Page images
PDF
EPUB

LAW IN ROmance.

Supreme Court of Massachusetts, while they novels on the shelves, has amused vast quanadmit that the alterations may be of such a tities of readers, and will not, we surmise, corcharacter that the party claiming under the rupt the ancient fountains to any very alarmdeed may rest on the paper itself, deny that ing extent. there is any presumption of law that the alte- Worth noticing as another good fiction, with rations were made either before or after. Lord a plot turning on law, is George Eliot's last Campbell, on the other hand, thinks there is novel, “Felix Holt, the Radical." Were this a presumption that they were made before the the title of an American novel of the present execution, because the presumption always year, one might expect, if told there was law is against fraud ; so there can be no doubt that

in it, to read some profound constitutional disthe question is for the jury, and that the turn-cussion, and to find some new and startling, if ing-point of this famous novel is bad law. We not very bad, law laid down; but, as the work are told, with much circumstance, that a rule was written on the other side of the water, we to show cause was obtained, and that, after simply have before us a point of old real-estate solemn argument, the ruling of the chief jus- law, which might well have found its place in tice was sustained in banc; but this only the Year-Books. The law in “Felix Holt," makes the matter worse.

not stated in precise legal phrase, is this : John There is much more of legal matter that is Justus Transome, being the owner of certain entertaining in the book. The legal charac- estates a hundred years before the commenceters are well described, the legal jokes told ment of the story, made a conveyance, " entailwith gusto; and there is scarce a page on ing them, while in his possession, on his son which some reference is not made to deeds, Thomas and his heirs male, * with remainder courts, or conveyancing. We must content to the Bycliffes in fee." His son Thomas, “a ourselves with copying the description of Mr. prodigal,” in his father's lifetime and without Weasel, a celebrated pleader :-

his father's consent, conveyed his interest to

a cousin named Durfey, a lawyer, who appears “ He was a ravenous lawyer, darting at the point and pith of every case he was concerned in,

to have entered upon the death of John Justus, and sticking to it just as would his bloodthirsty

the father, and assumed the name of Transome. namesake at the neck of a rabbit. In law he

One of the descendants of this Durfey, Harold lived, moved, and had his being. In his dreams, Transome, being in possession, the plot turns he was everlastingly spinning out pleadings which upon the discovery of an heir of the Bycliffes, he never could understand, and hunting for cases the remainder men, in the person of the herowhich he could not discover. In the daytime, ine. The theory of the novel is this: that the however, he was more successful. In fact, every ancient Durfey received a “base fee" from thing he saw, heard, or read of, wherever he was, Thomas Transome, which would continue as whatever he was doing, suggested to him ques. | long as the male line of Transomes existed ; tions of law that might arise out of it. At his

but that upon this stock becoming extinct, sister's wedding (whither he had not gone with.

the estate would become the property of the out reluctance), he got into a wrangle with the bridegroom, on a question started by himself, Bycliffes, the remainder men, if any existed. whether an infant was liable for goods supplied

It will be remembered that one of the legal to his wife before marriage; at his grandmother's points in " Ten Thousand a Year” was somefuneral, he got into an intricate discussion with a what similar to this. The question was wheproctor about bona notabilia, with reference to a ther an heir, in the lifetime of his ancestor, pair of horn epectacles, which the venerable de- had power to convey away his expectancy so ceased had left behind her in Scotland, and a as to bind himself, and those claiming under poodle in the Isle of Man; and, at church, the him, by estoppel, on the subsequent descent reading of the Parable of the Unjust Steward set of the estate. This, it will be remembered, his devout, ingenious, and fertile mind at work

was decided in the negative ; and it was there for the remainder of the service as to the modes assumed that a conveyance made by the goodof stating the case now-a-days against the offender, and whether it would be more advisable to pro

for-nauglit Harry Dredlington, in the lifetime

of his father, would not bind his heirs. In ceed civilly or criminally, and, if the former, at law or in equity.”

“Felix Holt," on the contrary, it is taken for

granted, that a conveyance made by the equally With this we must dismiss “ Ten Thousand good-for-naught Thomas Transome, in the lifea Year” without reference to more of its law, time of his father, would pass the estate as except to say, that it turns out that the mother against the heirs. The subject is an intricate of T. Titmarsh, Esq , was already feme corert one, and depends in some measure on the warwhen she espoused his father. Consequently, ranties in the deeds.† It is very fully discussed that gentleman, after going through a variety in the note to Doey. Oliver, in Smith's “Leadof entertaining adventures, spending many ing Cases,” to which more curious readers thousand pounds, becoming a member of the may refer. The case in “Felix Holt" is, how. House, and marrying an earl's daughter, re- ever, clearly distinguishable from that in “Ten verts to his former obscurity; and being knock- Thousand á Year. In the latter case, it was ed on the head in the futile attempt to recover a loan from an Irish baronet, ends his days

* “Of bis body," probably, as otherwise the estate of

Thomas would be a fee simple (Litt. & 31), and the remainpeacefully in an asylum. Thus Mr. Warren's mistake in law makes one of the cleverest † Co. Litt. 265 &. 2 Washburn on real property, 464.

der over void.

LAW in Romance --THE QUEEN EX REL. Mack v. MANNING.

[Elec Cases.

the heir (so to speak, though “nemo est hares and what not, until we were rather tired of viventis") who made the conveyance in the their reverend society. This makes an aclife of his ancestor, the tenant in fee. In quaintance with the bench and bar an gree" Felix Holt," it was the remainder man in tail able change. Mr. Trollope, with his cabinetwho conveyed, living the tenant for life. By painting style and niceness of touch, gives us presuming, therefore, that Mr. Dursey per- all varieties of the profession, in court and suaded the prodigal to have recourse to that out; and we would fain linger longer to say a very convenient but absurd fiction of the an- word of our new professional friends. cient law, the levying of a fine on the estate

(To be continued.) tail (and as Mr. Durfey was a lawyer, this is highly probable), Miss Evans will be found to have all the authorities in her favour, even THE ACTION OF MANDAMUS. though the prodigal had nothing in the land

The case of Fotherby v. The Metropolitan when he levied the fine. It is not likely the fair authoress looked into the black-letter

Railway Company, which is reported by us

this week (15 L. T. Rep. N. S. 243), decides Reports of Sir William Jones, Chevalier,”

the point that a mandamus may be claimed “De Divers Special Cases Cy bien in le Court

wholly apart from an action. The section of de Banck Le Roy Come le Common Banck in

the C. L. P. A. 1854, upon which the question Angleterre," and perhaps not even in Coke's

rests, is the 68th, which says that the plaintiff "Reports," or in Blackstone's “Commenta

in any action in any of the superior courts, ries ;" but, for all that, we think her law on

with certain exceptions, may endorse upon this ancient and abstruse point safe to stand the test of examination.* Had the conveyance

the writ, &c., a notice that the plaintiff intends

to claim a writ of mandamus, and the plainbeen by bargain and sale, or by lease and re

tiff may thereupon claim in the declaration, lease, or covenant to stand seised, the issue of

either together with any other demand which Thomas Transome, might have avoided his

may now be enforced in such action, or separ. conveyance by entry; but the “lawyer cousin”

ately, a writ of mandamus &c. The successprobably knew of the case of Machell v. Clarke,

ful contention in the case was, that an action 2 Lord Raym. 778, and took the wiser course

will lie to compel a man to do his duty, even of the fine.

though there be no action at common law for One more of these law-novels certainly claims

the neglect of that duty, i. e., that the statute notice, Mr. Trollope's recent story, "Orley

creates a new action for mandamus, which is Farm." The author frankly says, in his first

ex debito justitiæ. Erle, C. J., decided that paragraph, that, did he think' his rose by

the word separately, in the section, settled the another name would smell as sweet, he should

matter. The right to a writ of mandamus is call his story “The Great Orley Farm Case.'

substantive, not adjective to an action. There We plunge into court on the frst page, and

are some clear judgments on the point in leave it only to ascend barristers' stairs for

Norris v. The Irish Land Company, 8 E. consultations, to linger in attorneys' offices,

& B. 512; and 27 L. J. 115, Q. B. Law and to go into the country to search for wit

Times. nesses, until the concluding chapters bring us again before the judge and jury. What of social life is described is at judges' country. UPPER CANADA REPORTS. seats and barristers' town houses. The hero is rising at the bar; the heroine, a daughter of the ermine. Thus we have no stint of law,

ELECTION CASES. and, in spite of all, a most delightful and enter

(Reported by HENRY O'Brien, Esq., Barrister at-Law and taining novel. Mr. Trollope's sojourn among

Ropster in Pra: tice Court and Chambers.) professional men has hitherto been chiefly confired to the clerical order. We have dined

THE QUEEN EX REL. Mack V8. MANNING among bishops and deans, and listened to the controversies of rectors, curates, prebends,

Municipal Act of 1867, sec 73—Disqualificatim-Lensee of

Corporation-Defendanl having claim aguinst Corporalium

assigned before election. Cut fine leive per l'issue en tayle en vie (n'aiant oucun Section 73 of 29. 30 Vic., cap. 51, came into force on tho lst estote) si soit al un que n'a riens en le terre va silment per January. 1867. voy de comclusion vprx le issure et ses lineall issues et vers touts “Di qualification” is pot included in this act in "Qualis. aux queux veign ont en le post.

cation." Godfrey v Wade Term Trin. And XXI. Jac. Reg. in Com Where a lease, which was for twenty-one years, was origi movi Banco. Sir W. Jones's Rep. 31, 33. 8. C. Hobart, nally madu to a tbird person for the benefit of the bene433, a.

ficial lessee, and afterwards. during the term, it was “Apd. on these two cases of the Lord Zonch and Archer, surrendered, and a new lease made directly to the benefiit follows that is the grandfather be tenant in tail, and his

fcial lussee for the remainder of the term, which was for father in bis lite, haux bothing in the land, leries a five less than twenty-one years. it was her that, looking at with proclamations, and afterwards the grandfather dies, the real nature of the transaction, the l-asee was not and after wards the father dies, that this fine shall bind the

dispunjfied from being a member of th- Corporation. kon." 3 Rep. 90 b.

A claim y the defendunt against the Corporation, bmâ fide * A fine by tenant in tail does not affect subsequent re. arsigned to a third party, befure the election does not mainders. hut creates a base or qualified fre, determinablo disquality. upon the frilure of the issue of ih, person to whom ihe

(Com. Law Chambers, Varch 10, 1867 ] estate was granted In tail. upon whirb event the remainder man m y euter." Christiau's note to Blackstone's Comm.

J. A. Boyd obtained a writ in the pature of a vol. iii. c. 21.

quo warrunto on the 1st February last, on the relia.

[ocr errors]

Elec. Cases.)

The QUEEN EX REL. Mack v. Manning.

[Elec. Cases.

66

tion of William Mack, calling upon the defendant, leases were made, that Whittemore was merely Alexander Manning, to shew by what authority a trustee for Manning, and he corroborated the he claimed to exercise and enjoy the office of recitals inentioned in the second lease, that after alderman of the ward of St. Lawrence, in the city the death of Whittemore, be drew the lease for of Toronto; the relator complaining that the de- 17 years, which he stated was only intended to fendant was disqualified to be elected at the elec. confirm to Manning the term of 21 years, and tion held in January last.

rights of renewals. The grounds alleged against Mr. Manning Mr. Manning swore that the lease to Whittewere : 1st. That at the time of the said election more was made to Whittemore for his, the defenhe was a lessee of the Corporation of the city of dant's benefit, and that he was, from the first, Toronto for a term of 17 years, and for another the beneficial lessee for the term of 21 years, term of 21 years, in certain leases of premises and that the lease to bimself was made under belonging to the said city. 2. That said Man- the circumstances therein recited. piog, at such time, had a claim against such Cor- Robt. A. Harrison sbewed cause. poration for services rendered by bim as arbitra- The relator is not quilified as sich. He qualitor or valuator in their behalf.

fies on an Orange ball, of which he is merely It appeared from the affi lavits filed, that the care-taker and not a tenant, having such intedefendant was lessee of certain premises in the

rest as would entitle him to vote, and the locus city of Toronto, of property belonging to the city,

standi vf the relator may be questioned in quo onder a lense dated 26th January, 1864, made warranto proceedings: Regina er rel Shaw v. Mcby the Corporation to the defendant for a term

Kenzie, 2 U 0. Cham Rep. 36, 44; Con. Stat. of 21 years, at a rental of $216 17, payable balf

U. C., ch. 54, ss. 75. 76. yearly.

As to the first objection. The lease for 17 It further appeared, that the defendant was years is in substance and effect a lease for 21 also lessee of certain other property of the city,

years, and therefore within the spirit and intenunder a lease dated tbe 2nd April, 186, made

tion of the act. by the Corporation to the defeodant. This lease

Under the late act the Corporation lessees were was for a term of 17 years, from the 1st of disqualified, but under the act of last session this October then last past (1860). Tbis latter lease disqualificntion, so far as relates to leases for recited that by an indeature of lease, beariog

21 years and upwards, is removed. date the 30th of January, 1857, the Corporation

Seo. 73 is in force. Qualification" and “Disleased unto Ezekiel F. Wbittemore, tbea deceased,

qualification" are under separate and distinct the premises for the term of 21 years, at a rental

beads, and the clause of tbe act postponing the of £75; that altbough the lease was made to clnuse as to qualification does not affect that as Whittemore, the defendant was the beneficial to disqualification. lessee, and took possession of the premises, and

As to the third objection, Manning before the retained possession from the execution of the election assigned the amount due to him from lease to Whittemore, and was then io possession,

the Corporation, and tbe Corporation accepted and that the defendunt paid the rents and taxes,

it, he had not therefore any interest in the and expended very large sums in the erection and amount, and this objection must fail. completion of several brick buildings thereon.

If the construction of the statnte be doubtful, That in the month of Decem her, 1858, he, Whit- the sitting member should not be unserted : temore, gave notice to the Corporation that the

Regina er rel Chambers V. Allison, 1 U. C. L. J. defendant, Manning, was the real and ben-ficial

N. S. 244; Regina ex rel. Ford v. Cottingham, owner of the premises, and that be, Whittemore,

16, 214. held the lense from the first, for and on account J 4. Boyd, for the relator. of the defendant, and that he was desirous of Seo 73 of the Municipal Act of last session assigning the lease to defendant, and that be, will not come into force until the 1st day of Whittemore, instructed the solicitor for tbe city September, 1867. That clause is beaded, " Disto prepare an assignment of the lease to the de- qualification,” and enacts, that certain persons fendaut; tbut the assignment was endorsed on bolding certain official positions, &c., and that the lease and ready for execution, but that Whit- Do person having by himself or his partner an temore suddenly died without executing it. It interest in any contract, with or on behalf of the furiber recited, ibat the defendant requested the Corporation, shall be qualified to be a member city to execute to him a new lease of the premises, of the Council of any Municipal Corporation; as the beneficial owner thereof, which the Corpo- Provised always, thut no person shall be held to ration were willing to do, provided they did not be disqualified, fc, by having a lease of 21 years incur any liability to the defendant as against or upwards, of uny property from the Corporation, the estate of Whittemore, and that defendant but any such lease holder shall not vote in the covenanted and agreed to indemnify the Corpo- Corporation on any question affecting any lease rution agninst any claim of Whittemore's estate, from the Corporation in consequence of their executing the lense to This latter proviso is not found in the 73 sec. defendant. The lease, as already stated, was for of the Municipal Act, 22 Vic, cap 64, and before 17 years, from the 1st October, 1860, being the the passing of the act of last session, the defenunexpired term of the 21 years granted by the dant would no doubt bave been disqualified, and recited leave to Whittemore; it contained ibe if sec 73 was not in force since the 1st of Janusame covenants for renewals for further terms of ary last, he was ineligible as a candidate at the 21 years, and the other usual covenants in leases last election. of that nature.

Disqualification" is included in “qualificaIt further appe: red from the affidavit of Mr. tion," and sec. 73 does not therefore, by sec. 427, Gamble, the solicitor of the city at the time these come into force till next September.

[ocr errors]

Elec. Cases.]

THE QUEEN EX REL. Mack v. MANNING.

[Elec. Cases.

If that section is in force, it only applies to terms of 21 years, similar to the one before me, leases for 21 years and upwards, and the lease were granted by corporations like the city of for 17 years is not within the proviso, and tbat Toronto, and that it wae expedient to render the being the case, the defeudant is within the dis- holders of such leases eligible as candidates for qualifying portion of the clause.

the offices of aldermen, &c., no doubt thinking MORRISON, J.-—The first point to be determined that the policy of the law, which excludes conis, whetber the 73rd section of the act of 1866

tractors from corporations, did not apply to peris in force, and I am of opinion it is. The

8008 who like this defendant were so much inte427th section of that act (as amended by ch.

rested in the good goveroment and welfare of the 52 of the same session) enacts, “ That this act municipality. It is quite clear from the facts eball take effect on the 1st of January, 1867,

before me, that the premises in question were save and except so much thereof as relates originally leased for a term of 21 years to Whitto the nominating of candidates for municipal

temore ; that that gentleman took and held the offices, and the passing of by-laws for dividing lease as a trustee for the defendant; that before a municipality, or any ward thereof into electo

Mr. Wbittemore died be was desirous of relieving ral divisions, and appointing returning officers

himself of the trusteeship by assigning the lease therefor, which shall come into effect on the first to the defendant, his cestui que trust, and that he day of November Dext; and also, so much thereof as

took steps towards that end, but unfortunately relates to the qualification of electors and candidates before completion, he, Whittemore, died; that shall not take effect till the first day of September,

under these circumstances, the defendant applied 1867. Sections 70, 71 &72 are headed Qualifica

for and obtained the lease for 17 years in his own tion of Mayors and Aldermen,” &c. Section 73, name, being the then unexpired term of the 21 the one in question, is headed, “Disqualifica

years granted to his trustee, with similar covetion.” I can well understand upon an examination

pants and conditions as those contained in the of the old and new municipal acts why the coming

original lease, and as Mr. Gamble states, the into force of the 70, 71 & 72 secs. was postponed

lease for 17 years was intended to be a confirmauntil the 1st September next, as it appears that

tion of the lease for 21 years; all these facts are in many cases the qualification of candidates are also recited on the face of the lease. Uoder such cbanged, partly arising from the new system of

circumstances, it would be hard to say that this rating, established by the new assessment act of

defendant was not, in relation to the matter in last session, to the provisions of which act the

queston, in reality a lessee of a term for 21 years, new municipal act conforms, and that consequent

and as such entitled to be a person within the ly the Legislature, being aware that the assess

meaning of the proviso in that behalf mentioned ment rolls in existence on the 1st of January

in section 73. last, and by which the qualification of candidates With respect to the second ground of complaint would be determined were made up in 1866 : that namely, that the defendant had a claim for $30 they could not properly apply to the last elec- against the Corporation for services rendered to the tions, were the whole of the act to take effect city as an arbitrator, it appears from the affidavit on the 1st of January, saw that it was neces- of Mr. Boyd, that by a request of the standing sary for the working of the new act, that the committee on finance, &c., of the Corporation, provisions relating to the qualification of can- “ the committee recommended payment of Mr. didates should not take effect until rollis were Alexander Manning's (the defendant) account of made up under the new mode of ratiog intro- thirty dollars for services as arbitrator, in deterduced by the acts of last session. But I see no mining the value of St. Andrew's market buildlike reason for postponing the operation of the ings, destroyed by fire in 1860.” This report is 73rd section. On the other hand, if the Legisla- | dated December 14, 1866 ; and he states tòat he ture deemed it right that the disability arising was informed by the chamberlain that the nmount from the previous state of the law should be therein stated bad not been paid; he further removed, were the words of the section not clear says, that on the day of the date of his affidavit one way or the other, I would lean in favour of he saw an order (with whom or where is not a liberal construction; but in my judgment the stated), signed by the defendant, dated the 5th words of section 427 leave little doubt as to the of January last, as follows:-" The Corporation intention and object of the Legislature, it being of the city of Toronto will pay to Mr. John Willimited in precise words to so much as relates to son, the nmount allowed me by finance committee, the qualification of candidates. We find sections for valuation of St. Andrew's market, destroyed specially beaded “Qualifications of Candidates," by fire." Mr. Mapping swears that he performed to which it does apply, but section 73 is headed, the services mentioned in the report of the finance “ Disqualification.” Interpreting the section lite- committee, and that he omitted to collect tbe rally, it cannot apply to it, and I think I am war. amount; that on the 5th of January last (the ranted in assuming that it was not the intention election being held on the 7th), he assigned of the Legislature that it should. Such being all his interest in the $30, by the order in writing my judgment on this point, the next question to mentioned in Mr. Boyd's affidavit, which order be determined is, whether the lease for 17 years he states was accepted by the city chamberlain, is within the spirit and meaning of the 73rd sec- and that he, Manning, ceased on the 5th day of tion, and I think on this point the defendant is | January to have any interest in the sum of also entitled to my judgment. In considering money referred to, and that he had no interest this matter, I have to look to the object and pur- whatever in it at the time of his election ; it was poses of the Legislature in adding the proviso not suggested that the assignment or order for to section 73, which refers to leases for 21 years the money was not made in good faith. The and upwards. I think I may assume that the defendant's object may bave been to divest himLegislature had in view the fact, that leases for self of all interest (as he swears be did), for the

6

Elec. Cases.]

THE QUEEN EX REL. PIDDINGTON V. RIDDELL.

(Elec. Cases.

.

# There was also an affidavit of Mr. Boyd filed,

purpose of avoiding any doubt as to his eligibility as Clinkinbroomer, that the latter tendered for as a candidate, and enabling himself to be elected the supply of bread for the gaol from March, to the office of alderman. If bona fide done, upon 1865, to March, 1866, and that before he left . the principle acted upon in Reg. ex rel. Crozier v. defendant's employment he also heard from both Taylor, 6 U. C. L. J. 60, although done on the of them that Clinkinbroomer tendered for and eve of the election, I think there would be no obtained the contract for the supply of bread to valid objection to his doing so; it would indeed the new City Gaol from March, 1866, to the be hard were it otherwise. The object and spirit month of March of this year. Reeves also of the law was to prevent persons being elected swears that it was well understood among all members of a corporation who had any interest defendant's workmen that these contracts for in a contract with the municipality, because it supply of bread to the City Gaol were in reality might possibly influence their conduct in the the defendant's contracts, and that during the council. On the whole, my judgment is in favour whole period Reeves was in defendant's employof the defendant, as I am of opinion no case is ment Clinkinbroomer was regarded as a fellow made out for unseating him, and the applieation workman; that all the bread made during that must be discharged with costs.

time, and which was sent to the gaol, was baked

and made in the same manner, and by the same Judgment for defendant with costs.

workmen, as bread which was sent to iefendant's customers, and the bread for the gaol was drawn

to the gaol by defendant's horses and bread Tas QUEEN EX REL. PIDDINGTON V. RIDDELL.

carts, and sometimes driven by Clinkinbroomer Disqualification of candidate-Contract with Corporation- and at other times by other drivers ; that no Costs-Oral examination.

difference or change took place in the manageWhere a member of the Corporation, being a baker, supplied

ment of defendant's business after the contracts bread to fulfil a gaol contract held by another person in were made in Clinkinbroomer's name, he, defenhis own name and for his own benefit, the member of the Corporation was held not to be disqualified.

dant, being proprietor As the case presented very strong presumptions against

defendant in the absence of explanation, costs were not verifying an advertisement for tenders issued by

given. Oral examination of parties refused.

the Board of Gaol Inspectors asking for tenders [Com. Law Chambers, March 16, 1867.]

for, among other things, “ bread per loaf,” dated

27th February, 1866; also copy of a tender A summons in the nature of a quo warranto

sigued by Clinkinbroomer, as follows: was issued on the 18th February last, on the relation of Alfred Piddington, calling upon the

Toronto, March 15, 1866. defendant Riddell to shew by what authority he

To the Board of Gaol Inspectors. claimed to use, exercise or enjoy the office of I hereby tender to supply the Toronto Gaol alderman for St. John's Ward in the City of

with the best wheaten bread at 91 cents per 4 lb. Toronto, the relator complaining that the defen- loaf, in such shapes and forms, and at such times dant was disqualified to be elected at the election

as the Governor of the Gaol may require. held in January last.

(Signed)

C. E. CLINKINBROOMER. The ground alleged against Mr. Riddell was My sareties : that at the time of the said election he had by

JAMES SPENCE, himself, and by his servants and agent, a part

ALLEN BRYAN. ner, one Charles E. Clinkinbroomer, an interest The Board of Jail Inspectors consisted of alin a contract with the Corporation of the City of dermen and councillors of the City Councii. Toronto, and with the Gaol Committee appointed The affidavit of one White was also filed, stating by the Council of said Corporation, which was that he was well acquainted with defendant and then existing and unsettled.

Clinkinbroomer; that Riddell carried on the In support of the applieation the affidavit of one business of a baker in the premises in which he Samuel Reeves was filed, who swore that he had

lives, and has done so for some time; that Clink. been in the employment of the defendant as fore

inbroomer has been in his employment for two Dian in bis bake-house from August, 1864, until years; that when he went to defendant's be had some time in March, 1866; that Clinkinbroomer no means of his own; that his name has not above referred to was also in defendants employ appeared as owner of the business; and that he ment as an outside men, attending to the driving verily believes that Clinkinbroomer bas no means of the bread cart, and not as a baker; and also that of livelihood except from his occupation in dehe kept the defendant's books, receiving the same

fendant's business, and that the bread that goes wages as he, Clinkinbroomer, told him that de- to the gaol is delivered from the defendant's fendant paid his bakers; that when he, Reeves,

carts. went into defendant's employment, the defendant Robl. A. Harrison, for the defendant, filed then supplied the City Gaol with bread in his the affidavit of Clinkinbroomer, in which he own name; that before the time when defendant stated that he had read the affidavits of Boyd, became a member of the City Council in the year Piddington, Reeves, and white; that the de1866, he heard defendant say, in the beginning fendant had no interest, and never had any, of 1865, that he would have to get the gaol con- in his contract in the affidavits mentioned ; tract in another name, or else he would not be that he tendered for the supply of bread reable to run for the Council, or words to that ferred to solely on his own account, and for effect; and that he heard him shortly after- his own benefit, and that since his tender was wards say that Clinkinbroomer had got the con- accepted he had received and still receives tract for the supply of bread for the gaol ; and all profits from the contract for bis own use and that be understood from the defendant, as well | benefit; and that he alone would sustain the loss,

« PreviousContinue »