Page images
PDF
EPUB
[ocr errors][merged small]

Wnat notice of

Recorder.

The best plan was to bring the occupiers of for the purpose of getting a sum of money up for sessions to the clerk of the peace. If any difficulty those ninety-five houses forward, and throw another thief.

arose, the taxing officer always had the opporthe responsibility of the conviction upon the Mr. Clint said if the police brought up a pretty tunity of consulting the presiding judge, who had Bench. With respect to Mr. Gladstone's self. good case against one of the houses and that case the power of allowing or disallowing any item in denying course which he had proposed to adopt, was dismissed by the magistrates, or if conviction a bill of costs. The bill, having thus been taxed what he (Mr. Stitt) was anxious about was this. by the magistrates was followed by the case being by the competent officer of the court, was preHe understood that there should be no suppression quashed in the court above, the police were very sented to the county and borough treasurer, who of the names or numbers brought to Bridewell on much discouraged in bringing up another house. paid the amount-and should in due course be rethe Saturday. The extent of drunkenness in They were not going to waste their time uselessly couped by the Treasury. But for a long time past Liverpool had been unfavourably contrasted with and then be snubbed.

the practice of the Treasury had been this :other towns. For instance, while Liverpool had Mr. Raffles said there could be no question that After these bills had been carefully taxed accord. 14,000 persons taken up in a year, the magistrates the magistrates were bound to act upon the evi. ing to the scale laid down by the Treasury itself

, pointed out instances where only 3000 or 4000 dence before them to convict. With regard to cases and the money had been paid by the county or such convictions were recorded.; On examination it before the Superior Court additional evidence borough treasurer, a subordinate officer in the turned out that personswere taken to the Bridewell, might be given which might alter the case. It Treasury had been in the habit of reviewing or re. incarcerated in the cells, and dismissed from these did not follow that because the recorder quashed taxing the bills, and striking off items according cells by the head constable or some others, no record a case he thought the magistrates wrong. All he to his will or caprice. The effect of that had been of their having been there appearing. The rule said was that the evidence was such that it did that the sums were disallowed by the Treasury, was that wherever a man was incarcerated, a not convict.

and had to be paid out of the county or borough record was kept of the fact, and the result was Mr. Clint said he thought Mr. Gladstone's sug. rates. So that, in point of fact, a subordinate in those cases swelled the statistics. Mr. Gladstone's gestion a very good one, and should be glad to the Treasury had arrogated to himself the power wish was that due publicity should be given to the take part with any number of magistrates who of reviewing costs that had been taxed by the numbers discharged, so that they would see the undertook the duty Mr. Gladstone indicated. proper officer of the court on the Treasury scalereal extent of the evil, and when they knew the Mr. Castellain thought it would have a good he had, in fact, assumed a power which Parlia. facts, they could the better deal with it.

effect if the names of the drunkards were prblished. ment alone possessed, the power to tax the rate. Mr. Raffles said, as he read the Prevention If a man did get drunk on a Saturday afternoon, payers of the country ; because to the extent to of Crime Act 1867, the slightest remaining on the or Sunday, he ought to remain in the place until which he disallowed these costs he was, in reality, premises by thieves subjected the parties to con. Monday morning unless he was ill.

taxing, the ratepayers. He need hardly say viction.

Mr. Whitty thought if the names of the people that this was a most undesirable and improper Mr. Whitty said either these ninety-five houses locked up on the Sunday were published, those state of things. He used those terms with con. were culpable or not. If they were merely serving locked up during the week should be published siderable confidence, because the question had people who were entitled to refreshments, no also.

been brought before the Lord Chief Justice within blame could attach to them. If, on the other Mr. Gladstone said he had been promised by one the last few weeks, and he had used theso words : hand, they should be permitting persons to re- newspaper to put the names before the public, and — "It seems to me that the acts of parties who main' for improper purposes, the police ought no doubt other newspapers would follow in the act under the authority of Acts of Parliament are to use increased vigilance in bringing them before same way.

set aside by persons who have no authority at all the Bench. If they had been doing no wrong. Mr. Whitty, in reference to the disorderly houses, to interfere in the matter. It really appears to me it was wrong to have them gibbeted in the police said the very fact that the police were going to to be a very serious matter.” After such expresreports; but if, on the other hand, they violated take more stringent measures showed that suffi- sions as these from the Chief Justice of England, the law, it was quite right to throw the responsi- cient vigilance had not been used before.

it was quite unnecessary for him to use any words bility of dealing with them upon the magistrates. Mr. Holder thought Mr. Gladstone's suggestion describing bis opinion of the proceedings of the He thought Mr. Gladstone's a good suggestion, might or might not be a good one.

Treasury. He had hoped that the matter would and he had no doubt his example would be Mr. Livingston said he should be very happy to be dealt with very shortly. followed.

follow Mr. Gladstone in the course he proposed FEES IN CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS.—At the Mr. Raffles said he had noticed in the London to pursue.

Bucks Quarter Sessions on Monday, his Grace the papers two or three convictions under the Act he The meeting then terminated, there being no Duke of Buckingham in the chair, the above had mentioned, where thieves had met together other business.

question, which is causing in a great many counties a feeling of great dissatisfaction, was brought

before the court. The justices of Warwickshire BOROUGH QUARTER SESSIONS.

have sent round to the different counties of

England a circular suggesting the advisability of Borough,

combined action against the Treasury owing to When holden,

appeal to be given
Clerk of the Peace.

the apparent unjust disallowance of items previ.

ously allowed by taxing masters at assizes and Bideford

Wednesday, Jan. 10... C. J. Murch, Esq..
Wednesday, Jan. 10.

quarter sessions for exponses, counsel's fees, &c., S. Pope, Esq., Q.C.

10 days Brighton Monday, Jan. 8 J.Locke, Esq.,Q.C.,M.P. 2 days

in criminal prosecutions. His Grace the Duke of Monday, Jan. 8

H. Lloyd, Esq.

10 days
J. Walker.

Buckingham read an extract from a report of a
Gloucester
Tuesday, Jan. 9.
C.S.Whitmore, Esq.,Q.C

7 days

F. W. Jones. case The Justices of Lancashire v. The Lords Com. Hythe Monday, Jan. 8 R. J. Biron, Esq.

8 days

W. S. Smith. missioners of Her Majesty's Treasury, in which King's Lynn Thursday, Jan. 11

D. Brown, Esq., Q.C..

T. G. Archer. Cockburn, C.J. expressed a very decided opinion Ludlow Tuesday, Jan. 9 H. J. Hodgson, Esq.

H. Salwey. Portsmouth

against these reductions by the Treasury, bis
Tuesday, Jan. 9
Mr. Serjeant Cox

J. Howard.
Rye
Monday, Jan. 8
R. H. Hurst, Esq., M.P. Statutory

G. S. Butler.

language being, “ that he could not himself under. Scarborough Monday, Jan. 8 J. Middleton, Esq. 10 days

J.J. P. Mody.

derstand how a person sitting somewhere upstairs Sudbury Wednesday, Jan. 24... T. H. Naylor, Esq.

14 days
R. Ransom.

in the Treasury could take upon himself to disTewkesbury Tuesday, Jan. 16

J. Fallon, Esq.
Statutory..... | W. Winterbotham

allow certain items, previously allowed by persons
on the spot, competent to know all the circum-

stances of the case.” On the motion of the Duke DARTFORD PETTY SESSIONS. said district not assigned for the time being to of Buckingham a committee was formed, to confer Saturday, Dec. 30, 1871.

any of the police courts of the metropolis," but with the committee appointed in Warwickshire, (Before Sir P. H. DYKE, Bart., and a full Bench.) the power thereby restored was simply a power to consider the subject. Metropolitan Police Act-Jurisdiction of county Vict. c. 84, 8. 6, enacted *** That any two justices

to summon, and not a power to convict. 3 & 4 justices sitting outside metropolitan police dis of the peace having jurisdiction within the Metro

COMPANY LAW. tricts to try offences committeil within such politan Police District shall have, while sitting district.

publicly in the court or room used for holding At the Dartford petty sessions on Saturday last special or petty sessions of the peace in any part

NOTES OF NEW DECISIONS.

AGREEMENT FOR PURCHASE OF LAND-NOTICE several cases were heard in which a question of of the said district within the limits of their comjurisdiction was raised of considerable importance mission, except in the divisions to be assigned to into in Sept. 1863 between the owners of certain

TO TREAT-WAIVER.-By an agreement entered to justices having jurisdiction in the home the police courts already established, all the lands and a railway company, under which the counties. The offences were under the Metro: powers, privileges, and duties which any one politan Police Act 1839 (2 & 3 Vict. c. 47), and magistrate of the said police courts has,” but in

company purchased a certain portion of land, it were committed within the metropolitan police order for the justices to have jurisdiction under any additional ground for

any purpose they should

was agreed that if the company should require district, but not within any part of such district that section, their sessions must

be holden within pay for the same at a fixed rate. In May 1865 the assigned to any metropolitan police court.

the Metropolitan Police District.
It followed, company served the owners of the

lands in ques. Gibson (Dartford), for the defence. The justices therefore, that the justices might summon a tion, with a notice to treat under the Lands have no jurisdiction here. In summary convic. person to appear without the district, but they Clauses Consolidation Act, for the purchase of tions as well as in matters to be done at special could not hear and adjudicate upon the complaint. more lond from them. Two years afterwards the and petty sessions, their jurisdiction is wholly An inspector of police said the police magistrate company entered into possession of the lands: given to justices by statute : (Paley, 4th edit. at Woolwich refused to try offenders unless they Held, that the notice to treat had superseded the p. 15.) The offences charged are punishable under were actually in custody.

agreement, and that the value of the lands must 2 & 3 Vict. c. 47, and sect. 75 of that Act defined

The JUSTICES after deliberation decided that be ascertained according to the provisions of the magistrate “to mean and include every justice of they had no jurisdiction, dismissed the cases, and Lands Clauses Consolidation Act : (Kemp . The the peace appointed to be a magistrate of the arrangements were made for a case to be granted South-Eastern Railway Company, 25 L. T. Rep. police courts of the metropolis,” the latter part for the Queen's Bench,

N. S. 622. V.C. B.) of the section which included county justices

TRANSFER OF SHARES - BANKRUPTCY OF in the definition was repealed by 3 & 4 Vict.

TRANSFEREE.-LIABILITY FOR CALLS.-A trans. c. 84, 8. 1. The power to convict given by THE TREASURY DISALLOWANCE OF PROSECU. foror of shares in a company in liquidation, who, 2 & 3 Vict. c. 47, s. 76, was confined exclusively to TION Costs. The Recorder of Exeter on Monday, by the default of the transferee to register the magistrates as defined by sect. 75 of the same in his

charge to the grand jury, spoke at lengtli transfer, had been placed on the list of contribu: Act. Moreover 2 & 3 Vict. c. 71, s. 18, rendered upon the subject of the disallowance by the tories, and compelled to pay calls, filed a bill void any summons issued by a justice of Kent, Treasury of the costs incurred in criminal prose against the administrator of the transferee, who

requiring any person residing within the Metro. cutions at the assizes and quarter sessions. Some had since died, seeking to be indemnified against politan Police District, to appear at any place years since (the Recorder observed) the Legisla. the calls. To this bill the defendant pleaded : without the said district to answer any informa. | ture enacted that all costs incurred in such prose. deed of inspectorship executed by the transferee tion or complaint touching any matter arising cutions should be paid by the Treasury. The three months after the order for winding-ap the within the said district. 21 & 22 Vict. c. 73, s. 6, mode of proeeeding had been this : The bill of company : Held, that the plaintiff had no right of provided that 2 & 3 Vict. c. 71, s. 18, should not costs was always presented for taxation to the proof under

the deed, and that it could not be apply to “any such summons or warrant in re competent officer of the court-at assizes to the pleaded as a bar to his claim. (Holmes v. Symons, spect of any matter arising within any part of the clerk of assize, and at county and borough quarter 25 L. Rep. N.S. 628. V. C. W.)

Bolton

J. Rooker.
J. Gordon.
E. Evershed,

Chester

10 days
10 days

[ocr errors]

THE LAW TIMES.

Jan. 6, 1872.]

LAW.

on

MERCANTILE LAW.

Advanced Course.

ture at 3 p.m.); the first lecture on the 16th Jan.
On Wills.

The Private Classes on Mondays, Wednesdays,
NOTES OF NEW DECISIONS.

In the Elementary Private Classes, the Reader and Fridays, at 11.45 a.m. and 12.45 p.m.; first
SPECIFIC CHATTEL-SALE ON CONDITION- using the work of Mr. Joshua Williams as a Text.

will continue his Course of Real Property Law, . class meets on the 17th Jan. WARRANTI: - The plaintiff purchased, at the book'; and in his Advanced Private Classes, he International Law, at the Middle Temple Hall, on

The Public Lectures on Jurisprudence, Civil, and defendants' horse auction, a mare warranted to will take the Construction of Wills as the subject Fridays, at 2 p.m.; the first lecture on the 12th and by the conditions of sale the animal, if not the Text-Book have been hunted with specified packs of hounds; for discussion, using Mr. Hawkins's Treatise as Jan. The Private Classes on Tuesdays, Thursdays, answering the warranty, was to be returned before

and Saturdays, at 3.45 p.m. ; first class meets on

the 13th Jan. JURISPRUDENCE, CIVIL AND INTERNATIONAL the expiration of a specified time. After the purchase and payment of the price, but before remov

The Public Lectures on the Common Law, at the ing the mare from the defendants' premises, the The Reader on Jurisprudence, Civil and Inter- Inner Temple Hall, on Mondays (Elementary Lecplaintiff was told by some persons in the sale yard national Law, proposes to deliver, during the ture at ? p.m.; Advanced Lecture at 3 p.m.); that the mare had not been hunted with the parti.

ensuing Educational Term, Six Public Lectures the first lecture on 15th Jan. The Private Classes calar hounds named, but he, nevertheless, without

on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays, at 11.45 making any inquiry of the defendants in the matter, 1. The Roman Law relating to Obligations aris. a.m., and 12.45 p.m.; first class meets on the 16th sent his groom to take her away, and whilst the ing from Contract, contrasted with the French Jan. groom was riding her from the defendants' to the and English Law on the same head.

The Public Lectures on Hindu, Mahommedan plaintiff's stables the mare, without any negli.

(1.) The Contract of Sale (emptio venditio).

Law, and the Laws of India, at the Middle Temple gence or default on the part of the groom, but

(2.) The Contract of Letting on Hire (locatio Hall

, on Saturdays, at 10.45 a.m.; the first lecture from her own inherent disposition, became restive

conductio).

on the 13th Jan. The Private Classes on Mondays, and ran away, and, coming in contact with a

2. The History and Present State of Inter: Wednesdays, and Fridays, at 10 a.m.; first class,

15th Jan. carriage in the street, received serious injury. rational Law relating to Blockade.

The Educational Term commences on the 11th In his Private Class, the Reader will continue Haring ascertained that the warranty was untrue, the plaintiff returned her to the defendants

within the discussion of the First Book of the Institutes Jan., and ends on the 30th March. the time limited by the conditions, and brought an of Justinian, commencing with Title 8. He will

The First Public Lecture of this Course will be action to recover back the purchase money. It use as Text-books, Sandars' edition of the Insti- delivered by the Reader on Equity, on Thursday, was admitted by the defendants that the mare did tutes, Demangeat, Cours élémentaire de Droit the 11th Jan. at 2 p.m.

The first meeting of each private class will take not answer the warranty in fact : Held, by the Romain, and Scheurl, Lehrbuch der Institutionen. Court of Exchequer (Kelly, C.B., and Bramwell

The Reader will also discuss, in the Private

place on the usual morning or evening of meeting and Cleasby, BB.), and that the mare having been classes, points of International Law relating to after the first public lecture on the same subject.

Students who have been unable to attend a bought on a special contract giving power to the the Rights of Neutrals, using Wheaton's

Elements purchaser to return her within a specified time, if of International Law as the 'Text-book, and refer- lecture or class of either of the Readers, and desire not answering the warranty, which it was ad. ring to the works of the principal modern Jurists, dispensation as a qualification for call to the Bar, mitted she did not, the right to return her was

the decisions of the Admiralty and Prize Courts should make application, with an explanation of not affected by the gossip of the sale yard, which of England and America, the Debates in Parlia- the cause of such absence, in writing, to the amounted to nothing; and that as the injury to ment, and State Papers relating to the cases Reader, during the course, or immediately after the mare occurred not from any negligence or under discussion.

the delivery of the last public lecture of the default on the part of the plaintiff or his groom,

The Reader will also specially discuss the Concourse; and the Reader's report thereon, together but from an accident beyond their control, and gress of Vienna, the Treaties of Paris, and the with the application, will be forwarded to the osing to the inherent vice of the animal itself, the subsequent alterations of those Treaties.

Council of Legal Education, who alone have the plaintiff was entitled to return her, although she

power of granting dispensation.

COMMON LAW. was not in the same condition as at the time of The Reader on Common Law proposes to deliver, students be allowed to change from the elementary

The Council have resolved that in no case shall sale: (Head v. Tattersall and another, 25 L. T. during the ensuing Educational Term, Two to the advanced courses of lectures and classes, Rep. N. S. 631. Ex.)

Courses (of Six Public Lectures each) on the or vice versở, while qualifying for call to the Bar, following Subjects :

or for the examination on the subjects of the

lectures and classes.

Elementary Course.
LAW STUDENTS' JOURNAL

1. Simple Contracts, Express or Implied.

2. The Contract of Bailment. HILARY EDUCATIONAL TERM, 1872.

GENTLEMEN WHO PASSED THE FINAL 3. Proofs adduced and Rules of Evidence applied

EXAMINATION. PROSPECTUS of tho LECTURES to be delivered, in Actions upon Contracts not under Seal. during the ensuing Eduoational Term, by the

Advanced Course,

MICHAELMAS TERM 1571.
several Readers appointed by the Inns of Court. 1. Mercantile Contracts-Written or Verbal-Avory, Henry Kemp. Nalder, Geo. Bellamy.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW AND LEGAL HISTORY.
of ordinary occurrence.

Baker, Frederick Arnold. , Nurse, Bernard.
Baker, George.

0itway, Lewis John. The Reader on Constitutional Law and Legal His. 2. Torts affecting Mercantile Persons or Pro.

Barker, W. R. Edmund, Osborn, Richard Rolinson. tory proposes to deliver, during the ensuing perty.

Bartleit, Obesimus Smart. Paitson, John Lawrence. Educational Term, Six Public Lectures on3. Rules of Evidence applicable and Proofs ad- Baty, Isaac J.

Palmer, Thomas. 1. Constitutional and Legal History before the missible at the Trial of an Action between Mer. Behrend, Samnel Hesse. Parkes, John Wood. Conquest. cantile Persons.

Bell, Herbert Booth. Peile, Arthur Edward.

Peterson, E. W. Miyd.

Bell, Matthew.

With his Private Classes, the Read r will con. 2. Changes consequent on the Conquest.

Beyfus, Alfred.

Pocock, Noel Lewis. 3. Constitutional and Legal History from sider the above Subjects in detail, usicg the Biuney, Arthur J. Price, Richard. Henry II, to Edward I. following Books for reference :

Boden, George Mosley. Rawson, Benjamin Curren. 4. Magna Charta and its Confirmations.

Elementary Class.-Broom's Commentaries on Bond, Elmund Lowry. Rawson, John, 5. Early History of the Houses of Parliament.

Rayson, Z• ba. the Common Law (fourth edit.); and Selwyn's Boyce, Hubert Ellward.

Bradshaw, Robert B. D. Redpath, Wm. Lyme. 6. Early History of the Royal Councils and the Nisi Prius (last edit.).

Rhodes, Godirey.

Braithwaite, Stephen N. Courts of Law.

Advanced Class.-Smith's Compendium of Mer. Bremner, Rupert Stanley. Rhodes, John Charles. With his Private Class the Reader proposes to cantile Law (edition by Dowdeswell); and Roscoe's Burd, Edmund Pearse. Ricbardson, William E. take the following subjects :Evidence at Nisi Prius (last edit.).

Burton, James Keighley. Roberts, Edward Philip. 1. Broom's Constitutional Law, from the

Cadge, Edward.

Roberts, Richard.
LAWS IN FORCE IX BRITISH INDIA,
Banker's Case to the Case of the Seven Bishops, The Reader on Hindu and Mahomm.edan Law, and Capes, John F. Joseph.

Cama, Jemsetjee C.

Rooke, Ernest Wallace. inclusive.

Rowland, F. Arthur Alex, the Laws in force in British India, proposes to Chapman, Sidney.

Rowlatt, George. 2. Hallam's Constitutional History, from the

Saunders, Herbert. deliver, in the ensuing Educational Term, a Church, William. Meeting of the Long Parliament to the Revolution Course of Six Public Lectures on the following

Cumminga, James John. Sbires, Benjamin Arthur. of 1688.

Cunliffe, Robert Ellis. Smith, George Eilwin, subjects, viz. :

Sowton, James Wyore.

Cutliffe, George, jun.
EQUITY.
The Reader on Equity proposes to deliver, during

Mahommedan Lau.

Dawson, James William. Springthorpe, Joho T.

Dean, Charles Frederick. Stavanought, Joseph.

1. Introduction. the ensuing Educational Term, Two Courses of

Steinberg, G. Herbert.

Draper, Hastings Carter,

2. The Law of Inheritance.
each Public Lectures (there being Six Lectures in

Ellison, George Henry. Stephenson, Alfred.
Course), on the following Subjects :

3. The Law of Inheritance (continued).

Evans, Frank

Stevens, Charles Edward. 4. Contracts. An Elementary Course.

Farmery, George Couttas. Style, Sydney. 5. Gifts.

Tatham, Algernon.

Field, Henry. 1. On the Mode of taking Evidence in the Court

Fortescue, John Smyth. 6. Divorce.

Taylor, George Bernard. of Chancery, and on the Hearing of a Cause.

Taylor, Thomas Edward. 2. On Relief in Equity against Waste.

With his Private Classes, he will discuss minutely Goode, Henry Thomas.

Graham, Robert Philip. Taynton, Thomas C. R. 3. On Relief against Penalties. and in detail the subjects embraced in the Public Grain,

Henry, B. A. and Terrell, Francis Arnold H. Lectures, illustrating them by works on Mahom. LL.B.

Ticehurst, Frederic. An Advanced Course. medan Law.

Greaves, John Brook. Tickle, Japeth. 1. On Equitable Interference in Cases of Part.

By Order of the Council,

Greaves, William,

Tiddeman, Henry Thomas. nership (continued).

(Signed) EDWARD Ryan,

Gwyther, Julian.

Tidswell, Alfred Phillips. 2. On the Equitable Presumption arising from a

Chairman, pro tem.

Hamel, Lancel Victor. Tilley, James.
Step taken towards Performance of an Agreement.

Haynes, E. Child, B.A. Travers, Francis.
Council Chamber, Lincoln's-inn,

Haynes, John.

Turberville, David Beran. 3. On the Equitable Consequences of the Sub.

Dec. 21st, 1871.

Henderson, William. Turner, Edward Francis, stantial Performance of an Agreement.

Hobson, Frederick George. Turner, Walter. 4. On the Equitable Doctrine of Satisfaction. The Public Lectures on Constitutional Law and Hogarth, Leopard E. L. Upton, F. Archer, B.A. In the Elementary Private Class, the subjects Legal History, at Lincoln's-inn Hall, on Wednes.

Holland, William Tew. Walker, Frederick. discussed will be the Duties and Liabilities of days, 2 p.m.; the first lecture on the 17th Jan. Johnson, Henry Fielder.

Huish, Francis Darwin. Wall, William Henry.
Trustees ; Trusts for the Benefit of Creditors.

Watson, George Newby.
The Private Classes on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Jones, John Edward. Watts, Francis.
In the Advanced Private Class, the Lectures will Saturdays, at 10 a.m.; first class meets on the Kban, Mirza Hoosein. Weatherhead, Samuel.
comprehend-Relief against Mistake; Executory 18th Jan.

Kennedy, Edward.

Weed, William.
Trusts.

The Public Lectures on Equity, at Lincoln's.inn Killey, Zaccheus Roberts. Westmacott, George F.
THE LAW OF REAL PROPERTY, &c.

Westwood, Edward, jun.

Kinch, William.
Hall, on Thursdays (Elementary Lecture at 2 p.m.; Landon, Edward Palmer. Whitehead, Walter.
The Reader on the Law of Real Property, &c., Advanced Lecture at 3 p.m.); the first lecture on Lay, George William. Williams, J. Mason, LL.B.

proposes to deliver, in the ensuing Educational the 11th Jan. The Private Classes on Mondays, Mann, Frederick James. Wilson, Charles.
Term, Twelve Public Lectures (there being Six at 3.45 and 4.30 p.m.; Wednesdays and Fridays, Marsh, William.

Witherington, Duncan H,
Lectures in each Course) on the following Sub. at 3.15 and 4.15 p.m.; first class meets on the Masser, Sylvester Richard. Wood, Frederick.
jects :-
12th Jan.

May, Henry Parrott. Wood, William.
The Public Lectures on the Law of Real Pro. Miller,'John, jun.
Elementary Course.

Woodward, Thomas F.
Mellor, Robert.

Wright, James Thomas. On the Mutual Rights of Husband and Wife as perty, &c., at Gray's-inn Hall, on Tuesdays Mowle, Edward Worsfield. Yetts, Charles Muskett. to the Real and Personal Estate.

Elementary Lecture at 2 p.m. ; Advanced Loc. Murphy, Francis.

.

[ocr errors]

COUNTY COURTS,

that lot would be subject to the term that the admitted liability. He did not think an actual

wheels should not be removed until the same had payment necessary. A cause of action must be BIRKENHEAD COUNTY COURT. been inspected at an inquest (then about to be complete at the time of issuing a plaint, but he Tuesday, Dec. 19.

held) by the coroner. The plaintiff having, had must rule that a liability to pay was quite (Before W. J. HARDEN, Esq., Judge.)

this lot knocked down to him for 9., paid the sufficient to maintain an action. Supposing

money to the defendant, and took his written that a poor man, wbo had not the means of payCOMPLIMENTS TO THE JUDGE.

receipt. The plaintiff deposed that after the sale, ment, had been damnified to a large amount. Anderson, as the senior advocate present in and when he paid his raoney, the following con- Would it be contended that he was deprived of court, said it was his pleasing duty, on behalf of versation took place : "I asked when I could have the right of action, by reason of his not having the Profession, of wishing his Honour the compli. " To hich the defendant replied, “At the paid the sum due ? ments of the season, or in common parlance, " A inquest.” On several subsequent occasions the Haines.--He might give a promissory note or merry Christmas and a happy New Year.”. Daring plaintiff applied for his lot, and was always something else to make him liable. the last twelve months not a single cloud had told that it was to be retained for the in- His HONOUR. — Unless you can show me an passed over the horizon of the court. On the quest, and ultimately that it had been seized express authority, I shall hold that, under the contrary, everything had been sunshine. It was and sold by the landlord for rent. To this circumstances, there is sufficient liability to the sincere wish of the legal gentlemen, as well as two grounds of defence were offered: (1.) That maintain an action. I think your objection is of the suitors, that his Honour might continue for the 4th condition of sale constituted a written not good in law. An acknowledged liability many years to adjudicate in that court, as he contract between the parties which could not be and a promise to pay are to my mind quite sufi. hitherto had done, in an impartial, fair, and varied by parol, and consequently that whatever cient. honourable manner. the defendant might have said on putting up the

Haines submitted that the company were His HONOUR, in acknowledging the compli. fifteenth lot, was of no avail, and could not be merely acting as Goddard's agents in the matter; ment, remarked that it was now nearly a quarter adduced in evidence by the plaintiff. That might but this was disputed by Whatman, who of a century since he began to preside over that be so, but here the contract dependent on the con pointed out that the beef was handed over to the court, and from first to last his duties had been a ditions was fully performed when the plaintiff company to be delivered by them. labour of love to him. The position he occupied paid for his purchased lot, and asked when he Haines said: With regard to the claim of 30s. was one which enabled a judge to do a great deal could take it away. Then the defendant, acting for loss on rabbits and hares, his Honour would of good, if he acted with discretion and fairness; on his verbal notice in the auction room, told the remember that there was a misquotation, or imand he had always endeavoured to do his best to plaintiff that he could not remove it until after proper declaration on the part of Mr. Goddard. act up to the imaginary pattern of excellence the inquest. This was a new and verbal contract, A hamper containing hares was declared by him as which Mr. Anderson, in his compliments had attri- by which the defendant agreed to deliver the lot containing rabbits. buted to him. His Honour then acknowledged after the inquest. This he never did, and con. Whatman submitted that there was no' proof the valuable assistance he had at all times sequently was liable to repay the money he had whatever of a misquotation on the part of God. received from the legal gentlemen who įrac- received from the plaintiff. Then (2) it was said dard. Mr. Wright, poulterer, handed him a tised before him, and said that for years there the defendant sold as agent for one Preston, and package containing hares as well as rabbits, but had not been even an approximation to asperity that before this action was brought he had paid did not acquaint him of the fact. Mr. Goddard exhibited in the court. Ho felt deeply in over the money to Preston, his principal. It was, declared the contents to be rabbits, and had no debted for the assistance he had obtained. With however, clear that when an agent contracted for reason to suppose that the hamper contained ang. regard to the suitors, the moment the decision of the performance of a particular duty-as, in this thing else. the court was given they seemed to bow to it, and case, the delivery of the lot after the inquest- Hcines argued that it mattered not whether Mr. he never heard a word of disrespect from a dis. without any qualification of his liability, he was Goddard acted in ignorance or otherwise. He appointed suitor. He was not vain enough to personally responsible for the fulfilment of the act received the package without any declaration, and think that his decisions were always right. He undertaken to be done, although he was known to then took upon himself to declare that it contained might make a number of mistakes, but they were be acting only as an agent for some third party rabbits. Under these circumstances he must be leniently dealt with, and they managed to get on (Reail v. Draper, 30 L. J. 268, Ex.). In such a case held responsible. without anything unpleasant occurring. He re- the agent, in order to exempt himself, must ex- A case was cited in support of this view, which, ciprocated the good feeling which had been ex. pressly stipulate that he was not to incur any however, Whatman contended did not apply, and hibited towards him by wishing them all “ a merry personal liability. No such stipulation was made eventually Christmas and a happy new year.” His Honour by the defendant in this case, and if he had in fact His HONOUR said : In point of law, he did not concluded by referring to the great services which paid over to his principal the sum he had received think there was such a fraud on the part of God. were rendered to him by the officials of the court, for lot fifteen, and which he really held as a stake- dard as would render the contract a nullity, and whose conduct, he said, was beyond all praise. holder until his contract to deliver it to the release the company from their responsibility. It They were exceedingly fortunato in having such a plaintiff had been performed, he had done so to was an incorrect declaration, but not a false staff of officials, and he wished all County Courts his own wrong, and he still remained liable to the declaration within his knowlodge. in the country were supplied with such an efficient plaintiff, for whom there must be a verdict for Il., Haines.-It was a false declaration to his ad. staff of officers as they had in Birkenhead. (Ap. with costs.

vantage. plause.)

His HONOUR.-It cannot be false when he is SALISBURY COUNTY COURT.

not aware of the falsity. To prove a false decidBIRMINGHAM COUNTY COURT.

Wednesday, Dec. 13.

tion, you must show that he knew it to be untrao (Before R. G. WELFORD, Esq., Judge.)

(Before T. E. P. LEFROY, Esq., Judge.)

at the time he made it. There may be a question

whether the company may not still recover from BRADDELL v. HOWELL.

GODDARD v. THE LONDON AND SOUTH-WESTERN him a higher rate of carriage.
The liability of common carriers.

RAILWAY COMPANY.

Whatman.-Not on the ground that he comHis Hovoue delivered judgment in this cause. - Common carrier - Admitted liability Non-de. mitted a fraud. The plaintiff sued the defendant, a common car- livery to consignee - Non-payment of loss by His HONOUR.-No. rier, for the value of goods consigned to Belfast, consignor before plaint-Right of action--Erro. Whatman.-But on the ground that something which were lost at sea. That was the extent of neous declaration by sender Deterioration of else besides rabbits was included in the hamper: the evidence adduced by the plaintiff. In order to gooils in hand of carriers-Costs.

His HONOUR.—Yes. prove the loss of the goods the plaintiff produced This case stood adjourned from the last court. George Oliver was called for the defence. He a letter from the defendant, dated 19th Aug. 1871, | It was an action to recover losses on certain beef, said he was a carman in the service of Mr. Barin which he said, referring to the goods from Mr. mutton, rabbits, and hares which had been en- wick, who was employed by the South Western Riseker, “ The package went down in Dec. 1868, trusted to the company for conveyance either from Company to cart and deliver goods in London. in the ship which was lost, and called the Prince Salisbury to London, or from London to Salisbury, He remembered twelve quarters of beef arriving Alfred.” This proved at once the loss of the and which it was alleged they failed to deliver in from Salisbury on the 20th Oct. They were given package and the manner in which it was lost-proper course.

to him at twenty minutes to seven in the morning, 3. e., by the ship having gone down. Now, it was Whatman appeared for the plaintiff, who is a and he took them straight to the Metropolitan clear that where a common carrier was prevented carrier in Salisbury.

Market. It was very függy, and it took fifty from fulfilling his contract by the perils of the sea Haines, the company's solicitor, conducted the minutes to get to the market. He was in the or of navigation, that was an answer to an action defence.

market at 7.50, but the van was not wholly un. for damages for a breach of his contract. Here, as The first point raised was with reference to a loaded before 8.35. the evidence stood, the breach of contract for quantity of beef consigned by Mr. Smith, butcher, of His HONOUR.-At what time did yon deliver which the plaintiff sued, was, according to his Salisbury, through the plaintiff, to Messrs. Bonser the meat at Bonser's premises ? own evidence, caused by the peril of the sea, and and Son, of London. It was stated at the last Witness: From ten to twenty minutes past the plaintiff could not recover. If the plaintiff court that the meat was delivered to the Metro. eight, but I was in my place in the line of vans at thought he could prove negligence, he might have politan Meat Market too late for market, in con. the market at half.past seven. I went to Bonser's an adjournment for the purpose.

sequence of which Mr. Smith sustained a loss of first and delivered the other goods afterwards. Fitter, appeared for the plaintiff; and

11. 178. 6. That sam Mr. Goddard agreed to pay, The meat was not wrapped up at all, and it was Follows, in the absence of Rowlands, for the but there being a running account between him in very bad condition. It was wet and flabby. defendant.

and Mr. Smith, no money actually passed, and It was put on the cover of a hamper to carry it An adjournment was granted until the 28th Mr. Haines argued that an admitted liability, into the market. From the station it was carried Jan.

without actual payment, was not sufficient to on straw at the back of the van. It was not hang

maintain an action. The cause of action, it was ing up in the truck when it arrived at the station. WORTH V. HARPER.

contended, ought to have been completo at the His HONOUR.–Then it was in bad condition An auctioneer's liability.

time of issuing the plaint. On the other side it because it had boen lying down in the truck? His HONOUR gave judgment in this cause.

The was argued by Whatman that an admitted Witness : Yes. One of the legs was broken, plaintiff in this case sued the defendant, an liability was sufficient, and that the grounds of and matter was oozing from it. l'he men at the auctioneer, for 91., paid to him for lot 15, described action inight be rendered complete at any time market told me not to handle it; they said if I “in the catalogue as about five tons broken wheels," before the delivery of the verdict. His Yonour scratched my hands with the bone, it might poisou at a sale, at the Mill-street Ironworks, on the took time to consider the point; and, on the case It was taken from the van by weans of 7th Sept. last. Prior to the sale, certain condi. being called to-day, Whatman said it did not crooks. tions were read, of which the fourth, relied on by occur to him at the last court that the cause of Cross-examined.-The Salisbury train was supthe defendant as a defence, was this: "The lots action was the non-delivery of the goods and not posed to arrive about half-past four in the morning. to be at the entire risk of the purchaser from the the liability to pay. He might remark, however, On the morning in question it was not in before a fall of the hammer, and to be removed with all that since the last court the plaintiff had actually quarter past six. He did not know that any goods faults and errors of description, by three o'clock paid Mr. Smith the 41. 173. 6d.

were delivered from it in time for the market. Ho on Saturday next, and no purchaser (under any His Honour said, having looked into the ques. believed it was not su. Sparrow was not there at pretence whatever) will be allowed to remove any tion, he was inclived to think that the plaintiff four o'clock; and it was half past six when be lot until the whole amount of his or her respec. could recover on an admitted liability. In an left. tive purchases bave been paid for.” Before put action for personal injury on a railway, a man Whatman.-If a witness has sworn that he saw ting up the fifteenth lot, the defendant stated that might recover his surgeon's bill, which was an five hampers of mutton which arrived by that

:

me.

com

Jan. 6, 1872.)
THE LAW TIMES.

train in the shop shortly after six, he has suid interpretation of these was, that under the cir- | 125th and 126th sections of the Bankruptcy Act
that which is untrue ?-Witness: It is wrong. cumstances of this case the court had the power 1969. The creditors' meeting was fixed for the

Whatman.- What is the usual time for arriving to grant relief. He further referred his Honoar 10th April ; but, no resolutions being passed, that at market ?-Witness: Five o'clock.

to the case of Es parte Woolridge (31 L. J. 122, meeting, was abortive, and the proceedings under Whatman.-You say the meat was not hanging Q. B.), which was an application for a mandamus the liquidation fell to the ground. Messrs. Evans up. Whose fault was that ?-Witness: I don't against the Royal Velson Lodge of Odd Fellows to and Lockett were the bankrupt's solicitors in this know. I did not notice any hooks in the van. I reinstato oue George Woolridge as a member of matter, and Mr. Wason now applied that their have had to do with cattle, but am not a butcher, the order; also to Hill v. lacfarlane (27 L. J. ' costs should be paid out of the estate of the bank. and am not acquainted with cattle disease. It is 41, C. P.), showing that the plaintiff was a party rupt. They had been taxed by the registrar at not usual for quarters of beef to be hung up. instructed, and that where the case had not been 171. 18s. 41. 101. had been paid Messrs. Evans and

His Honour said the meat was evidently properly considered and inquired into, the court Lockett by bankrupt's mother-in-law at the comknocked abont, and deteriorated in appearance had jurisdiction.

mencement of the proceedings. by the defendants' improper treatment of it. Simpson argued that in the case of Denton, and Wason cited rale 292, which provides “where Baines.-Will your honour grant a case ? Marshall, which was later than that of Woolridge, bankruptcy occurs pending procaedings for or

His HONOUR.-You are entitled to it if the it was held that where the rules of the society towards liquidation by arrangement or
Terdict is above 102.

provided for the decision of disputes in l mode position with creditors, the proper costs inWhatman.-- Without the money paid into court therein prescribed, then the County Court Judge curred in relation to such proceedings shall be it will not be above 101.

had no jurisdiction. And this was perfectly obvi- paid by the trustee under the bankruptcy out His Honour.-But it is a case standing on the ous, because the intention of the Legislature was of the debtor's estate, unless the court shall records of the court as above 102.

that these societies should have seli-government. otherwise order," and sect. 11 of the Act, which With regard to the value of the sheep, Whatman After replying to the learned counsel's remarks as defined the commencement of the bankruptcy, in submitted that his client was entitled to recover to the case of woolridge, Ir. Simpson contended support of his argument. the price that was carrent at the time in Salisbury. that plaintiff, having boen heard by the committee Wheeler contended that, as the costs of the Mr. Day had sworn that he gave 10:1. 2 pound for and expelled, he was no longer an interested party, solicitor in the matter of the trader - debtor joints all round, and that two days afterwards he and that his Honour had no jurisdiction.

summons and the petition had already been gave 9fd. a pound for an entire carcase.

His HONOUR said he should act upon that case, paid out of the estate, to burden the estate His HONOUR said in the case of the rabbits, he and would now hear the facts.

with another set of costs would be a hardship; did not think there was such a fraud as to

and though the question was one entirely in vitiate the contract. With regard to the beef, he

the discretion of the court, he urged the judge was of opinion that a delay of two hours was not

should not, in fairness to the creditors, allow a reasonable delivery. Every bye-law must itself

BANKRUPTCY LAW.

the bankrupt's solicitors the costs they asked. be reasonable; and seeing how important it was

He further urged that the language under rule to catch a market, he did not consider the de. VOTES OF NEW DECISIONS. 292 of “ pending proceedings ” could not assist livery in question a reasonable one. As to the

DEMURRER-CREDITORS' DEED-PARTIES-AL- the applicants, for those proceedings had been badness of the meat he did not attach much im.

LEGATION-CONVICTION OF FELONY-REGISTRA. abortive and were dead, and were not the act portance to the casual observation of the men at the market to the witness Oliver. As to the sheep, filed in 1871 alleged that, previously to a debtor's TION IN BANKRUPTCY – LAPSE OF TINE.—A bill of bankruptcy on which the adjudication was

made. He produced a report of a decision of he thought the plaintiff was entitled to recover the conviction for felony, by an indonture made in 1802 Mr. Daniel, County Court judge of Burnley, who fall annount claimed. Haines.-Your Honour will allow me a case ?

between himself of the ürst part, a trustee of the had allowed costs to the solicitors in liquidation,

second part, and the several other persons whose where bankruptcy had follower the petition, and His Honour.—Yes. You are entitled to it, but nemes and seals were, or were intended to be, which had been allowed by that judge under the that are your grounds of appeal ?

thereunto subscribed and set, being respectively rule nameå. He, however, differed from that Haires said he was satisfied with his Hononr's creditors of the debtor of the third part, the debtor judge in his conclusions, and stated the point was finding in regard to the sheep. In the other cases, assigned all his personal estato and effects to the entirely new, and one on which no decision had as he should ground his appeal upon the fact that trustee upon trust in favour of his creditors ; and yet been made. the plaintiff had no locus stanu?i.

His Honour reserved his decision. that the said indenture was duly executed by the His HONOUR.-I am not infallible by any means. debtor and the trustee, and registered under the

Dec. 29.--- His HONOUE said this was an appli. I may be wrong; but I am pretty clear upon the 194th section of the Bankrupiey Act 1861 ; and cation for the costs out of the bankrupt's estate of subject. Haines sail, then as to the question of costs.

the bill prayed for a declaration that the defen- an abortive petition for liquidation which was not He considered himself entit oil to il feo for attend for the debtor, was a trustee of the house in dant, who had, in 1855, purchased a house in trust presented until after the insolvent had been served

with a debtor s suminons which terminated in bank. De the last court, the plaintiff having taken question for the trustze of the deci. On demurrer, ruptcy. It was admitted that the granting or advantage of the adjournment to introd1100 e lut of fresh evidence.

for wint of equity and of parties : Held (reversing refusing costs is entirely in the discretion of the Whatmun.- No. Day and Goddard were hath through there was no suficient allegation in the discretion” means something more than arbitrary

the oriler of the Master of the Rolls), that all court, but I was properly reminded that “ judicial in the box. The a-ljonrnment was obtained at the wil that the deed was executed by any creditor, will and pleasure, and ought to be exercised upon instance of my friend, who insisted on havi:g the still it did allego az assignment to the plaintiff, some well-considered principle. I real rule 292 :18 inan here who sold the hare; and rabbits. A verdict was then entered for the plaintiff for had the property in their possession, and there was and that enabled lum tu sue third persons who an encouragement to parties who tiud themseives

in failing circunstances to anticipate any hostile 171, odd, and

enough oa the bill to require an answer. A trustee movement of creditors, by proposing to pay thern His Honour ordered each party to pay their may sue to recover the fund for the benefit of all all pro rota as large a composition as the estate owu costs as regarded the firet day.

persons interesed in the trust without making his will admit of; for, even though the petition for cestuis que trust parties : (Glegy v. Rees, 25 L. T. liqaidation may be fruitless, it is plainly intimative Rep. N. S. 612. L. C.)

that in such a case, and as a general rule, the TUNBRIDGE WELLS COUNTY COURT. BANKEUPTCY ACT 1869, ss. 23, 31—LANDLORD costs ought to be allowed out of the estate; Thursday, Dec. 14. AND TENANT DISCLAIMET OF LEASE DY

whereas if it be a mere expriment to ora le (Before J.J. LONSDALE, Esq., Judge.)

TRUSTEE-INJURY INFLICTED BY DISCLAIMER the consequences of steps already taken by CHAPMAN v. WALLIS.

-LESSOR's Rigut OF PROOF.-The trustee of a creditors, and if it is not successful, the costs, in bankrupt's estate disclained, under the 23rd sec

the absence of something exceptional, wonld not Friendly society-Jurisdiction. tion of the Bankruptcy Act 1809, an agreement

as a general rule be allowed. Such would be my This was a claim of 501. or an order to be rein- entered into by the bankrupt, prior to his mode of dealing with this application if it were stated as a member of the Southborough Friendly bankruptcy, to take a lease of certain shops for a

not that on reference to the file of proceedings, I Society, of which the defendant is secretary. term of years. Held, that the lessor was entitled find that there are exceptional circumstances

Biron (instructed by Palmer, of Tunbridge), under the 23rd section of the Act, to prove against which for a portion, at all events, of the costs of appeared for the plaintiff.

the bankrupt's estate for the difference between the fattempted liquidation, would seem to me to Thomas Fox Simpson appeared for the defen. the rent reserved by the agreement, and the stop the creditors from objecting. The same dant.

present letting value of the premises for the solicitors who now represent the trustee and Biron, in opening the case, explained that this residue of the term. The general purview and object to the allowance, issued the debtor's sum. matter came before the court on a former occa- object of the Bankruptcy Act 1869 considered : mons with a view probably of securing their sion, and up to a certain point it had been dis. (Ex parte The Llynvi Coal cad ciron Company; jected to the proposed proceedings by liquidation

client's debt; it does not appear that they obcussed; but some cases had been discovered in Re Jide, 25 L. T. Rep. N. S. 609. L. JJ.) which it seemed doubtful whether his Honour had

instead of bankruptcy. Their acquiescence may jnrisdiction. That was Mr. Simpson's contention.

be inferred froin tie fact that they consented to Now he (Mr. Biron) submitted that his friend was BIRKENHEAD COUNTY COURT. the proccedings being twice adjourned. How not in a position to raise any objection as to his

Tuesılay, D.c. 19.

much these adjournments increased the costs I Honour's jurisdiction, because if his Honour (Before J. W. HARDEN, Esq., Judge.) do not know, but they must have added some. would refer to the plaint which had been entered,

Re ARTHUP. JUKES.

thing; and as the taxed costs of the proposed and the flat section of the Friendly Societies Act, Bankruptcy costs of abortipe petition for liqui dignidation amount only to 17,188. tus. I am not be find that the plaint was to

dation-Commencement of . disposed dissect the bill. The taxed costs will the plaintiff, being a member of the Southborongh Wason, instructed by Evnns and Locleti, ap. be allowed, but I cannot blame the trustee for ob. Friendly Society, was, on the 29th May last, ille. peared on their behalf' to apply for an order for jecting to pay them without an order, and I shall gally expelled therefrom, and ne now sought for costs out of the estate, under circumstances some- say nothing about the costs of this application. an order to be reinstated as a member of the said what novel. society, or, in default, that the society should pay solicitors for the trustee, Mr. William Nieal, of Wheeler, instructed by Simpson and North,

DERBY COUNTY COURT. to him the sum of 50%. Therefore, that plaint was founded in tort-it complained of illegal expulsion, Liverpool, resisted the application.

(Before G. RUSSELL, E39., Judge.) and that being the case he must first of all refer The bankrunt, on the 14th March last, was served

Re MARTIN. kis Honour to the 33th section of the 19 & 20 Vict. with a debtor's summons at the suit of the Ditton Application for a criminal prosecution under the c. 108. Brook Iron Company (Limited). The debt not

Debtors' Act. His HONOUP, after reading and considering being disputed, a bankruptcy petition was filed on This case was adjourned for the personal appear. this section, was of opinion that it referred not to the 22nd March, the alleged act of bankruptcy ance of Jr. Martin. It was an application by the jurisdiction simply, but to the case being tried at being the nonpayment of the debt in the debtor's trustee, Mr. T. H. Harrison, for the criminal pro. all in a County Court.

suminons. The bearing of the petition was fixed secution of the debtor, under the provisions of the Biron said he would now come to the main for the 1st April, and, after adjournments, an Debtors' Act, 1869, for not disclosing in his acquestion, and referre-l his Honour to the case of adjudication was made on the 15th April, on the counts the true state of his affairs, and for hiding Denton and Marshall (52 L. J., N.S., 89, Ex.); to alleged act of bankruptcy. Between the 14th property of the value of 101. and upwards. the 41st section of the Friendly Societies Act; March and the 15th April-namely, on the 20th Hestall appeared for the trustee, and Briggs and to the twenty-fourth rule of the Southborough March-the bankrupt filed a petition for lignida- for Mr. Martin. Friendly Society; and contended that the true tion by arrangement or composition under the Charles Martin filed his potition under the

:

66

[ocr errors]

COUNTY COURTS.

that lot would be subject to the term that the admitted liability. He did not think an actual

whoels should not be removed until the same had payment necessary. A cause of action must bo BIRKENHEAD COUNTY COURT. been inspected at an inquest (then about to be complete at the time of issuing a plaint, but he Tuesday, Dec. 19.

held) by the coroner. The plaintiff having had must, rule that a liability to pay was quite (Before W. J. HARDEN, Esq., Judge.) this lot knocked down to him for 91., paid the sufficient to maintain an action.

Supposing money to the defendant, and took his written that a poor man, wbo had not the means of payCOMPLIMENTS TO THE JUDGE.

receipt. The plaintiff deposed that after the sale, ment, had been damnified to a large amount. Anderson, as the senior advocate present in and when ho paid his raoney, the following con

Would it be contended that he was deprived of court, said it was his pleasing duty, on behalf of versation took place : "I asked when I could have the right of action, by reason of his not having the Profession, of wishing his Honour the compli- it?” To which the defendant replied, “At the paid the sum due ? ments of the season, or in cominon parlance, “ A inquest.” On several subsequent occasions the Haines.-He might give a promissory note or merry Christmas and a happy New Year." During plaintiff applied for his lot, and was always something else to make him liable. the last twelve months not a single cloud had told that it was to be retained for the in- His HONOUR. — Unless you can show me an passed over the horizon of the court. On the quest, and ultimately that it had been seized express authority, I shall hold that, under the contrary, everything had been sunshine. It was and sold by the landlord for rent. To this circumstances, there is sufficient liability to the sincere wish of the legal gentlemen, as well as two grounds of defence were offered: (1.) That maintain an action. I think your objection is of the suitors, that his Honour might continue for the 4th condition of sale constituted a written not good in law. An acknowledged liability many years to adjudicate in that court, as he contract between the parties which could not be and a promise to pay are to my mind quite suffi. hitherto had done, in an impartial, fair, and varied by parol, and consequently that whatever cient. honourable manner. the defendant might have said on putting up the

Haines submitted that the company were His HONOUR, in acknowledging the compli. fifteenth lot, was of no avail, and could not be merely acting as Goddard's agents in the matter ; ment, remarked that it was now nearly a quarter adduced in evidence by the plaintiff. That might but this was disputed by Whatman, who of a century since he began to preside over that be so, but here the contract dependent on the con pointed out that the beef was handed over to the court, and from first to last his duties had been a ditions was fully performed when the plaintiff company to be delivered by them. labour of love to him. The position he occupied paid for his purchased lot, and asked when he Haines said: With regard to the claim of 303. was one which enabled a judge to do a great deal could take it away. Then the defendant, acting for loss on rabbits and hares, his Honour would of good, if he acted with discretion and fairness; on his verbal notice in the auction room, told the remember that there was a misquotation, or imand he had always endeavoured to do his best to plaintiff that he could not remove it until after proper declaration on the part of Mr. Goddard. act up to the imaginary pattern of excellence the inquest. This was a new and verbal contract, A hamper containing hares was declared by him as which Mr. Anderson, in his compliments had attri- | by which the defendant agreed to deliver the lot containing rabbits. buted to him. His Honour then acknowledged after the inquest. This he never did, and con. Whatman submitted that there was no proof the valuable assistance he had at all times sequently was liable to repay the money he had whatever of a misquotation on the part of God. received from the legal gentlemen who prac- received from the plaintiff. Then (2) it was said dard. Mr. Wright, poulterer, handed him a tised before him, and said that for years there the defendant sold as agent for one Preston, and package containing hares as well as rabbits, but had not been even an approximation to asperity that before this action was brought he had paid did not acquaint him of the fact. Mr. Goddard exhibited in the court. Ho felt deeply in over the money to Preston, his principal. It was, declared the contents to be rabbits, and had no debted for the assistance he had obtained. With however, clear that when an agent contracted for reason to suppose that the hamper contained any. regard to the suitors, the moment the decision of the performance of a particular duty-as, in this thing else. the court was given they seemed to bow to it, and case, the delivery of the lot after the inquest- Hcines argued that it mattered not whether Mr. he never heard a word of disrespect from a dis. without any qualification of his liability, he was Goddard acted in ignorance or otherwise. He appointed suitor. He was not vain enough to personally responsible for the fulfilment of the act received the package without any declaration, and think that his decisions were always right. He undertaken to be done, although he was known to then took upon himself to declare that it contained might make a number of mistakes, but they were be acting only as an agent for some third party rabbits. Under these circumstances he must be leniently dealt with, and they managed to get on (Real v. Draper, 30 L. J. 268, Ex.). In such a caso held responsible. without anything unpleasant occurring. He re- the agent, in order to exempt himself, must ex. A case was cited in support of this view, which, ciprocated the good feeling which had been ex- pressly stipulate that he was not to incur any however, Whatman contended did not apply, and hibited towards him by wishing them all a merry personal liability. No such stipulation was made eventually Christmas and a happy new year.” His Honour by the defendant in this case, and if he had in fact His HONOUR said : In point of law, he did not concluded by referring to the great services which paid over to his principal the sum he had received think there was such a fraud on the part of God. were rendered to him by the officials of the court, for lot fifteen, and which he really held as a stake. dard as would render the contract a nullity, and whose conduct, he said, was beyond all praise. holder until his contract to deliver it to the release the company from their responsibility. It They were exceedingly fortunato in having such a plaintiff had been performed, he had done so to was an incorrect declaration, but not a false staff of officials, and he wished all County Courts his own wrong, and he still remained liable to the declaration within his knowlodge. in the country were supplied with such an efficient plaintiff, for whom there must be a verdict for H., Haines.- It was a false declaration to his ad. staff of officers as they had in Birkenhead. (Ap. with costs.

vantage. plause.)

His Honour.-It cannot be false when he is SALISBURY COUNTY COURT.

not aware of the falsity. To prove a false deciaBIRMINGHAM COUNTY COURT.

Wellnes.lay, Dec. 13.

tion, you must show that he knew it to be untrue

at the time he made it. There may be a question (Before R. G. WELFORD, Esq., Judge.)

(Before T. E. P. LEFROY, Esq., Judge.)

whether the company may not still recover from BRADDELL v. HOWELL.

GODDARD v. THE LONDON AND SOUTH-WESTERN him a higher rate of carriage. The liability of common carriers.

RAILWAY COMPANY.

Whatman.-Not on the ground that he comHis Honour delivered judgment in this cause.- Common corrier - Admitted liability Non-de. mitted a fraud. The plaintiff sued the defendant, a common car- livery to consignee -- Non-payment of loss by His HONOUR.–No. rier, for the value of goods consigned to Belfast, consignor hefore plaint-Right of action--Erro. Whatman.-But on the ground that something which were lost at sea. That was the extent of neous declaration by sender - Deterioration of else besides rabbits was included in the hamper? the evidence adduced by the plaintiff. In order to goods in hand of carriers--Costs.

His Honour.—Yes. prove the loss of the goods the plaintiff produced This case stood adjourned from the last court. George Oliver was called for the defence. He a letter from the defendant, dated 19th Aug. 1871, It was an action to recover losses on certain beef, said he was a carman in the service of Mr. Bar. in which he said, referring to the goods from Mr. mutton, rabbits, and hares which had been en wick, who was employed by the South-Western Riseker, " The package went down in Dec. 1868, trusted to the company for conveyance either from Company to cart and deliver goods in London. in the ship which was lost, and called the Prince Salisbury to London, or from London to Salisbury, He remembered twelve quarters of beef arriving Aljred.This proved at once the loss of the and which it was alleged they failed to deliver in from Salisbury on the 20th Oct. They were given package and the manner in which it was lost, proper course.

to him at twenty minutes to seven in the morning, i. €., by the ship having gone down. Now, it was Whatman appeared for the plaintiff, who is a and he took them straight to the Metropolitan clear that where a common carrier was prevented carrier in Salisbury.

Market. It was very foggy, and it took fifty from fulfilling his contract by the perils of the sea Haines, the company's solicitor, conducted the minutes to get to the market. He was in the or of navigation, that was an answer to an action defence.

market at 7.50, but the van was not wholly unfor damages for a breach of his contract. Here, as The first point raised was with reference to a loaded before 8.35. the evidence stood, the breach of contract for quantity of beef consigned by Mr. Smith, butcher, of His HONOUR.-At what time did you deliver which the plaintiff sued, was, according to his Salisbury, through the plaintiff, to Messrs. Bonser the meat at Bonser's premises ? own evidence, caused by the peril of the sea, and and Son, of London. It was stated at the last Witness: From ten to twenty minutes past the plaintiff could not recover. If the plaintiff court that the meat was delivered to the Metro. eight, but I was in my place in the line of vans at thought he could prove negligence, he might have politan Meat Market too late for market, in con. the market at half-past seven. I went to Bonser's an adjournment for the purpose.

sequence of which Mr. Smith sustained a loss of first and delivered the other goods afterwards. Fitter, appeared for the plaintiff; and

11. 178.611. That som Mr. Goddard agreed to pay, The meat was not wrapped up at all, and it was Fallous, in the absence of Rowlands, for the but there being a running account between him in very bad condition. It was wet and flabby. defendant.

and Mr. Smith, no money actually passed, and It was put on tho_cover of a hamper to carry it An adjournment was granted until the 28th Mr. Haines argued that an admitted liability, into the market. From the station it was carried Jan.

without actual payment, was not sufficient to on straw at the back of the van. It was not hang

maintain an action. The cause of action, it was ing up in the truck when it arrived at the station. WORTH 1. HARPER.

contended, ought to have been completo at the His HONOUR.- Then it was in bad condition An auctioneer's liability.

time of issuing the plaint. On the other side it because it had been lying down in the truck: His HONOUR gave judgment in this cause. The was argued by Whatman that an admitted Witness : Yes. One of the legs was broken, plaintiff in this case sued the defendant, an liability was sufficient, and that the grounds of and matter was oozing from it. The men at the auctioneer, for 91., paid to him for lot 15, described action inight be rendered complete at any time market told me not to handle it; they said if I “in the catalogueas about five tons broken wheels," before the delivery of the verdict. His Honour l'scratched iny hands with the bone, it might poisou at a sale, at the Mill-street Ironworks, on the took time to consider the point; and, on the case me. It was taken from the van by means of 7th Sept. last. Prior to the sale, certain condi- being called to-day, Whitman said it did not crooks. tions were read, of which the fourth, relied on by occur to him at the last court that the cause of Cross-examined.-The Salisbury train was sup. the defendant as a defence, was this : “ The lots action was the non-delivery of the goods and not posed to arrive about half-past four in the morning. to be at the entire risk of the purchaser from the the liability to pay. He might remark, however, On the morning in question it was not in before a fall of the hammer, and to be removed with all that since the last court the plaintiff had actually quarter past six. He did not know that any goods faults and errors of description, by three o'clock paid Mr. Smith the 41. 173. 6d.

were delivered from it in time for the market. He on Saturday next, and no purchaser (under any His Honour said, having looked into the ques. believed it was not so. Sparrow was not there at pretence whatever) will be allowed to remove any tion, he was incliued to think that the plaintiff four o'clock; and it was half past six when be lot until the whole amount of his or her respec- could recover on an admitted liability. In an leit. tive purchases have been paid for." Before put action for personal injury on a railway, a man Ilhatnian.-If a witness has sworn that he saw ting up the fifteenth lot, the defendant stated that might recover his surgeon's bill, which was an five hampers of mutton which arrived by that

a

« EelmineJätka »