II. In criminal cases.

1. Defects in indictments that are still bad in error, 553. Indictment, II.

2. In misdemeanour: list of recognizances. Reg. Gen. 693.

III. Rules and regulations.

1. Error in fact. App. xiii. 64.-69.
2. In law. App. xiv. 67. 68.
3. Costs. App. xiv. 69.

4. Stay of proceedings pending error.
App. xxi. 110.

5. Bail in. Bail in Error.

6. Award of repleader &c.
lxxxii. 24.

7. Costs in. App. lxxxii. 25.
8. Interest in. App. lxxxiii. 26.

App.

ESTOPPEL.

I. In what cases.

1. By previous conviction unreversed, though erroneous on the face of it, 501. Conviction, I. 1.

2. By previous conviction not followed by execution, 501. Conviction, I. 1.

3. When not opened by act of Parliament, 501. Conviction, I. 1.

4. Of tenant from disputing landlord's title; expiration as to part, 630. County Court, I. 3.

5. By judgment on appeal against former order, 583. Poor, VIII. 1.

6. Of party to a conveyance, 674. Deed, I.

II. When not.

Res inter alios: lands of a third party taken under compulsory powers, 372. Company, V1. 6.

EVIDENCE.

I. Admissions generally.

Tacit admissions by arguing upon a statement without disputing it.

Ejectment for a house. The tenant in possession took out a summons to inspect two leases. No affidavits were used before the Judge; but it was stated, for the tenant, that he was in possession as a lawful occupant of the house, and that the lessors of the plaintiff, who were owners of the reversions expectant on two leases, comprising a considerable district of which the premises were part, sought to recover on the ground that they had a right of entry for breaches of covenants alleged to be contained in the leases which the tenant sought to inspect. The attorney for the lessors of the plaintiff, without either denying or in terms admitting the statement, argued that the Judge had no authority to make an order to inspect.

The Judge made the order, on the assumption that the statement, not being disputed, was admitted to be true in fact. On a motion for a rule to set aside this order.

Held: 1st. That the affidavits must disclose what were the admissions before the Judge on which he made his order.

2d. That the order was properly made in exercise of the common law powers of the Court; the tenant appearing, by the tacit admissions before the Judge, to have an interest in the deeds which he sought to inspect. Doe dem. Child v. Roe, 279.

II. Admission of documents.

1. Form of notice to admit. App. vii. 29.

2. In what cases: consequences of omission. App. viii. 30.

III. Inspection of documents. Inspection.

IV. Attesting witness.

Deceased attesting witness to lost deed.

On the trial of an appeal at sessions, a witness proved the contents of a lost deed, and its execution by the parties. He stated, on cross examination, that the name of B. was written opposite to the names of the parties; that he knew B., who was dead; but that witness did not know B.'s hand writing. The Sessions found that B. was the attesting witness, and, because there was no evidence of his handwriting, rejected the secondary evidence. On a case stating the above facts:

Held: that, the Sessions having found as a fact the identity of the attesting witness and the deceased man, further evidence of handwriting was not required. Regina v. St. Giles, Cumberwell, 642.

V. Documentary: original records.

Restriction as to subpoenas to produce.
App. ix. 32.

VI. Depositions under order, rule or commission.

Return and filing. App. ix. 33. VII. Estoppel by previous judgments. As evidence of the district in which a highway lies, 501. Conviction, I. 1.

VIII. Recitals.

In justice's warrant given in evidence against him by the other. side, 471. Action, IV.

IX. Secondary.

1. Handwriting of deceased attesting witness, 642. Ante, IV.

2. Proper place of deposit, 93. Poor, IV. 1.

3. Finality of decision on such points, 93. Poor, IV. 1.

4. What person need not be called as a witness, 93. Poor, IV. 1.

X. Declarations.

1. Of person to whom a document is traced, 93. Poor, IV. 1.

2. Of party in his own favour, when evidence for him, 471. Action, IV.

3. Of deceased tenant as to what he paid rent for, 630. County Court, I. 3.

XI. Relevancy.

Irrelevancy of previous publications by other persons, 268. Defamation, I. 1.

EXAMINATION.

Of persons applying to be admitted as attorneys. Attorney.

EXCEPTION.

To bail. Buil.

EXCEPTIONS.

Bill of Exceptions.

VOL. I.

EXCHANGE.

Money paid for equality of, 54. Parti tion, I. 1.

EXECUTION.

I. Payment under.

1. Good, though seizure irregular.

Trespass against the sheriff and S. for breaking a house and taking goods. Plea by S., severing in his pleadings from sheriff, alleging a writ of fi. fa. directed to the sheriff, a warrant by the sheriff to S. as bailiff, and justification as bailiff. Replication, alleging a prior warrant to J. as bailiff, a seizure by J. under the writ, and payment by plaintiff to the sheriff in satisfaction of the writ, before the warrant to S. Rejoinder, traversing the prior seizure under the writ, and the payment to the sheriff.

On the trial, the sheriff and S. appeared by different counsel. It appeared that the sheriff made a warrant to J.; that J. sent L., his general manager, to execute it, and L. entered the plaintiff's house and seized his goods. Plaintiff sent to the office of the bailiff J., and there paid the amount to L., who, in J.'s name, withdrew the man in possession, and sent notice to the execution creditor that the money was ready. In the course of the same day J. died; and the money was not found. The sheriff, knowing the facts, made a fresh warrant to S.. who seized plaintiff's goods and held them for several days. The jury did not agree as to whether L. actually paid the money to J. before his death; but they found that L. was authorized by J. to execute the warrant, and to receive the money. The Judge ruled that the jury might find for the plaintiff. The counsel for the sheriff excepted. The counsel for S. did not. The jury assessed the

damages at 4007.

ing the bill of exceptions, as this was a point which could not have been! included in it; but that the jury were justified in giving vindictive damages in such a case against the sheriff; and the rule was refused.

The counsel for S. moved for a new trial, on the ground of misdirection. and that the damages were excessive as against S. Held, that there was sufficient evidence of a payment to J. the bailiff, under an execution de facto; and that, assuming the seizure by L. in J.'s absence to be irregular, still the payment was good: and the rule, on the ground of misdirection, was refused.

But held that the damages were excessive as against S. alone; and a rule nisi was granted to raise the question what is the measure of

EXPIRATION.

one of whom has acted under aggra- !

Court, L. 3.

County

other. An arrangement having been made, this rule dropped; and the question was not further discussed.

Ideo quare. Gregory v. Slowman, 360. 2. Where a statute forbids preference! amongst creditors, 74. Bond, I.

3. To bailiff's manager in his absence, 360. Ante, 1.

874. Company, VI.

EXTENSION.

FALSE IMPRISONMENT.

77.

lawry, or to fix bail: teste and retara. App. xv. 74. 75.

174.

FEES.

3. Caplas ad satisfaciendum: forms. App. xlviii. 15.—22.

Dominoes not an unlawful game.

Stat. 9 G. 4. c. 61. s. 21. subjects persons licensed under that Act to a penalty, on conviction before justices, for any offence against the tenor of the license the license (Schedule C.) provides that the person licensed “do not knowingly suffer any unlawful