Page images
PDF
EPUB

599

and should not continue to treat him as a principal. Pratt v. Willey, Page 350 2. If before sending goods by a carrier, the sender applies at his wharf to know at what price certain goods will be carried, and he is told 2s. 6d. per cwt., by a clerk who is transacting the business there, and on the faith of this he sends the goods: the carrier cannot charge more, although it be proved that the carrier had previously ordered his clerks to charge all goods according to a printed book of rates, in which 3s. 6d. per cwt. was set down for goods of the sort in question. Winkfield v. Packington, 3. If a person employed by the administrator of a deceased debtor, to wind up the concerns of the deceased's business, give an undertaking to a creditor of the deceased, to furnish money to meet an acceptance which such creditor has given, in furtherance of an accommodation arrangement for delaying payment, in the hope that funds may be forthcoming, he is liable on such undertaking, though he was merely a clerk, and had no interest in the goods sold by the creditor, and had not received any funds which he could apply to the discharge of the debt. Maud v. Waterhouse,

PRINTER.

579

[blocks in formation]

YY

[blocks in formation]

PROMISSORY NOTE.

1. The declarations of a former holder of a promissory note, payable on demand, made while he was the holder, are not evidence for the defendant in an action by a subsequent holder, unless the note had been presented for payment before such declarations were made. Barough v. White,

8

2. Certain persons, directors of a company, borrowed of certain bankers, for the use of the company, 2000l., for which they gave a joint and several note. Shortly after, at a meeting of the directors, at which one of them was not present, half the money was paid off, and a joint promissory note drawn, to which the signatures of all the directors were obtained. This note, on being tendered to the bankers, was refused; upon which the secretary to the company, who had no general authority, consulted with two

PUBLICATION IN NUMBERS.

of the directors, neither of them being the one who did not attend the meeting, and with their permission added to the note the words jointly and severally :-Held, in an action on the note by the bankers against such one director, that he was not liable, though on being written to for payment, his only reply was, "that from the death of a relation he could not then attend to the subject, but would give it his earliest attention:"-Held also, in the same case, that such one director was not liable upon the original consideration, though he was present when the money was borrowed, it appearing that one of the plaintiffs, the firm being composed of three, was an original holder of shares which had been afterwards sold, and the produce of them paid to another of the plaintiffs. Perring (Bart.) v. Hone, Page 401 PROMOTIONS, 293, 641.

[blocks in formation]

PUBLICATION IN NUMBERS.

If a party agrees to take a work which is to be published in eighteen numbers, at intervals of two months; and after receiving several numbers, refuses to take any more, and also to pay for those which he has had; an action will lie for the price of the latter, and the statute of frauds does not apply, though the original contract was not to be executed within a year, for the law in such case will imply a further contract to pay for each number as it is delivered. Mavor v. Pyne, 91

RECEIVER, &c.

PUBLIC HOUSE.

1. In assumpsit on an agreement to transfer a public house, and assign the licences, the parties binding themselves in a penalty for the performance of the terms; if the vendor could not assign the licences, and the vendee had not the money ready at an appointment to settle the business, the penalty cannot be recovered; but if the vendee has paid the deposit, it may be recovered back. Clarke v. King,

Page 286 2. A check upon a brewer's house is not sufficient in such a case if tendered in payment, though it be proved to be the constant practice to use checks instead of money, in order to prevent robbery, on account of the lateness of the hour at which settlements take place in the transfer of public houses. Ibid.

PUIS DARRIEN CONTINU-
ANCE.

A plea "puis darrien continuance” may be received at Nisi Prius on paper, and need not be transcribed on parchment. Myers v. Taylor,

[blocks in formation]

306

paper in the form of a receipt, if
it is not given in evidence as a re-
ceipt, does not require a stamp.
Brookes v.
Davies,

186 RECEIPT OF THE MASTER OF A SHIP.

See TROVER, 2.

RECEIVER OF STOLEN SECURITIES FOR MONEY. A receiver of stolen securities for money is not punishable as an accessory to the felony under the stat.

SEARCH WARRANT.

3 Geo. 4, c. 24. It is considered that, from its inaccuracy, no conviction can take place on that statute. Rex v. King, Page 412 But see the stat. 7 & 8 Geo. 4, c. 29.

RECOGNIZANCE.

If a recognizance be estreated at the Quarter Sessions, and a writ issue to the sheriff to levy under the stat. 3 Geo. 4, c. 46, and the sheriff levy the amount; the Court of Quarter Sessions has the power to mitigate the amount, although the money has been actually levied, and the sheriff must pay back the difference to the party. Whether on such a levy the sheriff is entitled to poundage-Quære. Haynes v. Hayton,

621

REGISTRY OF DEEDS. An examined copy of the registration of a deed, in the registry of the county of Middlesex, is admissible as secondary evidence of its contents. Doe d. Ubele v. Kilner, 289

RENT.

See DOUBLE RENT, 1.-SHERIFF, 1, 2.

REPAIRS.

See AGREEMENT, 3.

REPLEVIN.

In replevin, if the defendant avow for

rent in arrear, and the plaintiff replies non tenuit, on which issue is joined; if the plaintiff does not appear by himself or his counsel to open the pleadings, he may be nonsuited, though it is the defendant's record. Symes v. Larby, 358

SCHOOLMASTER.

See FRAUDS, STATUTE OF, 1.

SCRIP RECEIPTS.

See JOINT STOCK COMPANY, 2.

SEARCH WARRANT.

See BANKRUPT, 15.

SERVICE LOSS OF. 675

SECRETARY.

See JOINT STOCK COMPANY, 3.

SECURITIES.

See EMBEZZLEMENT, 1.

SEDUCTION.

In trespass for seducing the plaintiff's niece and servant, per quod servitium amisit, evidence that the party seduced (being about sixteen years of age) occasionally assisted in the household work, no servant being kept in the family, is sufficient to constitute the relation of master and servant between the uncle and niece; and such relation is not destroyed by the circumstance of the niece being entitled on her coming of age to a sum of nearly 500l., of which the interest is applied in the mean time for her benefit. Proof in such case that the niece, after her seduction and abandonment by the defendant, returned to her uncle's house, where she continued some time in a state of great agitation, and received medical attendance, and was obliged to be watched lest she should do herself some injury, is sufficient to raise the presumption of that loss of service by the uncle which is necessary to maintain the action. Manvell v. Thomson, Page 303

SERJEANTS' INN, FLEET
STREET.

The occupiers of houses in Serjeants' Inn, Fleet Street, are not liable to pay poor's rates to the parish of St. Dunstan in the West. King v. Butterworth, 391

SERVICE OF NOTICE.

See NOTICE, 3.

SERVICE, LOSS OF.

See SEDUCTION.

If the plaintiff's son, who was in fact

[blocks in formation]

1. If the attorney for an execution creditor, on being informed of a claim by the landlord, for rent, direct the sheriff's officer to withdraw the execution, and he do so, and the plaintiff sue out a ca. sa. for the debt, such execution creditor cannot bring an action against the sheriff, for falsely returning to the fi. fa. that so much rent was due, and he will not be entitled to recover, though he shew that the supposed landlord had not a right to the rent claimed, and that the attorney, at the time he directed the officer to withdraw the execution, did not know what the landlord's title was. Stuart v. Whittaker, 100 2. If an agreement for the assignment of a piece of ground, on payment of a sum of 1260l. contain a clause that the party agreeing to take the assignment shall pay and allow at the rate of 100l. per annum, from the time of taking possession, till the completion of the purchase, in equal half-yearly payments, a sheriff, on a writ of fi. fa., has a right, under such clause, to treat the 100l. as rent, and deduct it out of the proceeds of the execution. Saunders v. Musgrave, (Bart).

294, Addenda, ix.

[blocks in formation]

See DEMURRAGE.-MONEY HAD AND RECEIVED, 1.—MORTGAGE OF SHIP, 1. 1. If in a case where (there being no charter party) the captain of a ship delivers the cargo, and as the best thing he can do for all parties, under the existing circumstances, takes a bill of the agent of the persons to whom the cargo on board belongs, for the amount of the freight: this does not discharge the owners of the cargo, but they are liable for the freight, if the bill be dishonoured; but if it appear that he might have had his money of the agent, and chose to take the bill, it is otherwise. Strong v. Hart,

55

2. By a charter party, on a voyage from Liverpool to the West Indies, and from thence to London or Liverpool, it is agreed, that a brig "shall be made, and during the voyage kept tight, staunch, &c. at the owner's expense, and that the freighter shall pay freight at the rate of 2001. per month, for any time (beyond six months) that she may be employed, the pay to commence from the day of sailing, till her arrival into dock at the homeward port of discharge." The vessel was obliged to remain twentyeight days at St. Domingo, for the purposes of repair, the repairs being done at the expense of the owner: -Held, that during those twentyeight days the vessel was employed

by the freighter, within the terms of the charter party. Ripley v. Scaife, Page 132 3. If by some mistake of a ship's manifest, a suit is commenced in a foreign port against the captain, for a supposed surreptitious landing of a part of his cargo, by which he is delayed in prosecuting his voyage, there being no suit against the ship: This is not a loss on which the underwriters on the ship are liable. Bradford v. Levy, Page 137 4. If one execute a ship's articles, to serve on board as an able seaman, at certain wages, and when on board act as a cuddy servant, if there be no express agreement that he shall receive separate wages as a cuddy servant, he can maintain no action against the captain for wages in that capacity. Whether he could, if there were an express agreement, Quære? Dafter v. Cresswell,

SIGNATURE.

161

The

1. A person after he became a bankrupt, and before he had his cergot tificate, called at the office of his attorney, to whom he was indebted, and wrote there (the attorney not being at home) a letter promising to pay him a sum of 100l. only signature was a flourish of the pen, which, it was contended by the plaintiff, formed the letter M. the initial letter of the defendant's name: Held that if it was an M. it was not a sufficient signature under the statute 6 Geo. 4, c. 16, s. 131. Semble, that if such a letter be without date the time it was written cannot be proved by parol evidence. Hubert v. Moreau,

SLANDER.

See ALLEGATION, 3.

528

1. Action lies against a person for saying of an inn and tavern keeper,

[blocks in formation]

44

1. A receipt given by the stage manager of a theatre, "in satisfaction of all my claims for the last season," does not require the stamp of a receipt in full of all demands. Dibdin v. Morris, 2. A receipt for 521. 10s. requires only a stamp for that amount, though it mentions 100l. paid before. Ibid. 3. A bond for foreign stock, signed in Paris, but issued in England, does not require an English stamp. Yrisarri v. Clement, 223 4. If an instrument has been originally unstamped, but has been stamped on payment of the penalty, it is admissible in evidence, though the receipt for the penalty has been erased, provided it be proved that such receipt had been indorsed on it. It is not necessary to prove the commissioner's signature to such

« EelmineJätka »