how- 1
paling in and out of their city on horses SUPERSEDEAS.
or in carts or waggons (that is, at the · See PRACTICE, No. 2.
rate of id. for every horie load, and ad.
for every cart load drawn by one horse, TENANTS IN COMMON.
and 2d. more for each additional
horse); held that any alteration of the Where a corporation were seised in fee of
carriage by which the goods were la lands, which by the custom were annu
conveyed, as by taking them in Itage ally meted out under their control by a
coaches instead of carts or waggons, leet jury, according to a certain ftint,
could not vary the right of toll in the to such of the resident burgesses who
proportion of 2d. for each horse drawchose to stock the same; they paying
ing the coach, although the number of 195. 4d. to each of the other burgesses
horses were estimated by the weight of who did not stock: held that the bar.
passengers rather than of goods. The gesses, who lo stocked, were tenants in
Major, Gra of Curlisle v. Wilton, E. common of the lands so occupied by
44 G. 3.. them, and as such occupiers were liable 2. Where a corporation by a verbal agreeto be rated for the same. Rex v, Wat.
ment with a pauper leased to him the fon, M. 45 G. 3
480| tolls of a market for above jol. a.year;
held that he could not gain a lecil-ment TENDER AND REFUSAL. thereby, as no interest could pars from See EVIDENCE, No. 2.
a corporation but ender their seal : therefore he had no more than a mere
licence to collect the coll. But if such TITHES.
toll had been leased to him under seal The London Court of Requests has juris of the corporation, semble that he would
diction, by the stat. 39 & 40 G. 3. 6. have gained a settlement by residing 104. over a contract for the retention for 40 days in the same parish where of tithes by the tenant, the value of the market was. Rex v. The Inhabia which was under 5l. ; and therefore it ! tants of Chipping - Norton, T. 44 G. 3. the vicar sue for the same, and recover
239 less than 51. upon a count in aliumpfit 3. Where goods are carried along two for a quantum valebant, the defendant different lines of canal, one of which is may enter a suggestion on the roll, by statute exempied from being rated Itating thas he was a freeman and in in respect of the tolls, and the other habitant of the city of London, trading not; though the voyage happened to there at the time he was served with the finish on the une empted line where the writ, for the purpose of ousting the coils become due and are received, yet plaintiff of his costs under the 12th sec the Canal Company shall not be rared tion of the act. Sandby, Clerk, v. for more than such proportion of the Miller, E. 44 G. 3. .
195 tolls as accrued in respect of the care
riage along the unexempted line. And :: TOLERATION ACT.
the toll arifing in respect of so much per
ton per mile is to be rated only for so See FALSE IMPRISONMENT, No. 1. many miles as the goods were carried
along the unexempted lino. And where TOLLS.
the act directs that the tolls should be
exempt from any taxes, rates, &c.other See TURNPJKE.
than such as the land which should be 1. Where it appeared in evidence upon an used for the purpose of the navigation
action of indebitatus assumpfit for toll would have been subject to if the art that a corporation were entitled by a had not been made ; that goes to exgeneral grant of toll, explained by usage empt the rolls, qua tolls, altogether from to be due for all commercial goods being rated in respect of the line so exVOL. V.
empted, leaving the land rateable as tion of trover brought by the aflignees before. Rex v. The Leeds and Liver - | for a fhip belonging to the bankrupe's pool Canal Company, T. 44 G. 3. 325 estate. Bloxam and Otbers, Alignees of
Ward, a Bankrupt, v. Hubbard, T. TRESPASS. 44 G. 3.
407 See FALSE IMPRISONMENT.
2: But if he be not joined, advantage can 1. Where goods were taken by conltables
only be taken by plea in abalement to
the whole action ; though if there be under a warrant of distress granted by
no such plea the other assignees who sue a justice of peace for the county o
can only recover their proportional Kent, directed “ to the contables of
ib. the lower Half Hundred of C. and G.
:13. A sale of a Mip (which was afterwards in the county of Kent;" which warrant
loft at lea) made by the defendant, who reciced that the plaintiff (whose goods
claimed under a detective conveyance were distrained), of the parish of G. in
from a trader before his bankruptcy, is the said county, was ballotied for the mi.
a fufficient converfion to enable the litia of the said county, and having
aflignees of the bankrupt to maintain refused to serve, &c. was convicted in a
trover, without thewing a demand and certain penalty, for levying which the
refusal. narrant was granted: if it turn out that the warrant was executed wibin a
TURNPIKE. certain part of the parish of G. within the juriididion of the Cirque Poris, aud | One may gain a settlement by renting a not within the county of kent, the con
tenement of above rol. a year in the Tables are not within the protection of
parish where he refided, though fuch the itat. 24 G. 2. 6. 44. S. 6. and may
jendence were in a turnpike house, as be sued in trespass without the magis.
servant to the collector for whom he retrate's being made a defendant. Nilton:
ceived the tolls; for the general turnv. Green and Jenner, T. 44 G. 3. 233 pike'act 13 G. 3. 6. 84. S. 56. only says 2. A conitabie executing the warrant of a
that " no gate keeper or person renting julice of peace, and sued in crespass, the rolls and residing in the roll boule, thall without the magiflrate, is withio the thereby gain a seitlemeni,” i.e. by foch
taking of the coll-house or renting the protection of the Itat, 24 G. 2. 6. 44. . 6. and entitled to a verdict on proot
tolls. Rex v. The Inbabitants of Denof such warrant; having first complied bigh, T. 44 G. 3,
333 with the plaintiff's demand of a perula. and copy of the warrant before the ac
UNTIL. tion brought, though not within lix See IND CTMENT, No. 12. days after such demand, as the act die rects. Jones v. Vaughan, M. 45 G. 3.
445 By the vagrant act 17 G. 2.6. 5. after a TROVER.
rogue and vagabond has been commit1. An order of the Lord Chancellor, made ted to che Seflions, and they, adjudging
under the stat, 5 G. 2. c. 30, upon the him to be a rogue and vagabond, order petition of creditors, for removing one him to be further imprisoned and kept of several assignees of a bankrurt's to hard labour for six months, and to estate, not followed up by any re-allign. be publicly whipped during that time, ment or release of such asignee to the and that after the expiration of his im. remaining astignees, nor by any new prisonment he should be sent and em. asligoment of the commissioners under ployed in his Majesty's ser vice pursuant to the Lord Chancellor's further order, the statutes, &c.: held that the whole does not operate to dive it the lega! forms one fentence; and such order eltare out of such removed affignee : and being defective in the latter part, for consequently he ought to join in an ac want of adjudicating whether the party were to serve his Majesty by fea or land | tending the protection of the stat. as discriminated in the statute, the con 24 G. 2. C. 44. for privileging justices viction shall be quafhed, though the for of the peace in actions brought against mer part of the sentence, adjudging the them, as such, to the lord mayor and rogue and vagabond to be whipped, be aldermen of London acting under this act valid. Rex v. Patchett, T. 44 G. 3. 339 beyond the limits of the city ; directs
that « no action shall be commenced VALUATION OF PREMISES. against any perjon or persons for any thing Şee COMPENSATION.
done in pursuance or under colour of this
azt, until after 14 days' notice in VARIANCE.
writing, or after tender of amends,"
&c. : held that the treasurer of the See Stock, No. 3.
Company is a person within the said
clause ; and being sued for an act done VIDELICET.
by the Company which induced an inAn allegation in pleading which is sensible jury to the plaintiffs, was entitled to
and consistent in the place where it oc such notice before the action brought. curs, and not repugnant to antecedent | The notice is necessary in actions for matter, cannot be rejected as surplus trespasses or torts ; but qu. Whether in age, though laid under a videlicet, and affumpfit? Wallace v. Smith, Treasurer however inconsistent with an allegation of the Wif India Dock Company, E. Jubsequent. Rex v. Stephens and Agnew, 44 G. 3.
115 T. 44 G. 3.
1 244 See INDICTMENT, No. 1, 2, 3.
See COPY HOLD, No. 1. Devise. VENUE. A scire facias upon a recognizance of bail WORDS, CONSTRUCTION OF.
taken in open court in B. R. is properly - Charges." See CHARGES. suable in Middlesex, where the record « Share." See Devize, No. 6. 18; though all the previous proceedings ! « Unless." See AGREEMENT, No. 3 which commenced by original were in
and 5. London. And semble that it could not "'Until.” See INDICTMENT, No. 12. be sued elsewhere than in Middlesex. Coxeter v. Burke and Another, Bail of
WRIT. . Price, M. 45 G. 3.
See Practice, No. 6. WEST INDIA DOCKS. The Court will qualh a writ for irregula. The stat. 29 G. 3. c. 69. S. 184. directs rity if it have an informal return, ale that the West India Dock Company
though the day of the return be equally Thall sue in the name of their treasurer
certain as in the common form. Reue in all actions by or on behalf of the bel v. Preston, T. 44 G. 3. 291 Company, and that he shall be sued for the recovery of any claim or demand
WRIT OF RIGHT. upon, or of any damages occasioned by
See Right, WRIT OF. the Company; and S. 185., after ex
END OF THE FIFTH VOLUME.
Printed by A. Strahan, Law Printer to His Majesty,