Elvin v.

sary, though not when made a remauet at the sittings in London or

Middlesex. — Gains v. Bilson, 1 M. & P. 87. 13. A party outlawed can only appear in court for the purpose of re

versing the outlawry. Thus, a grantor of an annuity, who has been outlawed in K. B. cannot apply to C. P. to set aside the securities

whilst his outlawry continues. — Loukes v. Holbech, 1 M. & P. 126. 14. The defendants, in an action in which the plaintiff had been non

suited, and had obtained a rule for new trial, gave a cognovit for one shilling damages, and costs to be taxed by the Prothonotary. The Prothonotary having refused to tax the costs of the nonsuit, the court refused to interfere.

Drummond, 1 M. & P. 88. 15. The defendant, an uncertificated bankrupt when the action was

commenced, pleaded his bankruptcy and certificate puis darrein continuance, on which the plaintiff withdrew the record, and countermanded the notice of trial. The plaintiff being afterwards ruled to reply, obtained an order for time, but subsequently determined to proceed no farther, when the defendant signed judgment of non-pros, and issued execution for costs, but held that defendant was not entitled to the costs of proceedings prior to the plea, and the execution was accordingly set aside without costs. Baker v. Morrey, 1 M. &P.

138. 16. On a motion by bail to set aside an attachment against a sheriff, it

is necessary that the affidavit should state that it was made, not only without collusion with the principal, but at the expense of the bail.

King v. Sheriff of London, 1 M. & P. 177. 17. Costs are never given upon showing cause against a rule in the first

instance. --Rex v. Lacy, 1 M. & R. 139. 18. The proceedings in a recovery cannot be amended by substituting

one county for another. — Dolling v. Rice, 1 M. & P. 178. 19. Security for costs when plaintiff resides abroad cannot be nioved for

on the mere putting in of bail nor until after justification, if they have been excepted to. See De la Preuve v. Duc de Birs, 4 T. R. 697.Johnson v. Ely, MS. Easter Term, 1828.


If a high constable would present for a nuisance in a highway, he must go before the grand jury, and give his evidence upon oath.-Rex v. the Bridgewater and Taunton Canal Company, 7 B. & C. 514.


A married woman is competent to enter into an engagement of service, defeasible only by her husband; and a father may maintain an action for the seduction per quod, &c. of his married daughter, serving in his family apart from her husband.Harper v. Luffkin, 1 M. & R. 166. S. C. 7 B. & C. 337.

SETTLEMENT. 1. The mere fact of a pauper being first found in a particular parish, ally relieved by such parish, amount to an admission of his being settled there, nor preclude the parish from disputing the point. The

is not presumptive evidence of his having been born there nor does his having being maintained for several years and afterwards ccasion

King v. the Inhabitants of Trowbridge, 7 B. & C. 252. S. C. 1 M.&R. 7. 2. A pauper was hired as an ostler, upon an agreement that he was to

have no wages, but merely what he got as ostler, and that the service might at any time be determined by either party; held that the latter stipulation precluded the presumption of its being a general hiring for a year, and that service under it did not confer a settlement. The King v. the Inhabitants of Great Bowden, 7 B.& C. 249. S.C.

1 M. & R. 13. 3. A man marrying a woman who is tenant from year to year of pre

mises under the annual value of 101. gains a settlement thereby, whether ber interest came to her as executrix or otherwise.—The King v.

Inhabitants of Ynyseynhanam, 7B. & C. 233. S.C. 1 M. & R. 16. 4. A pauper under age entered into a contract of service, and served

under it till he had attained his majority, when he returned to his father's house; held that the pauper was not emancipated by such contract and service, and that his settlement followed that of his father, acquired during the continuance of the service.The King v. Inha

bitants of Lykhet Matravers, 7 B. & C. 226. S. C. 1 M. & R. 25. 6. A general hiring, with a stipulation that the servant might leave on

giving a month’s notice, and might be dismissed at pleasure, is a yearly hiring sufficient to confer a settlement, and it matters not though the hiring was by a public establishment, as a Royal Military College, exempt from poor rates. The King v. Inhabitants of Sandhurst,

1 M.&R. 95. SET-OFF.

The plaintiff having recovered damages against four defendants in trespass, three of whom were indemnified by the other, who had recovered against the present plaintiff in a former action; held that the damages and costs in the former action might be set off against the damages and costs in the present.--Bourne v. Bennett and others, 1 M. & P. 141.


The power given to the court of quarter sessions by the 3 Geo. 4. C. 46. to order the discharge of a forfeited recognizance, is confined to cases where the party has been committed or given security to appear; and the court does not possess a general discretion.—Hayne v. Hayton, 7 B. & C. 292.


If a warrant of attorney be executed by one who is inaccurately described therein, and judgment entered up and a fi. fa. issued against him by that description, the sheriff is bound to execute the fi. fa. and cannot dispute the accuracy of the description.-Reeves v. Stater, 7 B. & C. 486.

STAMPS. 1. An ad valorem stamp on the principal sum is sufficient for a bond conditioned for the payment of the principal sum, and interest for the performance of collateral acts, provided the ad valorem duty exceeds 1l. 158. which would have been required by the collateral matter if it

stood alone.--Dcarden v. Burns, 1 M. & R. 130. 2. An agreement may be received as evidence of the tenancy without

a fresh stamp, though altered by consent after execution, by the addition of the words “ house and premisesto the word “ farm.Doe

dem. Waters v. Houghton, 1 M. & R. 208. 3. When a clause in a prior is incorporated by words of reference into

a subsequent agreement, it is not annexed thereto, so as to make an additional stamp necessary on the ground of its swelling such subse

quent agreement beyond 1080 words.-Atwood v. Small, 7 B.& C.390. 4. Articles whereby one party agreed to pay the other a fixed salary,

and the other agreed not to set up a chemist's shop within à certain distance, and the parties were mutually bound in a penalty of £600 to perform the agreement; held that a stamp of 1l. 158. was suffi

cient.--Mounsey v. Stephens, 7 B. & C. 403. 5. To prove a tenancy the lessor of the plaintiff put in a written un

stamped agreement to take the premises in question at 2s. 6d. per annum, to quit at half year's notice. The premises were proved to be actually worth five pounds per annum. It was objected that it ought to have been stamped. But Vaughan B. at Shrewsbury admitted it. And the Court of K. B. held this was right, that it came within the exception in 55 Geo. 3. c. 184., since the subject matter of the agreement being the mere right of occupation, and not the premises themselves, it did not amount to twenty pounds.—Doe dem.

Morgan v. Amiss, MS. Easter Term, 1828. TRESPASS. A remainder man, 'after entering upon a party in possession by intru

sion, may maintain trespass against the intruders though he retains

possession.-Butcher v. Butcher, 1 M. & R. 220. S.C. 7 B. & C. 399. TURNPIKE. Under the general turnpike act, 3 G. 4. c. 126. s. 86. authorizing the

trustees, after the completion of a new road, to stop up the old one, unless leading to some church, mill, village, town or place, lands or tenements, to which the new road does not immediately lead; the trustees have a discretionary power of stopping up the old road even in the excepted cases.De Beauvoir v. Welch, 1 M. & R. 81. S. C, 7. B. & C. 266.

USURY. 1. An agreement for the payment of the purchase money of an estate

by instalments, with interest beyond the legal rate, is not usurious if the sum stipulated for as interest is in fact a part of the purchase

money.-Beete v. Bidgood, 1 M. & R. 143. S. C. 7 B. & C. 453. 2. Where a judge leaves it to the jury to draw their own conclusion on

a question of usury, their verdict cannot be disturbed on account of an erroneous opinion upon the matter of fact, expressed by the judge. -Solarte v. Melville, 1 M. & R. 198. S. C. 7 B. & C. 430.


ADVOWSON. 1. Where a prebendary, having the advowson of a rectory in right of

his prebend, dies whilst the church is vacant, the right accruing by the vacancy is a distinct independent chattel, and devolves on the personal representative, who may therefore present for that turn.Rennell v. Bishop of Lincoln, 7 B. & C. 113. Dissentient Lord Ten

terden, C. J. 2. Where the advowson of a parish is vested in trustees for the benefit

of the parishioners, the election of the vicar must be by voting openly, but the right of voting may by long usage be confined to parishioners who pay church and poor's rates. Edenborough v. Archbishop of

Canterbury, 2 Russ. 93. CHARITIES. 1. It has not been decided from what period a corporate body shall be not lose the benefit intended him, from his not executing the release within the prescribed period.-Hollinrake v. Lister, ibid. 500.

obliged to account in matters of trust. Where a corporation put in their answer in 1811, and in it had rendered accounts which went back as far as 1791, the account of the charity property was decreed from that time.-Attorney General v. the Corporation of Stafford,

1 Russ. 547. 2. The statute of Elizabeth created no new law on the subject of cha

ritable uses; but only a new and ancillary jurisdiction.-By Lord

Redesdale in Att. Gen. v. Mayor, &c. of Dublin, 1 Bligh, 347. 3. It is not a general rule of equity that a charitable gift for the benefit

of the poor is to be confined to such poor as do not receive parish re

lief.— Attorney General v. Corporation of Exeter, 2 Russ. 45. 4. The court is strict with the trustees when there is a wilful misappli

cation; but not when mistake only.-S. C. 5. And it is reluctant to compel the corporation to make a discovery of

property applicable to general corporate purposes.-S. C. 6. When trustees of a charity, under an instrument of doubtful con

struction, have acted honestly, though erroneously, they will not be charged in respect of past misapplication of the funds.--S. C.

The doctrine of equity, with respect to conditions precedent in wills, is,

that they must be complied with strictly when the property is given over on the devisee's failing to perform them; but the court will interfere, and set up the prior gift when there is no devise over, if the parties can be placed in the same situation, as if the condition had been strictly performed. i Russ. 508. Thus when lands were devised in fee, with a direction that the debts due to testator from the devisee's husband should be released, on condition that within two months from the testator's death, the devisee's husband should release all claim to the lands devised, it was held that the husband should

CONSIDERATION.-See Conveyance.

CONVEYANCE. 1. Though a deed is expressed to be made for natural love, it may be

proved to have been made in consideration of marriage, because the real is consistent with the alleged consideration.-Tanner v. Byne,

1 Simons, 160. 2. A reversion lies in grant, and though the particular estate is only

from year to year, and the lands are described as in the grantor's possession, it will pass without attornment, livery, or enrolment.-Doe dem. Were v. Cole, 7 B. & C. 243. 1 M. & R. 33. 7 B. & C.

243. 3. Recitals in a conveyance, whatever effect they may have against the

parties to it, cannot be evidence as against third persons.- 1 Russ. 604.


Where a person in remainder in tail under a former settlement, cove-

nanted that in case she should become entitled to a certain estate under the limitations of a former settlement, such estate should be conveyed as therein mentioned; and her brother, the antecedent tenant in tail, suffered a recovery, and died without issue, whereby the fee gained by such recovery descended on her; it was held that she took it not under or by virtue of the limitations of the settlement, but by immediate descent from her brother, and was consequently not bound to convey it under the covenant.--Tayleur v. Dickenson, 1 Russ. 521.

Loss of a deed or instrument is a ground on which the court of chancery

will exercise jurisdiction, but with great caution.-Per Lord Chancellor in Barker v. Ray, 2 Russ. 73, 4.

Words will not carry a fee, only because they would otherwise be mere

surplusage; and in their ordinary sense the words 'possessed of' do not import real estate. Where, therefore, a testatrix, after giving pecuniary legacies, devised to A. B. her two fields at, &c., likewise the remainder of the personalty, and all she might die possessed of at the time of her death, after the above bequests were discharged, &c.; the devisee was held to take only an estate for life.' Monk v. Mawdsley, 1 Simons, 286.

1 The devisor was a feme covert, and the will the execution of a power ; but it appears from the reasoning of the court that the case may be stated generally in reference to the above point. Vid. ibid. 289, 290, 291.

« 前へ次へ »