Page images

The effect of the
Verdict and Judg.


compensation cases are subject to no further inquiry or supervision, provided the sheriff had jurisdiction to enter upon the inquiry, and there was no malversation on the part of the presiding officer.

The importance of the subject seems to justify a few further observations on the effect of the language which is retained in the Lands Clauses Consolidation Act, i.e. that the verdict and judgment, when signed, “ shall be deemed records.” The learned judges appear to have felt considerable difficulty in putting a construction on the statute which first introduced this novel provision (k).

In an early case (1), an application was made to compel a company, by mandamus, to pay the amount of compensation, where the verdict and judgment had been duly inrolled at the sessions; and it was contended that the remedy was on the record, and that a writ of mandamus was therefore inapplicable. Patteson, J., observes, “If there be a specific remedy for this sum, we cannot grant the mandamus. Now, the court of quarter sessions is to give judgment for the sum assessed by the jury, which judgment is to be conclusive; and the clerk of the peace is to sign the verdicts and judgments, which are to be registered and to become records. It seemed to me, at first, that, if these were judgments of record, they might be enforced like judg

(k) By some of the earlier statutes Do conveyance appears to have been necessary to vest lands in a company, after the compensation was assessed, and the inquisition recorded with the clerk of the peace. See Bruce v. Willis, 11 A. & E. 463. By other statates the conveyances of the lands were required to be enrolled at the sessions ; R. v. The Leeds and Liver. pool Canal Company, Id. 316; but


under the provisions of the 8 Vict,
c. 18, the legal title of the Company
to the lands taken under the com-
pulsory powers, does not seem to be
complete, until a conveyance has been
executed. See sect. 75, post, App.,

(1) R. v. The Nottingham Old
Waterworks Company, 6 A. & E.

The effect of the Verdict and Judg


[ocr errors]

ments of other courts, by the process of the court itself, if it had any process proper for the purpose, and, if not, by action of debt. But, on looking to the act, I doubt whether such a consequence can be admitted. These are not the ordinary records of the quarter sessions; and I never heard of an action on a record of this sort.”

And the same learned Judge, in a subsequent case (m), says, “As to what fell from me during the argument in the present case, respecting the effect of the inquisition, considered as a judgment, I merely wished to inquire whether, if it have the effect of a judgment of a court of record, error would not lie, and a certiorari be excluded. But I think that, in fact, this cannot be considered as a judgment. The section is drawn very loosely; but it does not, as far as I can understand it, give these proceedings an effect analogous to that of judgments of a court of record.”

So, the late learned Littledale, J., says, in another case (n), “ It is said, that, because this inquisition is to be kept among the records of the quarter sessions, it ought, as the record of an inferior court, to set forth everything which was necessary to give jurisdiction. But the enactment is merely directory, that the judgment, having been given, shall be kept among the records of sessions; and, as to the judgment itself, nothing is prescribed, except that the jury shall ascertain the sum to be paid for purchase or recompense, and the justices shall accordingly give judgment for such purchasemoney or recompense so to be assessed.”

It therefore appears that the inrolment of the verdicts and judgments with the clerk of the peace does not clothe them with the character of records for all purposes.

(m) R. v. The Manchester and Leeds Railway Company, 8 A. & E. 428.

(n) R. v. The Trustees of Swansea Harbour, 8 A. & E. 448 ; S. C., I Per. & D. 512.

Verdict und Judg


In a subsequent case (o), it was, however, said, by Lord The effect of the Denman, C. J., and Patteson, J., that the effect of the record of the inquisition and judgment would be to operate as a conclusive bar in any action which might be brought to recover the lands.

The reader will observe, that in all the foregoing cases the special act provided that the verdict and judgment “ should be binding and conclusive to all intents and purposes ;" and that, when deposited with the clerk of the peace, they should be deemed records “to all intents and purposes whatsoever.” As these words are omitted in the 8 Vict. c. 18, a strong inference seems to arise that the Legislature did not intend that the verdicts and judgments, when inrolled, should of themselves be binding or conclusive (p); or that they are to be deemed records in the ordinary sense of the term; and it is submitted that the language used in the 8 Vict. c. 18, will be sufficiently carried into effect, if it be construed to mean that the verdict and judgment, when inrolled, shall be deemed the faithful record of the proceedings which actually took place before the sheriff.

Having thus shewn how the inquiry before the sheriff on the mode of is to be conducted, and suggested the various modes of awarded as com


(0) R. v. The Sheffield Railway & G. 219, the counsel for the plainCompany, 11 A. & E. 194. But see tiff do not appear to have relied upon also the dictum of Littledale, J., in the demurrer to the fourth plea, on R. ». The Bristol and Exeter Rail. the ground that no proof except the ray Co., 11 A. & E. 204. It is also record could be given. worthy of remark, that, in Doe d. (p) It has already been remarked Payne v. The Bristol and Exeter that the statute requires a conveyance Railway Co., 6 Mee. & W. 320, to be made to perfect the title of the the counsel for the defendants did not Company to lands taken under the contend that the inquisition was final; compulsory powers of the act. See and in Corrigal v. The London and note (k), ante, 321. Blackwall Railway Company, 5 Man.

awarded as Com


The modelen met correcting any irregularity which may have arisen in the

course of the proceedings, we will now suppose that the question as to the amount of the compensation has been finally decided, and that nothing remains but to recover it from the company. We shall therefore proceed to consider what remedies are open to the party entitled to receive the money awarded by the verdict of the jury.

This question was very much discussed in the courts of law when it first became necessary to provide a remedy to recover compensation, under some of the earlier special railway acts. Some of these acts were altogether silent as to the mode in which the money awarded should be recovered. In other instances it was enacted, as has been already shewn(), that the inquisition, verdict, and judgment should be inrolled by the clerk of the peace, and should be deemed records to all intents and purposes. The question soon arose, whether the proper mode of recovering money awarded as compensation was by action of debt-on the case—or debt upon

the statute, or by an action of debt as upon a judgment of record, -or whether the only remedy was by indictment. All these modes of proceeding were suggested in an early case, as an answer to an application made for a mandamus to compel a company to pay a sum of money awarded as compensation. The Court of Queen's Bench, without determining that one or more of the above remedies might not exist, determined, that, in the absence of any other clear remedy, they ought to issue a mandamus; and this was the mode of proceeding usually adopted to enforce the payment of compensation-money (s).

But the Court of Common Pleas has recently decided

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors]

awarded us Com


that an action of debt may be brought on an inquisi- The mode fra

of rotion and verdict, and this proceeding will, it appears, for the future supersede the old remedy by mandamus (t): and it seems that a count may be added in the declaration, to recover any costs attending the inquiry, which the party may be entitled to receive (u). A more summary remedy is, however, provided by the statute to obtain the costs; inasmuch as they are made recoverable from the company by distress, if not paid within seven days after demand (x). The company may also retain any costs to which they are entitled, out of the compensation-money awarded, or recover any excess by distress (y).

Parties who have taken bonds from the company before they were permitted to enter upon lands (2), are also possessed of a speedy and effectual mode of recovering the compensation awarded to them.


VI. Although, as it has been shewn (a), the 8 Vict. c. 18, On the payment enables tenants for life, and other persons under various dis- the compensation abilities, to sell and convey lands to a railway company, such parties are not entitled to take the purchase-money or compensation awarded or paid for the purchase of such lands, or for permanent damage thereto, for their own use, but it must be re-invested for the benefit of the parties interested in the lands. The following are the provisions of the statute on this subject :

If the purchase-money or compensation which shall be

(1) Corrigal v. The London and Blackwall Railway Company, 5 Man. & G. 219; and see R. v. The Hull and Selby Railway Company, 6 Q. B. 70; Williams v. Jones, 13 M. & W. 628.

(u) When it is necessary first to ascertain the amount of the costs,

see R. v. The London and Black. wall Railway Company, 3 Dowl. & L. 399.

(r) 8 Vict. c. 18, s. 53, post, App., 128.

(y) Ibid.
(z) See ante, 164, 172.
(a) Ante, 147.

« EelmineJätka »