to say," is bad, for not averring | 8. that such libellous matter, was" of and concerning the plaintiff;" unless the words set out distinctly point to the plaintiff, or that application is given to them by an innuendo. Clement v, Fisher, M, 8 G. 4. page 281 4. A declaration omitting to allege a fact, without proof of which at the trial the judge ought not to have directed, or the jury to have found a verdict for the plaintiff, cured by such verdict. 285 5. A. having, at my request, consented to stay proceedings against B., I, C., do hereby, in consideration thereof, promise to pay 501. on account on the first day of April next, and the further sum of 53. within four months next ensuing the first day of April." A declaration on this agreement, stating, that in consideration that A., at the request of C., would consent to suspend proceedings against B., C. promised to pay to A. 301., and that A. did suspend proceedings against B., discloses a sufficient consideration, avers a sufficient performance, and is supported by the terms of the agreement. Payne v. Wilson, M. 8 G. 4. 708 6. Inspection of papers granted for the purpose of framing declaration.

II. Indictment.

571

In a plea justifying antrespass under the warrant of a magistrate, all the facts constituting the jurisdiction must be alleged, and are issuable.

IV. Replication, &c.

page 668

Re

9. To debt on bond conditioned "to
replace stock, with all dividends
which shall accrue due upon the
same, from the date of the bond,
upon three months' notice," defend-
ant pleaded that plaintiff did not
give three months' notice to replace
the stock, with the dividends which
would have become due for the same
from the date of the bond.
plication alleged, that more than
three months before action, plaintiff
gave notice, at the expiration of
three months to replace the stock,
with all dividends which had accrued
due on the same from the date of the
bond, and then went on to assign
a breach in the non-transfer of the
stock-Held, that the notice set
out in the replication was sufficient;
and that the assignment of the
breach was unnecessary and in-
formal, but that the objection could
be taken only by way of special de-
murrer, for duplicity. Hudson v.
Smith, M. 8 G. 4.
10. If a plea to a declaration on an in-
demnity or surety bond, states, that
the principal duly accounted, and
the replication alleges the receipt of
several sums for which he did not
account, and the rejoinder states
that these sums were received from
C. D. and E. and that A. did not
account, a sur-rejoinder, alleging
that the moneys stated in the repli-
cation are other and different from
those specified in the rejoinder, and
concluding to the country,-is good.
Calvert v. Gordon, M. 8 G. 4. 497
11.Where to a quo warranto informa-
tion defendant pleaded that he was
elected by the major part of the
common council duly assembled, a
replication stating that notice of the

489

9. Secus, with regard to a party re-
siding in this country, semble.
page 114 (b)
10. Although the party be actually
travelling in Scotland, semble. ibid.
11. As to what papers may be natu-
rally supposed to be placed in the
hands of the attorney, see 115 (b)

V. Trial..

12. Where upon the plaintiff's evidence, the judge intimates a strong opinion in favour of the defendant, upon a point decisive of the cause, and in consequence of such intimation, the defendant's counsel omits to call evidence in support of a different point intended to be raised by way of defence, the Court will direct a new trial only, and will not order a verdict to be entered for the plaintiff. Le Fleming v. Simpson, M. 8 G. 4.

269 13. Upona covenant to use on demised premises all dung, straw, soil, compost, ashes and manure made thereon, a breach is assigned in not using on demised premises all dung, straw, soil, compost, ashes and manure made thereon, but on the contrary thereof, taking away straw, soil, ashes and manure. Plea, that defendant did not take away the said straw, compost, ashes and manure. A verdict being found for the plaintiff upon the supposed insufficiency of the plea,

without the production of evidence, See DEEDS, 2.-QUARE IMPEdit, 2.

the Court refused to enter a nonsuit, or direct a new trial.

The

proper course seems to be, to enter

PRESENTMENT.

WAYS, 1.

a verdict for the defendant upon See BILLS AND NOTES, 3, 4.-HIGHthe breach, with an assessment of damages as to the soil, or generally as to the premises in the breach not covered by the plea. Marrack v. Ellis, M. 8 G. 4. 511

VI. Proceedings against sheriff. 14. After a rule to bring in the body, defendant has the same time to

1. Of offences.

1. The presentment by a constable of any offence, whether at the assizes or quarter sessions, must be made upon oath, before the grand jury. Rex v. Justices of Somersetshire, M. 8 G. 4.

272