« 이전계속 »
incite B. being a foldier, to mutiny, 4. A note for fecuring the weekly allow-
knowledge of B.'s being a foldier, is ance to a prisoner under the Lord's act
implied. The King v. Fuller, M. need not be tiamped. Bowring v. Ed-
38 Geo. 3.
Page 180 gar, E. 38 Gen.3. (Vid. el. Tekell v.
3. And the word "advisedly," if used in Cafey, 7 Term Rep. 670.) Page 270
such a case, is equivalent to fcienter. 5. Such a note cannot be ligned by the
creditor's attorney if his client be dead.
4. It seems that if one endeavour to com- The King v. Davies, One, 8c. M.
prize two separate offences, a count in 39 Geo.3.
an indictment charging that endeavour, 6. It is no objection to a prisoner being
may contain those two offences. ib. ib. discharged under the Lord's act that
his creditor is dead. 15.
7. An attorney in cuftody on an attach-
See BAIL, No.16.
ment for not paying over money re-
TRUSTEE, No.1, 2.
ceived by him in the course of a fuit,
may be discharged under the Lord's
INQUIRY, WRIT OF.
8. The Court cannot, under the words of
1. If notice of a writ of inquiry to be 37 Geo. 3. c. 8. f.2. moderate the fum
executed at a particular hour and to be paid to a prisoner on his being re-
place be continued, the notice of con- manded, but a note muft be signed for
tinuance need not express any hour the full fum directed by that aci. ib. ib.
or place. Jones v. Chune, One, &c. 9. A. prisoner who is taken in execution
H. 39 Geo.3
363 for more than 300l. and afterwards re-
2. At the execution of a writ of inquiry
duces his debt be ov that fum, is not
after judgment on demurrer, it is not entitled to be discharged under the
competent to the Defendant to con- Lord's act in the next Term after he
trovert any thing but the amount of has to reduced his debt, unleís it be
the fum in demand. De Gaillon v. also the next Term after he was taken
V. H. L'Aigle, H. 39 Geo.3.
368 in execution.. Ex parte Hublard, E.
10. The Court of Chancery having re-
fused to discharge a prifoner in cuftody
See Practice, No.6.
for not putting in an answer unless on
payment of the fee, he applied to C.B.
1. A. prisoner in execution in an action to be discharged under the insolvent
in the Tholsey Court at Bristol, having
act, 34 Geo. 3. c.69. but was refuled,
been removed by habeas corpus to the
his contempt not confitting in the non-
Fleet, was discharged under the Lord's payment of money. Er parte Benja-
act, by the Court of Common Pleas.
min Lawrence, E. 36 Geo. 3. -477
Hofkins v. Morris, M. 38 Geo. 3. 92
2. If a prisoner brought up to be dif-
charged under f.16. of the Lord's act, See East INDIA COMPANY, No.2.
deliver in a false fchedule and be re- 1. Sailing orders are necessary to the per-
manded, the Court will not, at the in- formance of a warranty to depart with
ftance of a creditor, order him to be convoy, unless particular circumstances
brought up a second time for the pur- exempt the iniured from the general
pose of amending his schedule, and rule. . Webb v. Thompson, E. 37 Geo. 3.
affigning over that property which he
had before concealed. Hutchins v. 2. In an insurance on a fhip at and from
Hesketh, M. 38 Geo. 3.
Hull to Bilboa, warranted to depart
3. Even though the prisoner consent. ib. from England with convoy, the voy-
ib. ages from Hull to Portfinouth, where
The meetswith convoy, and from thence effects a policy in his own name and
to Bilboa, may be considered as dif- informs A. thereof, who approves of
tinct; and in case of a loss between his conduct; in an action by C. ftating
the two latter places, an apportion- himself in the first count to be the
ment and return of premium may be agent of A. and averring interest in
demanded. Ruthwell y. Cooke, M. him, and in the second averring in.
38 Geo. 3.
Page 172 terest in himself: Held, firft, that the
3. Insurance on a voyage from C. to D., policy was good within the 28 G.3.
on a representation that the ship was C.56.; Wolff and Others v Horncastle,
first to fail from A. to B. and from B.
M. 39 G. 3.
to C.; the voyage from A. to B. was 7. Secondly, that C. had an infurable in.
performed, but that from B. to C. terest to the amount of 300l. ib. ib.
being unavoidably prevented, the thip 8. If the name of the broker, effecting a
returned to A., from thenee proceeded policy of insurance, be inserted in the
immediately to C. and in performing policy as ogent generally, without say.
the voyage from C. to D. was loft ; ing for whom, it is a fufficient compli-
and this was held a good commence. ance with 28 Geo.3. c.56. Bell and
ment of the voyage insured. Driscol Others v. Gilson, M. 39 Geo.3.
v. Palmore, M. 38 Geo.3.
9. So it is if his name be inferted in the
Insurance on a voyage from A. to B., policies, though not as agent. De
from B. to C. and from C. to A.; the Vignier v. Swanson, B.R. M. 39 Geo-z.
voyage from A. to B. is performed, but
that from B. to C. being unavoidably 10. Goods the produce of Holland, pur-
prevented, the thip returns to A.; from chased in that country during hoftili-
whence the captain writes to his broker ties between Great Britain and Holo
in London, requesting him to obtain the land, by a British agent resident there,
opinion of the under-writers as to his and thipped for British subjects, were
proceeding directly to C. if the char- insured by them in this country: Held,
terer thould insist on it, and is an- that this was a legal insurance. Bell
fwered by him that he thinks the policy and Others v. Gilson, M. 39 Geo.3. 345
at an end; at the instance of the char- 11. In a policy against fire from half a
terer the captain does proceed to C. year to half a year, the aflured agreed
and on his return from thence to A. to pay the premium half yearly “ as
the ship is captured : Held, that the long as the insurers Thould agree to
voyage insured was never abandoned.
accept the same," within fifteen days
Driscol v. Boril, M. 39 Geo.3. 373 after the expiration of the former half
5. A. being indebted to B. without any year, and it was also ftipulated that no
order from him, configns goods to C. insurance should take place till the
to be held for B. and indorses the bill premium was actually paid; a lofs hap
of lading to C.: resolved, that B. has an pened within fifteen days after the end
insurable interest in the goods fo con- of one half year, but before the pre-
figned. Hill and Another v. Secretan, mium for the next was paid : Held,
M. 39 Geo.3.
that the insurers were not liable,
6. A. having consigned a cargo to B. though the affured tendered the pre-
and drawn bills on him to the amount mium before the end of fifteen days,
of it in favour of C. his general agent, but after the loss. Tarleton v. Stani-
fends these bills together with the bills forth in Error, E. 36 Geo. 3.
of lading to C.; defiring him to tranf.
mit them to B. “ that Ž. may have an INTEREST OF MONEY,
opportunity of insuring;" he also draws See Bond, No. 1.
a bill for 300l. on C. which is accepted;
B. refuses to take to the cargo
EXCHEQUER CHAMBER, Court of,
cept the bills drawn on him; C. then
1. The net fum received only without the purchaser mortgages, and in the
intereft can be recovered in an action mortgage deeds the like notice is
had and received. Walker taken of the lease, and the mortgages
v. Constable, T'rin. 38 Geo.3.
for fome time receive the rent re-
Page 306 served : held that the leafe expired
with the interest of the tenant for life,
and that the notice since taken of it
did not operate as a new leafe.
See INSURANCE, No. 5.7.
d. Potter v. Archer, T. 36 Gro. 3.
See DistRINGAS, No. 1, 2.
Practice, No.4. 38.
1. A condemnation by four out of the
triers of leather, appointed under
1 Jac. 1. C.22. (the whole number
being met for the purpose of trying)
must be considered as the condemna-
See TITAES, No. 3.
tion of all fix. Grindley and Another
v. Barker and Others, E. 38 Geo. 3.
See ExchEQUER CHAMBER, Court of,
EXECUTOR and ADMINSTRATOR, 1. A letter written by Defendant to a
third person calling Plaintiff " a vil-
PRACTICE, No. 7. 27.
lain," is actionable though unfup-
ported by proof of special damage.
Bell v. Stone, M. 39 Geo. 3.
2. An action cannot be maintained for
publishing a true account of the pro-
LANDLORD AND TENANT,
ceedings of a court of justice, however
See ADMINISTRATION, No. 1, 2.
injurious such publication may be to
the character of an individual. Curry
PAYMENT, No. 1.
v. Walter, E. 36 Geo. 3.
PLEADING, No. 1.
3. Qu. Whether the matter of justifica-
tion ought not to be pleaded ? ib. ib.
LIMITATIONS, STATUTE of,
TRUSTEE, No. 1, 2.
See PRACTICE, No. 22.
1. Tenant for life leafes premises for
twenty-one years, and before the ex.
piration of that term dies, the trustees
of the remainder-man, then an infant, See INSOLVENT. ,
continue to receive the rent reserved,
and he on coming of age, sells the pre-
mises by auction; in the conditions of
sale the premises are declared to be
veyance to the purchafer the leale See Action on the Cafe, No.1, 2, 3.
is referred to as in the poffeffion of
the lessee, and in the covenant against
incumbrances that lease is excepted; See INPIA Contracts in No. 1.
MONEY HAD AND RECEIVED,
1. If the grantee of a market under let. See COMPOSITION, Deed of, No.1.
ters patent from the crown suffer ILLEGAL CONTRACT.
another to erect a market in his neigh- INTEREST, No. 1.
bourhood, and use it for the space of 1. A broker who has received the amount
twenty-three years without interrup-
of a loss from the insurers, to the use
tion, he is by such user barred of his
of the insured, on account of an in-
action on the case for difturbance of
furance on British goods in an Im-
his market. Holcroft v. Heel, E.
perial fhip trading to the East Indies,
39 Geo. 3.
in contravention of 7 G.1. fl. 1. c. 21.
2. Qu. Whether if no specific toll be
$. 2. and who has had no intimation
granted in the letters patent, the
from the insurers to retain, ihall not
grantee be entitled to any toll, and be allowed to set up the illegality of
whether in such case he can support
the contract as a defence, in an action
any action for an injury to his mar-
by the insured for money had and re-
ceived. Tenant v. Elliott, E. 37 Geo.3.
MASTER AND SERVANT,
Sce INDICTMENT, No. 1, 2, 3.
1. The Plaintiffs fue by the name of the
mayor and burgefles of the borough of
, and give in evidence a char. See SUBJECT.
tor, by which they appear to have been
incorporated by the name of the mayor
and burgesses of the borough of Staf. 1. Defendant brought a writ of error on
ford, in the county of Stafford : this is the first day of Term; obtained a rule
not in bar. Mayor and Burgeles of nis for a new trial on the second and
Stafford v. Bolton, E. 37 Gen. 3. 40 justified bail in error before cause
2. But might have been pleaded in abate- Thewn; this was held to be no objec.
ib. tion to his supporting the rule for a
3. Though if the variance had been in new trial, as a point of importance was
matter of substance, instead of mere depending which would have been
matter of addition, so that no luch Thut out in the Court of Error. Sir
corporation as that mentioned in the B. Hammelt Knt. and Others v. Sir
declaration had appeared to have ex- W. Yea, Bart. M. 38 Geo.3.
ifted, it might have been in bar, ib. 44 2. Where no point has been faved at the
4. Defendant being arrested by the name trial, the Court will not set aside a
of F. II., put in bail by the name of verdict on a queftion of law, the jur-
S. II. ; Plaintiff then declared thus : tice and conscience of the case be with
“ S. H. arrefted by the name of F.H. it. Cox v. Kitchin, M. 39 Geo.3. 338
was attached to answer,” fc. Defen- 3. If the testimony of witnesses on which
dant without craving oyer pleaded in a verdict has proceeded be founded
abatement of the writ that his name on, and derive its credit from particu-
was S. H.; Plaintiff having treated "lar circumstances, and those circun-
this plea as a nullity, and figned judg- ftances be afterwards clearly falsified
ment accordingly, the Court refused by affidavit, the Court will grant a new
to set it afide. Murray v. Hubbart, · trial. Lifter, One, &c. v. Murdell, E.
H. 37 Geo 3
645 ; 39. Geo. 3. :
See PRACTICE, No.11, 12.
See BANKRUPT, No.7.
1. The 8 & 9 Will. 3. c.31.8.1. which di-
rects the form to be pursued in a writ
of partition, applies only to cafes where
the tenant does not appear. Dyer v.
Bullock and others, M. 39 Geo.3.
JUDGMENT AS IN CASE OF,
See PRACTICE, No.2.38.
1. Judgment as in case of a nonfuit may
be entered up against the Demandant
in a writ of right. Almgill et uz. v.
Pierfon and Others, M.38 Geo.3.
2. Nor will the Court relieve him if he
has conducted himself unfairly towards
the tenant in the course of the pro-
See Ball, No.13. 15.
Bail Bond, No.2.
Bills of Exchange, No.4, 5, 6.
See CONSIGNMENT, No. 1.
1. A. B. C. and D. were partners in a
banking-house at Liverpool, and C.
and D. also carried on a separate mer-
cantile concern in London: J. S. hav
ing accepted bills payable at the house
of C. and D. employed A. B. C. and
D. to get them paid accordingly, and
agreed to deposit with them good bills
indorted by him, for the purpose of
enabling them fo to do; Á. B. C. and
D. debited J. S. in account for his ac-
ceptances, and credited him for all
the bills which he deposited; fome of
the bills so deposited by J. S. were re-
mitted by A. B. C. and D. to C. and
D. upon the general account between
the two houses, and before any of the
acceptances of J.S. became due both
houses failed, and J.S. was obliged to
pay his own acceptances: held that
the assignees of C. and D. were en-
titled to retain against J.S. the bills
remitted to them by A. B. C. and D.
Bolton v. Puller, T. 36 Geo.3. 539
2. Held also, that it made no difference
that one of the bills remitted did not
arrive in London till after the bank--
ruptcy of C. and D., though sent by
A.B. C. and D. before that event, ib.
1. If the leffee of a house at a rack-rent
underlet it at an advanced rent, he is
liable to contribute to the expences of
a party-wall built under the 14 Geo. 3.
c.78. Sangster v. Birkhead, T.38 G.3.
2. Nor is the operation of the statute at
all varied by any covenants to repair,
entered into by the landlord and tenant.
Sangster v. Birkhead, T. 38 G.3. ib.
See PLEADING, No.15.