pany had not delivered it to Mr. K.; and that the amount of damages in such action is the value of the lost parcel, as the plaintiff would be liable to that amount to the owner of it. Crouch v. The London and North Western Railway Company, 789

10. A railway company has no right to open a parcel, to ascertain whether it contains other parcels addressed to different persons. Ibid.

11. By their Act, 3 Will. 4, c. xxxvi, s. 181, the London and North Western Railway Company are to take rates and tolls from all persons alike, under the same or similar circumstances. Their ordinary price for carrying a parcel from L. to B. was d. per lb. They refused to carry a parcel for the plaintiff from L. to B. unless he paid 1d. per lb., which he did : -Held, that he might recover back the excess. Ibid. Ibid.

12. Form of Pleadings.

RAPE.

See ABUSING FEMALE CHILDREN.

1. Where, on the trial of a case of rape, it was wished on the part of the prisoner that the jury should see the place at which the offence was alleged to have been committed, and the place was so near to the court that the jury could have a view without inconvenience, the judge allowed a view, although the counsel for the prosecution did not consent to it. Reg. v. Whalley, 376

2. An acquittal on an indictment for a rape could not be successfully pleaded to a subsequent indictment for an assault with intent to commit a rape, nor could an acquittal on an indictment for feloniously stabbing with intent to do grievous bodily harm, be successfully pleaded to an indictment for an assault, although, in each case, the transaction was the same, and the accused might have been

VOL. II.

1. An indictment for breaking into the house of A., contained five counts, laying the property stolen in five different persons, A., B., C., D., and E. It also contained five other counts under the stat. 11 & 12 Vict. c. 46, for receiving the goods mentioned in each of the first five counts respectively:— Held to be correct, and that there may be as many counts on this statute for receiving as there are counts for steal960 ing. Reg. v. Beeton,

2. E., at the Dorset Sessions, was found guilty of sheepstealing, on one count of an indictment, and M. was convicted of receiving on another count in the same indictment for a substantive felony, the receiving being alleged in that count to have been in Somersetshire:-Held that M. was improperly convicted, as there was nothing in the latter count to shew jurisdiction to try him in Dorsetshire. Reg. v. Martin,

950

RECORD (PROOF OF).

See EVIDENCE, 9, 13.

RECORDER.

See CROWN CASES RESERVED, 3.

REGISTER.

See PARISH REGISTER.

REGISTER OF DEEDS.

See EVIDENCE, 12.

REGISTRAR.

1. An indictment on the stat. 6 & 7 Will. 4, c. 86, s. 41, for making false statements for the purpose of their being inserted in a marriage register, alleged that a clergyman had solemnised a marriage, and was about to register in duplicate the particulars relating to that marriage, and that the defendant did wilfully make to the clergyman who solemnised the office of marriage, "for the purpose of being inserted in the register of marriage," certain false statements:Held, that this was supported by proof that the entry was made by the church clerk before the marriage, and that, after the marriage, the clergyman read over the statements to the defendant, and asked him if they were correct, and that he answered in the affirmative.

Held also, that, on such an indictment, it was not necessary to prove that the register books were furnished to the clergyman by the RegistrarGeneral. Reg. v. Brown,

2. Form of indictment.

504 Ibid.

3. The stat. 6 & 7 Will. 4, c. 86, s. 41, makes it a misdemeanor to make a false statement of one or more of the particulars required to be registered for the purpose of being inserted in any register of birth, death, or marriage; and to constitute this offence the pur

pose need not be effected. But it is a felony under the 43rd section of that statute to cause the registrar to make an entire false entry of a birth, marriage, or death. Reg. v. Mason, 622 4. Form of indictment.

Ibid. 5. A woman went to a registrar of births and asked him to register the birth of a child; she stated to him the particulars necessary for the entry, and he made the entry accordingly, and she signed it as the person giving the information. Every particular which she stated was false:—Held, that this amounted to the felony of causing a false entry to be made, within the stat. 6 & 7 Will. 4, c. 86, s. 43, and was not merely the misdemeanor of making a false statement, under sect. 41 of that statute. v. Dewitt,

RENT.

Reg.

905

judge at Nisi Prius that he had done so, if he did not succeed in the cause; and that, not having done so, he had not prosecuted his suit with effect. Ibid.

3. Where the defence rested on several cognizances:-Held, that a person under whom one of such cognizances was made was competent to prove matters distinct from and independent of that particular cognizance. Walker v. Giles, 671

REPLY.

See ADDRESSING THE JURY.

RESCUE OF DISTRESS.

See CHURCH-RATE, 7.

RESERVED CASES. See CROWN CASES RESERVED.

REPRESENTATIVE SUING FOR DEATH CAUSED BY NEGLIGENCE.

See NEGLIGENCE, 1, 2.

RETURNED TRANSPORT.

See EVIDENCE, 13.

Where a prisoner was indicted, under the the 5 Geo. 4, c. 84, s. 22, for being found at large in England before the expiration of a term for which he had been sentenced to be transported:-Held, that the fact of such sentence being in force at the time he was so found at large, was sufficiently proved by the certificate of his conviction and sentence,-the judgment remaining unreversed,-although, on the face of such certificate, it appeared that the sentence, viz. transportation for fourteen years, was

one which could not have been inflicted on him for the offence of which, according to such certificate, he had been committed, viz. larceny. Reg. v. Finney, 774

REWARD (TAKING) FOR HELPING THE RETURN OF STOLEN GOODS.

A. had her goods stolen. B., who knew the thieves, received money from A. to endeavour to purchase the stolen property of the thieves for A., but not meaning to bring the thieves to justice-Held, that B. was guilty of the felony of taking money on account of helping A. to the return of stolen goods within the stat. 7 & 8 Geo. 4, c. 29, s. 58. Reg. v. Pascoe,

RIGHT TO BEGIN.

927

See COVERTURE, 1, 5.-REPLEVIN. 1.

ROBBERY.

See ASSAULT, 1, 2, 4.

A. asked B. what o'clock it was, and B. took out his watch to tell him, holding his watch loosely in both. his hands. A. caught hold of the ribbon and key attached to the watch, and snatched it from B., and made off with it:-Held, no robbery, but a stealing from the person. Reg. v. Walls, 214

SALE BY SAMPLE. See SAMPLE.

SAMPLE.

Semble, that an article sold by sample cannot in any case be rejected as not corresponding with the sample. except within a reasonable time. San557 ders v. Jameson,

SCRIP.

See JOINT-STOCK COMPANY.

SEDUCTION.

Evidence. In an action for the seduction of the plaintiff's daughter, to prove that her connexion with the defendant (which happened but once) was against her consent, the daughter can be asked only as to circumstances occurring immediately after the event. Colyer v. Mayne, 1011

SHERIFF.

In an action for an escape against a sheriff, where the prisoner was brought up to London from the country, in obedience to a warrant issued by a commissioner of bankruptcy, and permitted to remain there three days, though remanded back by the learned commissioner, (one of them, however, being a Sunday, and another a day appointed for the prisoner to appear before a judge at chambers by virtue of a writ of habeas corpus,) and to repair from place to place attended by the gaoler:-Held, that the above-mentioned facts did not constitute an escape in contemplation of law. Nias v. Davies,

SHIPPING. See TENDER, 1.

280

1. The captain of a ship was instructed to apply for a cargo to A.; and, in the event of A. not being on the spot, then to apply to B. (both being agents of the charterers) for the same purpose. He applied to both accordingly, and was refused a cargo by both. An action was brought by the owners to recover the freight : and, in order to do away with the effect of the proof as to B.'s refusal, a

letter from B. to the defendants was tendered in evidence, to shew that, prior to such refusal, B. had renounced their agency:-Held, to be inadmissible. Hassell v. Watson, 141

2. Held, further, that A. having been on the spot, what passed between B. and the captain was important only in so far as it was confirmed and adopted by A. Ibid.

3. A., a supercargo, sailed to Calabar in charge of a ship, called the "Magistrate," his commission being 5 per cent. Some time after his departure, his principals despatched another ship, called the "Windermere,” to Calabar, with instructions to A. to find a cargo for her, and to consider her "in one turn" with the "Magistrate," and offering him, in respect of this second ship, a commission of 24 per cent. A. wrote to his principals, rejecting the 2 per cent. commission; but, notwithstanding this, he proceeded to load the "Windermere," that course being, in his view, the best for his principals:-Held, that, as he had acted on the instructions of his principals in loading the "Windermere," he was bound by their offer as to commission, and could not recover more than 24 per cent. in respect of the cargo of that ship. Moore v. Maxwell,

SLANDER.

554

1. In an action for slander, the words were, "You are a thief; you robbed Mr. L. of 301." The words were spoken in the hearing of B. and of several strangers. B. knew that the words did not mean to impute felony, but meant to impute that the plaintiff had improperly obtained 307. from Mr. L. to compromise an action for a distress :-Held, that, under these circumstances, the question to be left to the jury was not what the defendant meant by the words he spoke,

3. B. and C. entered into partnership by an unstamped agreement which was in the hands of J. S. A. sued B. and C., as partners, for goods sold, and applied to J. S. to take or send the agreement to the Stampoffice, that A. might get it stamped. J. S. refused to do so; and a judge at chambers would not order him to do so, as J. S. held the agreement for B. and C., and did not in any way hold it for A. Dyke v. Brewer,

828

4. A 251. stamp not necessary for

See LANDLORD AND TENANT, 1.

1. The custom of the Caen stone trade being to pay the freight half in cash and half by a bill at two months, the agent of the owners of Caen stone