Page images
PDF
EPUB

committed on a day which has no yet arrived, can only be taken advan tage of on demurrer, and cannot be taken after a plea of Not guilty. Reg. v. Fenwick,

915

which was brought by a vessel to an English port, verbally offered the captain of the vessel which brought it half the amount of the freight in cash, and also offered to give the captain per proc. the acceptance of the principal for the other half, if the captain would draw a bill. This the captain refused: -Held, a sufficient tender of the freight, as it was the duty of the captain to draw the bill. Luard v. Butcher,

29 2. The question as to whether a tender was made conditionally or not is for the jury. Marsden v. Goode, 133

TIME (REASONABLE).

See CONTRACT, 10.-FALSE REPRE

SENTATION, 1.

TOWN COUNCILLOR.

See FALSE ANSWER.

THREATENING LETTER.

TRADE (USAGE OF). See Custom OF TRADE.—EVIDENCE, 8.

TRANSCRIPT OF PARISH RE

GISTER.
See Parisu REGISTER.

TRANSPORT (RETURNED).

See EVIDENCE, 13.

1. An indictment on the stat. 4 Geo. 4, c. 54, s. 3, charged that the prisoner sent a letter to T. L., threatening to burn the house of J. R.:Held, bad, as the threat must be to the owner of the property; and that if the letter was sent to T. L., with intent that it should reach J. R., and did reach him, it should have been charged in the indictment as sent to J. R. Reg. v. Jones,

398 2. A letter, written to a banker, stating that it is intended by a cracksman to burn his books and cause his bank to stop, and that, if 2501. are put in a certain place, the writer of the letter will prevent the mischief; but if the money is not put there, it will happen, is a letter demanding money with menaces, within the stat. 7 & 8 Geo. 4, c. 29, s. 8. Reg. v. Smith, 882

TRAVERSE. A defendant, in a case of misdemeanor, for which he was indicted at the quarter sessions, and in which he was entitled to traverse, did traverse: -Held, that his traverse was to the next sessions, and not to the assizes, which came before the next sessions, and the defendant, being imprisoned in the gaol on this charge, the judge, at the assizes, would not discharge him on his own recognizance. Reg. V. Arlett,

596

TIME.

TRESPASS.

1. In legal matters, “a month" means a lunar month; but in commercial matters, “a month” always means a calendar month. Hart v. Middleton,

9 2. The objection, that an offence is laid in an indictment to have been

See ACQUITAL. 1. If, in an action of trespass against several defendants, there be

case.

at the end of the plaintiff's case no evidence against one of the defendants, it is in the discretion of the judge whether such defendant shall be then acquitted; and if, from the nature of the evidence given for the plaintiff, it is probable that evidence which will be given for the other defendants will fix this defendant with liability, the judge will not allow his acquittal at the end of the plaintiff's

Spencer v. Harrison, 429 2. In trespass for taking goods, the defence, under the stat. 11 Geo. 2, c. 19, s. 3, that the goods had been seized after having been fraudulently removed to prevent a distress for rent, cannot be gone into unless specially pleaded; but where, in trespass against à landlord and his broker for taking goods, there was no evidence against the landlord, and this defence was opened but could not be gone into, as Not guilty “by statute” was the only plea, the judge would not certify, under the stat. 8 & 9 Will. 3, c. 11, s. 1, that there was reasonable cause for making the landlord a defendant, in order to deprive him of his costs. Ibid.

plaintiff had been endeavouring to baffle his creditors by a merely ostensible transfer of the goods to another, and where they were seized upon premises in which the plaintiff's tenancy had expired:-Held, 1st, that there was a sufficient possession as against a wrongdoer, without regard to the question of ownership; and, 2ndly, that the measure of damages was the value of the plaintiff's real and bonâ fide interest in the goods, and not the full value. Cameron v. Wynch, 264

2. In trover a written demand of the goods, signed by the plaintiff, and attested by a subscribing witness, was served on the defendant:-Held, that, at the trial, a duplicate original of this could not be given in evidence as a demand by the plaintiff, without calling the subscribing witness; but the judge allowed it to be read as a paper delivered to the defendant, (though not as sent by the plaintiff), in order to allow the plaintiff (if he could) to shew anything that the defendant had said or done in consequence of it. Briant v. Dormer,

692

USE AND OCCUPATION. See LANDLORD AND TENANT, 9, 10.

TRIAL. See GAOL DELIVERY.-TRAVERSE.

The stat. 38 Geo. 3, c. 52, s. 2, which relates to the trial of offences in an adjoining county, only applies to cities and towns corporate which are counties of themselves, and not to towns corporate which are not counties of themselves. Reg. v. Milner,

.

310

VARIANCE. BILLSOF EXCHANGE, 9.-FORGERY, 14.

Where, after recital of two several contracts between the parties, the declaration alleged that they agreed to consolidate them, but the several contracts alone were proved in evidence, and the fact of an agreement

consolidate was negatived:-Held, that the variance was fatal, and that the Court would not amend the declaration. Moncrieff v. Reade, 705

TRIAL (POSTPONING). See POSTPONING TRIAL.

TROVER. See DISTRESS, 2.-LANDLORD AND

TENANT, 7. 1. In an action of trover, where the

VENDOR AND PURCHASER.

See RAILWAY COMPANY, 1. A perfect abstract of title is one

which shews such a title as enables a to be of a particular quality, he has a purchaser to complete his purchase. right, on the arrival of the ship, to Therefore, where A. had contracted to inspect such cargo before it is desell lands to B., and B. afterwards livered to him, in order to ascertain contracted to sell them to C., and whether the warranty has been comagreed, amongst other things, to fur- plied with; and if it have not, he nish C. with a full and sufficient ab- may reject the cargo altogether. But stract of title; and before any con- if the cargo be once delivered to him, veyance by A. to B., A. died :-Held, he has no right to return it, on the that B., having before A.'s death de- ground that it does not correspond livered to C. an abstract, bringing the with the warranty. Toulmin v. Hedtitle down to the contract by A. to ley,

157 sell to him, had performed his agreement. Blackburn v. Smith, 561

WELSH LANGUAGE.

See PERJURY, 6.
VENUE.
See FORGERY, 23.—JUSTICE OF THE
PEACE.-RECEIVER, 2.

WITNESS.

See ABUSING FEMALE CHILDREN, 1, VIEW.

2.- BANKRUPT, 4.—Costs, 2.Where on the trial of a case of rape

COVERTURE, 2.-FOREIGN LAWS.—

REPLEVIN, 3. it was wished on the part of the prisoner that the jury should see the 1. Where a partner, who had alplace at which the offence was alleged ready had a judgment against him, to have been committed, and the place was put into the witness-box to prove was so near the court that the jury the same debt against his copartner, could have a view without inconveni

but it did not appear on the record ence, the judge allowed a view, al- that he was an interested party :though the counsel for the prosecu- Held, that he was a competent wittion did not consent to it. Reg. v. ness. Cupper v. Newark, 24 Whalley,

376 2. A negro, who was called as a

witness, stated, before he was sworn, WARRANT OF DISTRESS. that he was a Christian, and had been

baptized :—Held, that he ought to be See CHURCH RATE, 7.

sworn, and that no further question

could be asked of him before he was WARRANTY

Reg. v. Serva,

53 1. Where a horse is warranted 3. A witness in an action brought “sound,” the plaintiff cannot recover to recover certain commission or broin an action on that warranty, unless kerage stated, on the “voir dire," that he shew that the horse was unsound he had a claim to one moiety of whatat the time of the sale: and mere de- ever commission the plaintiff should fective formation, not producing lame- receive :-Held, that the evidence of ness at that time, is not an unsound- the witness was admissible under 6 & ness within the meaning of the war- 7 Vict. c. 85 (Lord Denman's Act). ranty. Bailey v. Forrest, 131 Hill v. Kitching,

278 2. Where à party buys a specific 4. A., B., and C., were jointly incargo of goods, expected by a parti- dicted, A. and B. for stealing tea, and cular ship, and which are warranted C. for receiving it scienter, &c. A.

SO.

and C. pleaded Not guilty, and B. any stage of the inquiry, and no anpleaded Guilty, and the trial pro- swer forced from him by the presidceeded against A. and C., no judg- | ing judge (after such a claim) can be ment having been pronounced against afterwards given in evidence against B. :—Held, that B. was a competent

him.

Ibid. witness for the prosecution on the trial 8. Since Lord Denman's Act (6 & of A. and C. Reg. v. Hinks,

462 7 Vict. c. 85), the petitioning creditor 5. If a witness claims the protec- is a good witness to support the fiat. tion of the Court, on the ground that Johnson v. Graham,

808 his answer would tend to criminate himself, and there appears reasonable ground to believe that it would do so, WITNESSES EXPENSES. he is not compellable to answer; and,

See ASSAULT, 6. if obliged to answer notwithstanding, what he says must be considered to bave been obtained by compulsion, WITNESSES NAMES ON THE and cannot be given afterwards in BACK OF THE INDICTMENT. evidence against him. Reg. v. Garbett,

474

The judges have laid down a rule, 6. Whether the mere declaration of

that a prosecutor is not bound to call a witness on oath, that he believes

witnesses merely because their names that his answer would tend to cri

are on the back of the indictment; minate him, would or would not be

but the prosecutor ought to have all sufficient to protect him from answer

such witnesses in court, so that they ing, where sufficient other circum

may be called for the defence, if they stances did not appear in the case to

are wanted for that purpose; if, howinduce the judge to believe that the

ever, they are called for the defence, answer would tend to criminate the

the person calling them makes them witness-quere?

Ibid.
his own witnesses. Reg. v. Woodhead,

520 7. It makes no difference in the right of the witness to protection, that

WORDS. he had before answered in part, as he is entitled to claim the privilege at

See SLANDER.

END OF VOL. II.

« PreviousContinue »