See RECOVERY, 1, 2, 8. WRIT OF RIGHT.
Where the affidavit to hold to bail named
five defendants, separate bailable process 2.
was issued against one, and a bail-piece
taken, in which he alone was named;
afterwards, serviceable process was is-
sued against the other four, who were not
named in the bailable process; the dec-
laration was against all five; the court
permitted the plaintiff to amend the bail
recognizance, by inserting the names of
VOL. VIII.-78
3 F 2

the four defendants who had been at first
omitted. Christie v. Walker et al.

ANNUITY.

206

By 53 Geo. 3. c. 141. it is enacted, that
within thirty days after the execution of
every deed, &c., whereby any annuity
or rent-charge shall, from and after the
passing of the said act, be granted for life
or lives, a memorial of the date of every
such deed, &c., of the names of all the
parties, and all the witnesses thereto, and
of the person or persons for whose life or
lives such annuity or rent-charge shall be
granted, and of the person or persons by
whom the same is to be beneficially re-
ceived, shall be enrolled in chancery, in
the form or to the effect therein exempli-
fied, with such alterations as the nature
and circumstances of any particular case
may reasonably require; and in a sched-
ule, the following directions are given as
to the mode of describing the witnesses
in the memorial: at the head of one of
several columns, which are to contain the
substance of the deeds, stand the words,
"names of witnesses;" and underneath,
as applicable to indentures of lease and
release, the letters and words, "E. F.
of, G. H. of—;" and, as applica-
ble to a bond and warrant of attorney to
confess judgment, the letters " E. F., G.
H." Where the witnesses to the deeds
were attorneys' clerks: Held, that they
were sufficiently described in the memo-
rial, as clerks to E. H.., (their employer,)
of B., (the employer's residence.) St.
John v. Champneys.

77

An annuity being in arrear, and the rents
of an estate on which it was secured
being unpaid, the trustee of the estate,
who had negotiated the annuity between
the grantor and grantee, having advanced
a sum to the grantee in anticipation of
the coming rents, and having received
from the grantee, on this advance, the
commission which he usually received
(617)

premises which he had wrongfully!
damaged, it was referred to a barrister to
settle what sum should be paid in lieu
of his doing this. The defendant's attor-
ney produced no witnesses at the first
meeting, under the arbitration, of which

ASSIGNEE.

See INSOLVENT DEBTOR, 2.

ATTACHMENT.

See PRACTICE, 20 & 24.

a party for non-performance of an award
which has been made a rule of court,
though he reside out of the jurisdiction
of the court. Hepcraft v. Fermor.

378

ing before he was to leave London for the
Circuit: on the morning of that day, de-
fendant's attorney called on the arbitrator,
and left an affidavit, stating that one of
the two surveyors was confined to his
bed, and the other gone to France. The
arbitrator suggested, that other surveyors
were equally capable of making an esti-
mate for the defendant, and offered if the
defendant's attorney would name a day
to come to London to hear them, or the
two first proposed; the attorney refused
to name a day, or procure another sur-
veyor, although another surveyor and a
carpenter had attended the trial of the
cause on defendant's behalf. The arbi-
trator then gave the defendant's attorney
notice he should make his award, if re-
quired by the plaintiff; and being re-
quired, awarded a sum to be paid to the
plaintiff.

The defendant's attorney swearing he un-
derstood the arbitrator meant to have
called another meeting, the court set
aside the award, though no objection was
made to the amount awarded; leaving,
however, the plaintiff at liberty to enforce
the defendant's agreement to enter into
the rule of nisi prius for the reinstating
the premises. Dodington v. Hudson.

ARREST.

384

ATTORNEY.
See COSTS, 1.

ing a suit in which the party charged
has not had the benefit of the attorney's
judgment and superintendance. There-
fore, where, in an action on an attorney's
bill, it appeared that the plaintiff lived at
D., five miles from W., and applied to J.
B. (who resided at W., and who had been
a clerk of the plaintiff, and practised in
his name,) to carry on the suit in ques-
tion, for which the bill was incurred; J.
B. carried on the suit, and it did not ap-
pear that the defendant ever saw the
plaintiff, or had the benefit of his judg
ment; the business done at the office at
W. was for J. B.'s benefit, except one-
third, which the plaintiff received for
coming over once a week to show his
face; plaintiff's name was not on the
door at W., nor was it employed by J. B.
in soliciting business; but J. B. fre-
quently consulted with plaintiff; drafts
were sometimes engrossed at D. for the
office at W.; the draft of the brief which
J. B. had carried on for defendant was
in the hand-writing of plaintiff, as well
as some items in J. B.'s books touching
that suit; the defendant, when applied to,
admitted the sum claimed, but required
to set off a sum due to him from J. B.,
which was refused:

Held, that a nonsuit, directed by the judge
who tried the cause, was proper. Hop-
kinson v. Smith.

13

The court will not call upon an attorney
summarily to answer the matters of an
affidavit charging him with an indictable
offence, but will leave the parties com-
plaining to their indictment for the of
fence. Short v. Pratt.
102

5. The court will not proceed summarily

against an attorney on an affidavit charg-
ing him with an indictable offence. In
the Matter of Hall & Knight.

142
6. The court refused to strike an attorney
off the rolls on the ground that he had
not served a regular clerkship, and had
misconducted himself previously to ad-
mission. In the Matter of Page. 160

B.

BAIL.

1. The principal offered to surrender on 2.
the 13th of May, but the plaintiff gave
him time, and dispensed with the surren-
der, on an understanding that the bail
should continue liable. On the 11th June
the bail, ignorant that the defendant had
offered to surrender, signed an agree-
ment to continue liable; the principal
always declaring himself ready to sur-
render; but in Trinity vacation the plan-
tiff, without notice, issued proceedings
against the bail, returnable in Michaelmas
term. On the 29th of October the princi-
pal obtained his certificate under a com-
mission of bankruptcy: Held, that the
bail were discharged. West v. Ashdown
& Palfrey.

165

2. Excuse for non-attendance of bail: what 3.
sufficient. In the Matter of Well's bail.

359

145

A commission of bankrupt was sued out
against the plaintiff in April, and super-
seded the 2d of August. A second com-
mission was sued out on the 7th of
August, on the same act of bankruptcy,
under which the plaintiff obtained his
certificate. Plaintiff sued defendants'
commissioners under the first commis-
sion, for an alleged wrongful imprison-
ment; they entered up judgment of non-
suit against him in July, and afterwards
charged him in execution for costs:
Held, that the defendants might have
proved their debt under the second com-
mission, and that plaintiff was entitled
to be discharged from it under his
A bankrupt having promised, after his
certificate. Holding v. Impey et al. 189
bankruptcy, and before certificate, to pay
a debt due before the bankruptcy, in-
dorsed to the plaintiff two promissory
notes for that purpose: Held, that his
certificate was no bar to an action on
these notes. Brix v. Braham.
Bankruptcy and certificate are no dis-
charge to a bond given under 4 Geo. 3.
c. 33, by a trading member of parliament,
where the judgment in the suit in which
the bond was given, is obtained after the
bankruptcy, though before certificate.
Campbell v. Jameson et al.
320

281

BARON AND FEME.

See EVIDENCE, 6.

413

1. Defendants, who had a lien on C.'s ship,

received from C., then lying in prison,
the balance due to them on account of
disbursements made on the ship, and
they then delivered up the ship's papers |
to C. C. having become a bankrupt a
fortnight after this payment, (the im-

court would not upon a summary appli
cation, cancel the bail-bond, and permit
the defendant to file a common appear-
ance, where much of the debt sued for
was contracted before the defendant dis-
closed her coverture, where she acted
with great duplicity in eluding payment,

after the death of the testator, accounted
with the plaintiffs, as executors, concern
ing a sum of money due from the defend-
ant to the plaintiffs as executors, and
that the defendant, upon that account,
being found indebted to them as execu-
tors promised them as executors to
pay:

Held, that it appeared on this count, that
the plaintiffs might have sued in their
own right; and that, therefore, upon
nonsuit, they were liable to costs. Jones
et al., Executors v. Jones.
249

8. Where the plaintiff in an action on a
marine policy of insurance, recovered
for an average loss, obtained a new trial,
the costs of the first trial being directed
to abide the event, and at the second
trial recovered again for no more than
an average loss: Held, that he was en-
titled to the costs of one trial only, and
the defendant to the costs of neither.
Hudson et al. v. Majoribanks.

393
9. An arbitrator to whom it was referred
to certify what verdict should be entered
up, certified for the plaintiff, and orally
communicated to the parties, that each
should pay his own costs of the refer
ence; which was acceded to by them.
The cause having been referred back to
the arbitrator, he certified in the same
way a second time, but omitted to give
any direction as to the costs of the second
reference: Held, that the plaintiff was
entitled to those costs. Mackintosh v.
Blyth.

269

10. Where the costs in the cause are
adjudged to the defendant, and to the
plaintiff costs on the issues found for him,
the costs of the issues, except in replevin,
include only the costs of pleadings.
Othir v. Calvert.

COUNTY COURT.

275.

debt for treble value of tithes. Bale v.
Hodgetts.
182

3. In finding the treble value, the jury in
effect find the single value also. 182

4. If the jury omit to find costs, the court
may, where the plaintiff is entitled to

first part, S. F., junior, of the second
part, and J. H. H. of the third part, it was
agreed, that S. F. senior, should retire
from business, and S. F., junior, and J.
H. H. became partners; that the capital
employed should be 36,000l., 24,000l. of
which S. F. senior, should advance for
S. F. junior, and 12,000l. was to be ad-
vanced by J. H. H. The deed then pro-
ceeded, "And whereas an account of all
the debts of S. F. senior, in his business
of merchant, has been this day taken,
and the balance in his favor amounts to
38,0331. and whereas it has been agreed by
and between S. F. senior, S. F., junior and