B. DUTY OF JUSTICES.

the justices at their session, and delivered to a committee appointed to receive them. Tuck and another, executors of Carter, v. Ruggles, 5 Esp. 237.

12. Notice of action against a J. P.

6. Where goods are seized and Mansfield, C. J. 1805. brought to a police office without cause, it is the duty of the magistrates to re-under 22 Geo. II. (24 Geo. II. cap. 44.) store them, and to procure a permit, if necessary. Price v. Messenger, et alt. 3 Esp, 96, 100. Ellenborough, C. J. 1800.

describing plaintiff's attorney, as of New Inn, London, instead of New Inn, Westminster, held insufficient for the variance. Stears v. Smith, clerk, 6 Esp. 138. Ellenborough, C. J. Maidstone, 1810.

And see Taylor v. Fenwick, 7 T. R. 635, more fully reported, 3 B. & P. 553, (n.) a.

13. Semble, that the notice of action against a magistrate, must be indorsed by an attorney who has taken out his certificate. Sabin v. De Burgh and others, 2 Campb. 196. Ellenborough,

C. J. 1809.

14. But proof that the attorney had

C. (b) By indictment for scandalous ordered his clerk to take out a certificate,

words.

and had given him money for that purpose, is sufficient evidence of qualification. Ibid.

8. Semble, that an indictment will not lie for words spoken of a J. P. in 15. In trespass against J. P. for taking his absence. Rex v. Weltje, 2 Campb.goods, the plaintiff cannot recover more 142. Ellenborough, C. J. 1809.

than the value stated in his notice of

134. Macdonald, C. B. Kingston, 1810.

Acc. Rex v. Pocock, 2 Stra. 1157, 8; action. Stringer v. Martyr, esq. 6 Esp. Regina v. Wrightson, 2 Salk. 698. Cont. Rex v. Darby, 3 Mod. 149; Rex v. Revel, 1 Stra. 420.

9. And such an indictment clearly cannot be supported, unless it be proved, as well as laid, that the words were spoken of the prosecutor with intention to defame him in his magisterial capacity. Ibid.

Acc. Kent v. Pocock, 2 Stra. 1167.

C. (c) In actions brought against them.

10. At the trial for an indictment for theft, the judge orders that the goods shall remain in the custody of the justice who took the information, until it shall appear who is entitled to them. The owner may bring trover for the goods after the expiration of six months, and without giving notice. Licet and another, assignees, &c. v. Reid, esq. and another, Peake, 35. Kenyon, C. J. 1791.

11. Magistrates are not personally liable for expenses incurred in preparing plans for a county gaol advertised for by

16. And if that sum has been tendered, the plaintiff is not entitled to a verdict. Ibid.

17. The notice need not specify the form of the intended action. Sabin v. De Burgh, ubi supra.

A misdescription was ruled to be fatal; but the point was reserved. Strickland v. Ward, 7 T. R. 631, n.

And see Massey v. Johnson, 12 East, 67; Gray v. Cookson, 16 East, 13.

LANDLORD AND TENANT. (See WITNESS, C. (i).)

A. LEASES.

(a) When valid.
(b) Covenants by lessee.

B. RENT.
(a) By whom payable.

(b) Double rent.
(c) Double value.

C. TAXES.

D. REPAIRS.

E. NOTICE TO QUIT.

(a) In what cases necessary.
(b) Form of notice.
(c) By whom given.

(d) To whom given.
(e) How directed.
(f) How served.

(g) At what time to expire.
(h) How waved

(i) Where evidence of commence-
ment of tenancy.

A. LEASES.

(And see BILLS AND NOTES, pl. 51. EVIDENCE, G. (b).)

A. (a) When valid.

(And see FRAUDS, STATUTE OF, A.)

1. A lease at an entire rent, where part of the lands cannot be legally demised, is void for the whole. Doe d. Griffiths v. Lloyd, 3 Esp. 78. Kenyon, C. J. 1800.

2. Where tenant for life, bound to reserve the best rent, lets the premises on a repairing lease, and after the improvements have taken place, accepts a surrender and grants a fresh term, he must reserve the best rent that can be then obtained. Ibid.

operates as a demise, and cannot be received in evidence, unless it be stamped as a lease. Poole v. Bentley, 2 Campb. 286. Ellenborough, C. J. 1809.

And a rule nisi in K. B. to set aside nonsuit was discharged; 12 East, 168.

6. A provision in a lease for an advanced rent, in case the lessee should discontinue purchasing his beer of the lessor, was strongly censured by the Cooper v. Twibill, 3 Campb. 286, n. Ellenborough, C. J. 1808.

court.

7. And a plea in bar to an avowry for such additional rent, stating that the beer supplied was of a bad quality, was considered as a meritorious defence. Ibid.

8. But where premises are described in the conditions of sale, as "a free public-house," the bargain may be avoided by the purchaser, if it appear

that the lease contains a clause of this nature. Jones v. Edney, 3 Campb. 285. Ellenborough, C. J. 1812.

9. Although the lease be produced, and read at the auction. Ibid.

S. C. not S. P. Sugd. V. & P. 37. And see Gunnis v. Erhart, 1 H. Bla. 289; Jenkinson v. Pepys, 6 Ves. 330; Powell v. Edmunds, 12 East, 6.

A. (b) Covenants by lessee. (And see ante, INSURANCE, 263.) 10. Qu. whether a covenant contained in the assignment of a lease, requiring the assignee and his assigns to buy their beer of the assignor, will bind a subsequent assignee. Hartley v. Pehall, Peake, 131. Kenyon, C. J. 1792.

And see ante, Agreement, pl. 40, 41, 2, 3, 4, 5.

11. A covenant not to alien without leave of lessor, is a fair and usual covenant. Morgan v. Slaughter, 1 Esp. 8. Kenyon, C. J. 1793.

3. But a court of equity may give relief for that part of the term which remained unexpired at the period of the S. P. Folkington v. Croft, 3 Anst. 700. S. P. contra, Henderson v. Hay, 3 Bro. C. C. 632, recognized by Eldon, C. in Church v. Brown, 15 Ves. 531; Brown v. Ruban, 15 Ves. 529.

surrender. Ibid.

4. Acceptance of rent by a party entitled to avoid a lease, confirms it. Doe d. T. Jolliffe, J. Jolliffe, and W. Bowerman, v. Sybourn, 2 Esp. 677. Kenyon, C. J. Maidstone, 1798.

S. C. not S. P. 7 T. R. 2.

5. An agreement for a building lease which is to be considered binding till one fully prepared can be produced,

12. A covenant not to assign or otherwise part with the premises, or any part thereof, for the whole or any part of the term, is broken by an underlease. Doe d. Holland v. Worsley, 1 Campb. 20. Ellenborough, C. J. 1807.

And see Crusoe v. Bugby, 2 Bla. 766. | rent, by putting up a bill at the window, S. C. 3 Wils. 234. Seers v. Hind, 1 and endeavouring to procure another teVes. 295. nant. Redpath v. Roberts, 3 Esp. 225. Kenyon, C. J. 1800.

13. Letting lodgings is not a breach of a covenant not to underlet. Doe d. Pitt v. Laming, widow, 4 Campb. 73. Ellenborough, C. J. 1814.

14. Where lessee covenants to repair generally, and also covenants, within three months after notice, to make the repairs required by such notice, the two clauses are independent; and a notice given under the second covenant, is no waver of a breach of the first. Roe d. Goatly v. Paine, 2 Campb. 520. Ellenborough, C. J. 1810.

20. Acceptance of rent from a third person, is not a ground for presuming a surrender. Copeland v. Watts and another, executors of Gubbins, 1 Stark. 95. Gibbs, C. J. 1815.

21. A landlord may distrain after an act of bankruptcy. If, therefore, the rent be paid by the bankrupt to avoid a distress which is threatened, the assignees cannot recover the amount from the landlord. Stevenson et alt. assignees of Knight v. Wood, 5 Esp. 200. Ellenborough, C. J, 1805.

15. If after the expiration of a term, the lessee continue to hold, though at And see ante, EXECUTION, A. (e) an advanced rent, the parties are pre22. Dub. whether an agreement to sumed to have acceded to the terms take a house and to pay rent can be of the former tenancy, as far as they enforced where the premises are conare applicable to their new situation. sumed by fire before the day appointed Digby v. Atkinson and another, 4 for the defendant's entry. Phillipson v. Campb. 277. Ellenborough, C. J. Leigh, 1 Esp. 398. Kenyon, C. J. 1795.

1815.

B. RENT.

That it may, see Dyer, 56, a. Paradise v. Jane, Aleyne, 26; Monk v. Cooper, 2 Stra. 763. S. C. 2 Lord Raym. 1477; Belfour v. Weston, 1 T. R. 310;

{And see USE AND OCCUPATION, 11, n.) Doe v. Sandhum, ibid. 705, 10; Cutter

B. (a) By whom payable,
(And see EXECUTION, A. (e)

v. Powell, 6 T. R. 323; Hare v. Groves, 3 Anstr. 687; 1 Fonbl. 336; 22 Car. II. cap. 11, § 81. 2 Saund. 422; Baker v. Holtpzaffell, 4 Taunt. 45. S. C. 18 Ves. 16. Where at the expiration of a lease, 116. Contra, Brown v. Quilter, Ambler, an under-tenant continues in possession, 619; Steele v. Wright, cited 1 T. R. the original lessee remains liable for the 708. Pothier, Contrat de Bail à Rente, rent, unless the landlord accept the key chap. 6, num. 190, 2. And see Weigall of the premises, receive rent from the v. Waters, 6 T. R. 488. S. C. in Equity, party in possession, or, by some other 2 Anst. 575. Post, D. pl. 35.

act, acknowledge him as tenant. Harding v. Crethorn, 1 Esp. 57. Kenyon, C. J. 1793.

And see Roe v. Wiggs, 2 N. R. 330; Pleasant v. Benson, 14 East, 234; 4 Bac. Abr. Leases, I. 3.

17. Where at the expiration of a term, the lessee gives notice to an under-tenant in possession, to pay rent to the lessor; which notice the latter attests with a knowledge of its contents, the first lessee is discharged. Ibid.

18. Secus, if the lessor subscribe his name without knowing the contents of the instrument which he attests. Ibid.

B. (b) Double rent.

23. A notice given by the tenant of his intention to quit as soon as he can get another situation, is too vague to entitle the landlord to double rent under 11 Geo. II. cap. 19. (sect. 18). Farrance v. Elkington, 2 Campb. 593. Ellenborough, C. J. 1811.

24. Although the tenant quit the premises, and underlet them. Ibid.

B. (c) Double value.

19. If the tenant abandon the premises (Post, PENAL STATUTE; Replevin.) without notice, the landlord is not pre- 25. A tenant who holds over, under cluded from recovering the subsequent a fair claim of right, will not be con

sidered as wilfully holding over within to keep the premises in tenantable conthe meaning of 4 Geo. II. cap. 28, s. 1; dition. Ibid. though it be decided eventually that he has no right. Wright v. Smith, 5 Esp. 203. Hotham, B. 1805, and Exch. E. 1805.

33. It has since been holden, that he is not liable to general repairs. Horsfall v. Mather, Holt, 7. Gibbs, C. J. 1815.

And see EXECUTORS, pl. 3. post, 36. Acc. Gibson v. Wells, 1 N. R. 290. 26. If, therefore, after the expiration S. C. 2 Smith, 677. Countess of Shrewsof a term, and after a notice from the bury's case, 5 Co. 13. And see Co. Litt. landlord to deliver up possession, the 56, b. (n) 2; 1 Saund. 323, (n) 7; 2 tenant hold over and defend an eject-Saund. 252, c. ibid. 259. Herne v. Bemment on a supposition that a renewal of bow, 4 Taunt. 764. the lease by tenant for life, is valid, an action for the double value will not lie. Ibid.

27. Debt for double value will not lie against a tenant from week to week. The statute, being penal, is to be construed strictly. Lloyd v. Rosbee, 2 Campb. 453. Ellenborough, C. J. 1810.

Sed vide Wilkinson v. Colley, 5 Burr. 2694; Lake v. Smith, 1 N. R. 174, where this seems to have been regarded as a remedial statute. And see F. N. B. 60 D, N; Co. Litt. 54, a.

C. TAXES.

(And see post, SET OFF.)

34. A stipulation that the tenant shall insure the premises in 6007. does not limit his responsibility to that sum under a general covenant to repair. Digby v. Atkinson and another, 4 Campb. 277. Ellenborough, C. J. 1815.

35. A covenant to keep in repair, binds to re-build after a fire. Ibid.

Acc. Pym v. Blackburn, 3 Ves. 34; Bullock v. Dommitt, 6 T. R. 650; Walton v. Waterhouse, 2 Wms. Saund. 420, 422, n. (2). And see ante, pl. 22.

E. NOTICE TO QUIT.

E. (a) Where necessary.

28. In an action for use and occupa- 36. Where the tenant who came into tion, the defendant is entitled to deduct possession under the devisor refuses to landlord's property tax actually paid. pay rent to the devisees under a contestBaker v. Davis, 3 Campb. 473. Ellen-ed will, but expresses his readiness to borough, C. J. 1813. pay to the party entitled to receive it, And see Sapsford v. Fletcher, 4 T. R. his refusal does not amount to a dis511; Fuller v. Abbott, 4 Taunt. 105. avowal of the title of the devisees so as 29. And it is sufficient to call the to entitle them to maintain ejectment collector, who received the amount, with- without notice. Doe d. Williams v. out producing the assessment. Philips Pasquali, Peake, 196. Kenyon, C. J. v. Beer, 4 Campb. 266. Ellenborough, 1793. C. J. 1815.

And see Throgmorton v. Whelpdale, 30. But property-tax not yet paid, Bull. N. P. 96; Lumley v. Hodgson, cannot be deducted on the ground of the 16 East, 99; Atkyns v. Lord Willoughliability of the demised premises. Pocock by, 2 Anst. 397; Doe d. Foster v. Wilv. Eustace, 2 Campb. 181. Ellenbo-liams, Cowp. 621, 2; F. N. B. 179, K. rough, C. J. 1809.

37. The acceptance of rent by the

And see Howe v. Synge, 15 East, 448. remainder-man upon a void lease from Abbott, 4 Taunt. 105.

Fuller v.

D. REPAIRS.

31. Tenant from year to year cannot

tenant for life, creates a tenancy from
year to year, and entitles the party to no-
tice. Doe d. Martin v. Watts, 2 Esp.
501. Hotham, B. Guildford, 1796.
And the court of K. B. discharged a

be required to make lasting and substan-rule to set aside nonsuit; 7 T. R. 83.

tial repairs. Ferguson v.

Esp. 590. Kenyon, C. J. 1797.

2

38. If the attorney of an infant lessor in ejectment make a bona fide compro

32. But it was said that he is bound mise with the defendant, who, in con

sequence thereof, attorns to such infant | which cannot mislead the tenant, is imlessor, the latter cannot, at full age, material. Doe d. Cox and others v. bring another ejectment without notice, 4 Esp. 185. Ellenborough, though he have done no act to confirm C. J. 1802. the agreement. Doe d. Miller v. Noden, 2 Esp. 530. Kenyon, C. J. 1797.

39. A tenant who holds over after the expiration of his lease, is not entitled to notice, unless the occupation has continued for a year, or rent has been paid. Doe d. Hollingsworth v. Stennett, 2 Esp. 717. Kenyon, C. J. 1799.

And see Whiteacre v. Symonds, 10 East, 13; Richardson v. Langridge, 4 Taunt. 128.

45. A notice to quit need not be in writing. Doe d. Lord Macartney v. J. Crick and W. Crick, 5 Esp. 196. Ellenborough, C. J. 1805.

46. Though given on behalf of a corporation aggregate. Roe dem. Dean and Chapter of Rochester v. Pierce, 2 Campb. 96. Macdonald, C. B. Maidstone, 1806.

47. An ejectment may be supported on a notice given by the steward of a 40. A stranger gets into possession of corporation aggregate, without shewing an empty house without the privity of that he had a power of attorney for the the owner, and an ineffectual negotia- purpose; the adoption of the notice by tion for a lease afterwards takes place bringing the action being a sufficient between the parties; the owner may proof of his authority. Ibid. recover the possession in ejectment without giving any notice to quit. Doe d. Knight v. Quigley, 2 Campb. 505. Ellenborough, Č. J. 1810.

And see Right v. Bawden and others, 3 East, 260; Denn d. Brune v. Rawlins, 10 East, 261.

41. Ejectment lies without notice to quit against vendee in possession under proviso that in default of payment of any instalment, vendor shall not be compellable to convey. Doe d. Moore v. Lawder, 1 Stark. 308. Ellenborough, C. J. 1816.

But see Co. Litt. 245, a. b. 258, a. post, D. (c) 54.

48. Under an agreement between landlord and tenant, "that either party may determine the tenancy by a quarter's notice," such notice must expire at the season of the year when the tenancy commenced. Doe d. Pitcher v. Donovan, 2 Campb. 78. Mansfield, C. J. 1809.

And the court of C. P. set aside a verdict for the landlord; 1 Taunt. 555. 49. Under an agreement by which the tenant is always to quit at three 42. Where upon a treaty for the as-months' notice," the notice must expire signment of a term from A. to B. it was at some quarter-day corresponding with agreed that B. should pay the purchase- the time of entering. Kemp v. Derrett, money on a certain day, that he should 3 Campb. 510. Ellenborough, C. J. in the mean time have possession and 1814.

pay rent, and that if the purchase- 50. Where lands and tithes are held money should not be paid at the day, under a parol demise at an entire rent, he should not be entitled to an assign-notice to quit the lands only, omitting ment, it was held, that upon failure of the tithes, is not sufficient to determine payment, A. might maintain ejectment the demise in respect of the lands. Doe against B. without notice, or demand of d. Morgan v. Church, 3 Campb. 71. possession. Doe d. Leeson v. Sayer, 3 Le Blanc, J. Monmouth, 1811. Campb. 8. Ellenborough, C. J. 1811. 51. But notice to quit the lands and 43. Ejectment against co-partner, af-premises will include the tithes. Ibid. ter dissolution of partnership, for a house agreed to be occupied by the partners, during its continuance, and held, that no notice to quit was necessary. Doe d. Waithman v. Miles, 1A. and B., where A. only is entitled, Stark. 181. Ellenborough, C. J. 1816.

E. (b) Form of notice. 44. A misdescription of the premises,

E. (c) By whom given.

52. A notice to quit in the names of

is good, and will support an ejectment on the single demise of A. Doe d. T. Jolliffe, J. Jolliffe, and W. Bowerman, v. Sybourn, 2 Esp. 677. Kenyon, C. J. Maidstone, 1798.