« EelmineJätka »
presume a deed to have been made in accordance RENT--See DEBT. COVENANT. REPLEVIN with the recital, rather than believe the evidence to STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS. LANDLORD AND contradict it. Flood v. Moriarty, Bl. D. & 0. 165, TENANT. TRESPASS. TITHE-RENT CHARGE. N. P. [Per Pigot, C. B.)
RENT CHARGE_See Deed. Covenant. RECOGNIZANCE_See SCIRE FACIAS.
PLEADING. The court will not vacate a recognizance against
Apportionment of:]-See SEQUESTRATION. a party when there is a bill of costs entered up against him in the Crown-office, without notice to
REPLEVIN. the Crown-solicitor, though a long period has elapsed since the entry. Anonymous, Bl. D. & 0.205, Ex.
Generally.]-Quære, can the bailee of a chattel
maintain an action of replevin, and if be can, is it RECORD-See PLEADING. PRACTICE. necessary that he should have the actual possession Amendment.] --See AMENDMENT.
of the chattel at the time of the seizure? Butler Quære, can an order for the removal of a record v. Bridge, 3 Ir. L. Rep. 464. under the 3 & 4 Vic. c. 105, s. 30, issue without a
Quære, should the bailment be replied specially certiorari. M'Dona v. Hanley, 6 Ir. L. Rep. 155, to the pleas of property. Ib. Q. B.
A general avowry by the assignee of an insolvent Should the original record be returned, or is an for rent, which had accrued due to a former as exemplification of it a sufficient compliance with the signee who had died, is bad. M.Keon v. Smith, statute? Ib.
5 Ir. L. Rep. 231, C P. No subpæna shall in future issue for the produc
In an action of replevin the defendant pleadedtion of any record in the custody of the paymaster first non cepit, secondly, that the goods seized were of civil services, or of any other officer of her Ma- pot the property of the plaintiff, thirdly, a special jesty, distinct fron those under the controul of the coguizance that he seized the goods under a statutseveral courts, without the order of the court, or of able execution against a third party and that these one of the judges thereof , upon special application goods were not the goods of the plaintiff
, on which in the cause where the same shall be deemed neces. pleas, issue was joined as to the property in the sary, and notice of such application must be given goods, and a verdict found for the plaintiff
. Held to the Crown-solicitor of the district wherein the that under such circumstances a motion for a nonrecord is deposited; and the order served on the suit could not be sustained. Keenan v. Philips, 5 officer in whose custody it is with the writ of sub- Ir. L. Rep. 440, Q. B. pæna or duces tecum. In re Attorney-general, 5 Ir.
A defendant in replevin may move for judgment L. Rep. 185.
non obstante veredicto. M'Creeny v. Jackson, 5 The court will amend the return of a record by Ir. L. Rep. 443, Q. B. extending the same to the following term, provided
In an action of replevin, an immaterial isste had it is not out of return at the time of the application, been joined on a replication, and a verdict found and that the amended return-day be not beyond the for the plaintiff
. Held, that the avowant was not time at which the record might at first have been entitled to judgment non obstante veredicto upon made returnable. Bagot v. Graham, Bl. D. & O. that issue, though there was no confession of the 239, Ex.
cause of action in that plea. Ib.
Distress.]—As to the necessary amount of eviRECORDER-See MAGISTRATE. dence of insufficiency of distress. See Orr v. Ste
phenson, 5 Ir. L. Rep. 6. [Per Pennefather, B.] RE-DOCKETTING-See JUDGMENT.
The 6th section of the 6 & 7 W.4, c. 75, requiring a landlord to deliver a particular of distress,
does not apply to actions of replevin in the superior RE-ENTRY-See EJECTMENT.
courts. Daly v. Bloomfield, 5 Ir. L. Rep. 65.
An agreement to change the gale-days on which
the rent is to be paid, and ascertaining the fraction REGISTRATION-See DEED.
payable on the then last new gale-day, will be sufThe registration of a deed operating in law as a ficient evidence, to go to the jury, of rent being in surrender is not equivalent to the registration of an arrear, so as to support a distress. Purcell v. Noactual deed or instrument of surrender. Powell v. lan, 1 Ir. L. Rep. 258, C.P. Kelly, 10 Ir. L. Rep. 193, Q. B.
Writ.]—A writ of replevin will not be quashed
if it issue to get back goods, which the defendant REGISTRY_See ELECTION.
obtained by virtue of a contract, to convey them
over the sea for the plaintiff, there being questions REJOINDER-See PRACTICE. (FURTHER TIME
of law and fact which can be tried in the action. TO PLEAD.)
Corscaden v. Stewart, 1 Ir. L. Rep. 106, Q. B.
When the plaintiff, from whom å mare had been
stolen, which was found in the possession of the RENEWAL OF WRITS-See HABERE. defendant, who had purchased her from a party ac SUERIFF.
cused of having stolen her, had issued a writ of
replevin, returnable into this court, and thereby Held, that it was not necessary to aver continua obtained possession of the mare, after informations ance of seizin in fee of the rent in the party dishad been sworn against the reputed felon, but be- training at the time of the distress, and that an fore he had been tried. The court ordered the averment at the conclusion of the cognizance, that writ to be quashed, and the mare to be returned to the locus in quo is, and at the time when, &c., was the defendant. Doyle v. Kelly, 4 Ir. L. Rep. 9, C.P. part of the premises granted and re-leased by the
deed of 1712; and by virtue of which deed, the Pleading.]—Where in replevin, the plaintid' de premises therein mentioned were charged with, and clared for a taking on the 9th of August, 1838, and made subject to the said yearly rent, to be issuing the defendant avowed for five years arrears of rent, and growing thereout; and because a certain sum next before, and ending on the 25th of March, 1836, at the said time, when, &c., was due, &c.,” was a due to the defendant by virtue of a demise thereto- sufficient allegation of the lands being charged with fore made, and the plaintiff pleaded, amongst other the rent, at the time of making the distress. Ib. pleas, a plea of the recent statute of Limitations
Held also, that it is not necessary to make pro(3 & 4 W. 4, c. 27, s. 42), to the whole amount of fert of a deed making a tenant to the præcipe, and the arrears ; the defendant demurred, principally leading the uses of a recovery ; or of any conveyon the ground, that the plea of the statute should
ance operating under the statute of uses. Ib. have been confined to the period of the five years
An avowry, which, after stating that the taking which were outside six years; but the court overruled the demurrer. Wilson in replevin v. Jack- was for several and distinct gales of rent, in the
or detention of several distinct parcels of goods son, 2 Ir. L. Rep. 1, Q. B.
conclusion justified the taking or detention of all Although the terms of the contract must be ac the goods, for the whole arrear of rent, is bad on curately stated in an avowry, and a variance in respect to them would be bad, yet the time stated general demurrer. Dejoncourt v. Rogers, 8 Ir. L.
Rep. 450, Ex. Ch. is not material. [Per Burton, J.] Ib. Where a further plea to an avowry, in the for- under the 10th section of the 9 & 10 Vic. c. 111,
A plea to an avowry in replevin, framed under mal part (as to leave of the court, &c.), professed ought distinctly to apprise the defendant of the preto be an answer to the whole of the avowry; but cise default complained of by the plaintiff ; and in the substantial part of the plea professed to be therefore where the language of the plea was so an answer, and only answered a part of the demand. Held good on general demurrer. Ryan plaintiff complained of a non-delivery of the par.
ambiguous as to leave it doubtful whether the v. Young, 2 Ir. L. Rep. 76, Q. B. Semble—That this plea would be bad on spe- having been such a person—or of the defendant's
ticulars of distress, to a person in possession—there cial demurrer. Ib.
Wherė, to an avowry, the defendant pleaded having omitted to put the same on a conspicuous that the property in question was the joint property Held to be bad for uncertainty. Richardson, v.
part of the premises, being vacant at the time. of himself and the plaintiff
. Held, that this was a good plea ; and where to the avowry several other Newhenham, 1 Ir. Jur. 204. Q. B. pleas were pleaded ; in all of which, the taking was native ; provided that neither allegation was so
Semble-- The plea might have been in the alterdenied, and the detention justified. Held, that the worded as to leave the materiality of the other said pleas were bad for duplicity. Reeves v. Morris, doubtful, for the purposes of the pleading in ques2 Ir. L. Rep. 309, Q. B.
tion. 16. The plaintiff in replevin being under terms to plead issuably, pleaded to all the avowries and re- pleaded to two avowries, differing in respect of the
Semble—That the plea was bad, having been cognizances, in the names of different parties, a plea of riens iu arrear, “ from the plaintiff to the said de rent-days, and nevertheless referring to a single
particular. Ib. fendant.” The court ordered the plea to be taken off the file with costs ; but gave the plaintiff liberty of the 4th Geo. 4, c. 99, and an establishment for
Variance.]-Lands were leased after the passing to plead anew. Graydon v. Kernan, 4 Ir. L. Rep. the composition of tithes, within the parish at a 121, C. P.
In replevin the declaration stated that the de. yearly rent of £104 8s. 6d., together with £7 is. fevdant on, &c., “ in the parish of St. Thomas, in after the passing of the 1 & 2 Vic. c. 109, distrained
6d., for tithe payable half-yearly ; and the landlord, the county of the city of Dublin, in a certain dwell
. for half-a-year's rent due, viz. one-half of the foreing house, there took the goods, &c." of the plain, going rent and tithe, minus one-eighth of the latter, tiff'; and the defendant demurred, specially on the and in an action of replevin, avowed for the full ground that the locus in quo was not sufficiently amount of the said one half-year's rent and tithe, described. Held, that the description in the de- without deducting the one-eighth of the latter ; and claration was sufficient. Kenny v. Simpson, 4 Ir. at the trial gave the lease in evidence. Held not L. Rep. 42, Q. B.
to be a variance, Burke y. Dignam, 3 Ir. L. Rep. In replevin of a distress for a rent-charge, the
368, C.P. defendant, in the cognizance, set out deeds which made title to part of the lands on which it was Amendment of Pleadings.]—A notice and concharged, as well as the rent-charge itself. Held, sent served on the plaintiit, to allow the defendant that it was not necessary to plead the lease and re- to amend and add new avowries, on the terms of lease as distinct deeds, as the conveyance might be amending the plaintiff's copy, entering the rules to resorted to as grants at common law. Cooper v. plead de novo, and paying to the plaintiff'such costs Hamilton, 4 Ir. L. Rep. 225, C. P.
as might be incurred by him, by reason of the
amendment. Held to be sufficient, without the
RESTITUTION. additional terms of the defendant paying the costs of pleas in bar. Whelan v. Annesley, 4 Ir. L. Rep.
Writ of Restitution.]-See EJECTMENT. 17, C. P.
A writ of restitution will not be granted to a Evidence.]—In replevin it appeared that the cution of the habere, and permits the landlord to
tenant, who lies by for eight months after the exeplaintiff, who was an admirer of paintings
, became repair and re-let the premises, though the latter had acquainted with the defendant, who represented obtained judgment in the ejectment upon entering himself as an artist, and immediately after lent 42 into a consent that he should execute a lease of the paintings from his dwelling-house, for exhibition in premises in question to the tenant for a term of the defendant's lodgings, in order, as it was alleged, three lives. Martin v. Pierce, 9 Ir. L. Rep. 297, Ex. to assist defendant, and also to have them cleaned ; and in about a month afterwards, the plaintiff purchased several paintings through the defendant,
RETURN-See SHERIFF. which were also sent to the same place with the plaintiff's consent. With respect to one painting, REVENUE_See MAGISTRATE. MANDAMUS. it appeared that the plaintiff gave the defendant the money to purchase it ; sent him to buy it; and di A grocer, obtaining the license specified in the 6 rected him to bring it to Nassau-street. The & 7 W. 4, c. 38, s. 3, to retail spirits in quantities, defendant purchased the painting, but did not not less at one time than one pint, and to be conbring it to Nassau-street, but took it to his own sumed elsewhere than in the house or on the prelodgings with the rest of the plaintiff's paintings. mises of such retailer, is liable to the bigher rate of It further appeared, with respect to three others of duty imposed upon retail spirit licenses, by the 2nd the paintings, that when the plaintiff went with the section and schedule 6 Geo. 4, c. 81. Dickson v. sheriff, to point out to him his paintings in the de- Pape, 7 Ir. L. Rep. 74. [Brady, C. B. dissentiente.] fendant's lodgings; these three were missing, and s. C.-Decision reversed. Dickson v. Pape, 1 the defendant said he had sold them ; but upon Ir. L. Rep. 107, Ex. Ch. [Lefroy, B., Richards, search they were discovered removed from the B., Torrens, J., & Pennefather, B., dissentientibus.] room in which the others were, and concealed in The effect of the 6 & 7 W. 4, c. 38, s. 3, is, that the garret of the house. Held, by the whole court, a licensed publican is not entitled to a grocer's lithat with respect to the one painting above men- cense for the sale of coffey, tea, &c., on the same tioned, there was sufficient evidence of a taking premises ; and a person holding a grocer's license, of it by the defendant to go to the jury, and to is not entitled to any other license, for the sale of sustain their finding for the plaintiff on the plea of spirits, but that mentioned in 6 & 7 W. 4, c. 38, non cepit. Reeves v. Morris, 3 Ir. L. Rep. 484, s. 3. M'Kenna v. Pape, 7 Ir. L. Rep. 98, Es. C. Q. B.
The 7th section of the 3 & 4 W. 4, c. 68, applies Where to a declaration in replevin, the defendant to the case of a person applying for a license for pleaded that the goods were the property of A. the first time; and therefore it is necessary that a Held, that A. was not a party to the suit, nor a per- party applying for, and obtaining a license, should son on whose individual behalf the action was de- enter into the bond required by the 7th section, fended, and therefore that he was a competent wit- even though he should have obtained a license, and ness. Kemp v. Mathews, 9 Ir. L. Rep. 405, Q. B. entered into a similar bond in the preceding year.
On an issue in replevin, as to whether a person M Garry v. Pape, 9 Ir. L. Rep. 141, Es. Ch. named Garvin was tenant at a certain period to A. A person who is already a licensed publican, is or B. Garvin, was produced at the trial as a wit- not entitled to a grocer's license since the passing ness, and an attested copy of an affidavit, made by of the 6 & 7 W. 4, c. 38. Reg v.Commissioners of a person of the same name, in a cause in the Court Ercise, 2 Ir. L. Rep. 287, Q. B. of Exchequer, was offered in evidence, in which A. and Co. being brewers, at w., and having the allegations as to facts were different to what two licenses, one authorising them to brew for sale, Garvin swore at the trial. Held, that such attested and another to brew and retail beer, to be concopy was admissible in evidence-proof being sumed elsewhere than on their premises sent a given of the identity of the person, with the person van to C., in charge of a servant, who from it, on who swore the affidavit. Garvin v. Carroll, 10 Ir. their behalf
, sold beer by retail to any person who L. Rep. 323, Q. B. [Perrin, J. dubitante.] offered to buy. Held, that no other license for Costs.]-See Costs.
doing so was required by the 6 & 7 G. 4, c. 81.
Quære, was any license necessary for such a sale. Replevin Bond.]—See Debt. Civil BILL. Steevens v. Strangmans, 1 Ir. Jur. 159, Ex.
Semble-That in cases of serious doubt, as to Setting aside Judgment.]-See PRACTICE.
the construction of statutes, and licences therent
der, the court will be slow to inflict penalties for REPLY
their infringement. 16. Right of:]-See COUNSEL.
Information.]—Where a defendant was arrested
under the 95th section of the 3 & 4 W. 4, c. 53, REPUGNANCE-See PLEADING.
by virtue of a capias, which recited that an information had been exhibited—no information baring been exhibited or filed. Held, that the pro
ceeding was regular. Attorney General v. Kyle, Habeas Corpus.]For the practice as to issuing 8 Ir. L. Rep. 87, Rev. Ex.
an habeas corpus at the revenue side of the ExcheHeld also, that the defendant was not entitled to quer, see The Attorney-generul v. Sullivan, 5 Ir. L. a copy or an inspection of the affidavits, upon Rep. 254, Rev. Ex. which the fiat for the capias was grounded. 16. The appearance in court , mentioned in the 95th defendants having been arrested in a house in which
Notice of Trial, 1 & 2 W. 4, c. 55, s. 19.]-The section, may be made by attorney ; and bail to illicit distillation was then carrying on, and brought answer the forfeitures, may be taken before com- before a magistrate, were then admitted to bail unmissioners appointed by the parties. Ib. An information being exhibited before a magis.
der the 36th section of that Act, to appear on a certrate against two parties, under the 1 & 2 W.4, c.tain day before the petty sessions. On the day fixed 55, for that they did keep a certain inill, and did
for the trial they appeared, and objected that they permit to be received into it certain malt
, the dus were not duly summoned, or any notice of trial for
that day served upon them, in contravention of the adduced to support the information, having proved terms of that statute. The magistrates, admitting that the mill was the property
and kept by one of the objection, dismissed the complaint. Held, that the two parties only, the magistrate dismissed the such summons or notice for trial was not necessary; case. Held, that the information was not supported the decision of the magistrates, and sent the case
and therefore this court, upon certiorari, quashed by the evidence, and that the decision of the back to them to re-hear on the merits. Reg. v. Gilmagistrate was correct. The Queen v. MCullon, 8 Ir. L. Rep. 27, Rev. Ex.
lespie, 9 Ir. L. Rep. 36, Rev. Ex. Under the 19th section of the 1 & 2 W.4,c.55, 7 & 8 Geo. 4, c. 52, s. 1
, and 4 & 5 W. 4, c. 51, an information was exhibited against the defendant s. 6.1-Held, that so much of the 7 & 8 Geo. 4, for having been found in a certain place, where the c. 52, s. 1, as imposed the forfeiture of malt found process of distillation was then carrying on. Held, in an unentered building was impliedly repealed by that the decision of the magistrates dismissing the the above enactments of the latter. Attorney-genecomplaint, on the ground, that the evidence proving ral v. Dunne, 1 Ir. L. Rep357, that the defendant was not seen or arrested in the
When two statutes have the same purview, and place, but was only seen coming
out of a shed at- inflicting different punishments for the same offence, tached to an old house within which the distillation but the latter statute is to be taken as expressing
the punishments are not to be taken as cumulative, was carrying on, and was arrested within a few paces the intention of the Legislature, and therefore, so of the shed, did not sustain the information, was erroneous. On certiorari to this court, that decision far as relates to the punishment, repealing the forwas quashed, and the case sent back to the magis
mer one. Ib. trates to re-hear and decide on the merits. Reg. v. Mullins, 8 Ir. L. Rep. 33, Rev. Ex.
REVERSION. The court quashed the decision of certain magis
Between Landlord and Tenant.]-See Eject. trates, dismissing an information exhibited before
MENT, (LESSOR'S TITLE.) them, under the 19th section of 1 & 2 W. 4, c. 55, against the defendant, for having been found in a certain place wherein the process of illicit distilla REVIVAL-See SCIRE FACIAS. tion was then carrying on-the magistrates erronepusly conceiving that evidence of the defendant
ROMAN CATHOLICS-See MARRIAGE. being found not upon the place, but being seen coming out of it, and pursued and arrested at some
Where by a charter of the reign of Edward I. listance from the place, the officer arresting not perpetual chauntry of one or two chaplains was having during that period lost sight of him, was founded in the church of St. Nicholas in the city of not sufficient to support the information. Reg. v.
Dublin, and leave and license was thereby granted Voran, 8 Ir. L. Rep. 35, Rev. Ex.
to the said chaplain or chaplains, and their succesWhere an information charged that a party did sors to acquire lands, and to the amount of £— inowingly harbour and conceal, and did also per- to hold to them and their successors for ever nit and suffer to be harboured and concealed cer- and leave and license was thereby also granted to ain contraband articles, and the conviction thereon the proctors of the said church for ever, by and with djudged bim guilty of the offence so charged. the assent of the “honest parishioners of said church” leld that this information did not charge two whenever and as often as it should happen that the ffences, and that there was no duplicity in the con- said chaplain or chaplains, or his or their successors, iction. Reg.v.M-Naghten, 8 Ir.L.Rep. 93, Rev. Ex. should die or misbehave themselves, to discharge,
An appeal does not lie under the 7 & 8 Geo. 4, depose, and remove him or them from their service, . 53, s. 82, from a dismissal, by parties at petty and elect and constitute one or more fit persons in essions, of an information brought for a custom's the stead of him or them so removed or deposed from ffence, (under the 3 & 4 W. 4, c. 53, s. 44,) by an time to time for ever. Held, that the Roman Ca. xcise officer, by virtue of the 4 & 5 W.4, cap. 52, tholic parishioners are disqualified at the present 28. Reg. v. M Feely, 7 Ir. L. Rep. 395, Q. B.
day from voting in elections of such chaplain or In revenue cases the court will not grant the or- chaplains. Reg. v. Scott, 3 Ir. L. Rep. 219, Q. B. inary rule that the defendant join in the expense
Semble, that a naturalized Jew might vote in this f the demurrer books or judgment for the plaintiff
. election. Ib. Reg. v. , 1 Ir. Jur. 236, Rev. Ex.
A marriage without the degrees of consanguinity
forbidden by the 33 Hen. 8, c. 6, celebrated between ment that payments of interest were made for and Roman Catholics by a Roman Catholic priest is a on account” of the conusor, and not stating by whora
, valid marriage, sufficient to make a second felony is insufficient. Wigmore v. Wigmore, 1 lr L. Rep
. within the statute of bigamy. Reg.v. Burke, 5 Ir. 103, Q. B. L. Rep. 549, Q. B.
The affidavit of an assignee of a judgment, who Roman Catholics are not admissible to scholar- seeks to revive, must shew by special circumstances ships in Trinity College Dublin. In re Denis c. that it is still unpaid. Holmes v. Gregory, 3 Ir. L. Heron, 9 Ir. L. Rep. 56, n.
Rep. 66, C. P. The certificate of a Roman Catholic clergyman is Upon motion for liberty to issue a Sci. Fa. to not sufficient evidence of the fact of marriage. Far- revive a judgment twenty years old, the affidavits rell v. Maguire, 3 Ir. L. Rep. 187, Q. B.
must state by whom payments of interest have been
made. Crenim v. Stephenson, 2 Ir. L. Rep. 287, SAVINGS' BANK-See CHARGING ORDER.
One of two conusors of a joint judgment being
dead, a sci. fa, may issue to revive it against the sur SCIRE FACIAS-See PLEADING. SHERIFF.
viving conusor, and the heir and terre-tenants of
the deceased conusor. Keegan v. Deakin, 4 Ir. L. STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS.
Rep. 15, C. P. 1. JUDGMENT.
An affidavit for liberty to issue a sci. fa. to reII. RECOGNIZANCE.
vive a judgment, if the judgment be over twenty
years old, should specify the particulars as to the I. JUDGMENT.
payments of interest relied upon. Anonymous, 4 Ir. Issuing Scire Facias.]—Where an arrangement L. Rep. 104, Q. B. had been entered into by a committee consisting of
A scire facias to revive was issued, the judgment several members of a company, for the purpose of being more than twenty years old, it being merely contributing and collecting contributions, in order sworn "that several sums had been paid within the to discharge the debts of the company, the court last thirteen years, on foot of interest." Woodrefused to allow a scire facias to issue, on a judgment rooffe v. Blake, 4 Ir. L. Rep. 417, C. P. obtained, against the public officer of the company,
A judgment may be revived by the personal reby a creditor put forward by such committee, against presentative of the cestui que trust, the personal rea former inember of the company, who was alleged presentative of the person in whom the legal estate to be a member for the time being, but whose name was vested, being out of the jurisdiction. Tastfe did not appear on the registry. Sutherlandv. Hodges, v. Kelly, 4, Ir. L. Rep. 220, C. P. 6 Ir. L. Rep. 292, Q. B.
Scire fucias to revive a judgment of Hilary Tert, The court granted a scire facias to revive a judg. 1807—it was never revived or redocketed; the ment more than twenty years old, although there conusor was entitled for his life to the interest of was nothing to take it out of the statute, except a the sum secured by the judgment, the principal to revivor against the conusor in 1825, and an acknow go upon his death to his issue. The conuzor was ledgment in writing by his wife, written, as the ap- discharged as an insolvent debtor. Held, that the plicant believed, with the sanction and authority of representatives of the conusor were entitled to reher husband. Assignee of Egan v. Joyce, 6 Ir. L. vive Dillon v. Kennedy, 1 Ir. L. Rep. 296, Q. B. Rep. 341, C. P.
On a motion by the assignee of a judgment, for The court issued a scire facias to revive a judg. liberty to issue a sci. fa. to revive, the court disment more than twenty years old, recovered against pensed with the usual affidavit of the original consa personal representative de bonis testatoris, although sor; that the full sum was due on foot of the judg. there had been no payment of principal or interest, ment, at the time of the assignment—it being sworn or acknowledgment in writing within twenty years, that the conusee was bed-ridden, and unable to and nothing to keep it alive except the continuance make an affidavit. Salmon v. Lord Audley, 5 Ir. of a Chancery suit. Gower v. Monks, 6 Ir. L. Rep. L. Rep. 91, C. P. 343, C. P.
The court would not grant liberty to the assignee Where a judgment had been obtained in 1818 by of an assignee of a judgment, to issue a sci fa. to A. against B, and in 1832 a scire facias had been revive it--the original conusee being dead, and the sued ont thereon by the joint administrators of A., first assignee making no affidavit; and the appliwhich scire facias was served, and the rule for judg- cant merely swearing that the judgment was asment entered thereon in January, 1834, and no fur- signed to him in consideration of the sum of £ti, ther proceedings were had on foot of the scire facias, without stating that he had paid anything for it. the court refused to grant liberty to proceed on the Ib. scire facias, and to allow a suggestion to be entered
A judgment of 1719 having been assigned in for that purpose, stating the death of one of the 1839, the conusor and conusee being previously plaintiffs. Roche v. Blake, 6 Ir. L. Rep. 479, Q. B. dead, the court would not issue a sci. fa. to revive
A judgment in scire facias is headed of the term it, on an affidavit which stated that all interest due of which the first writ of scire facias is tested, but on foot of it had been paid up to the preceding is entered on the roll of the term in which the judg. May, without stating anything specific of the pas ment is marked. O'Reilly v. Monaghan, 6 Ir. L. ments previous to the assigninent. Kirwar v. Rep. 507, Ex.
Blake, 5 Ir. L. Rep. 187, C. P. In an affidavit to ground a motion for liberty to The court will not grant an order for liberty to issue a scire facias to revive a judgment, a state issue a sci. fa. to revive a judgment inore than