B. POINTS ON PARTICULAR (And see PENAL ACTION.) B. (a) 31 Eliz. cap. 12. sect. 4. (Stolen horses.) for disturbing a congregation of protestant dissenters, that the defendant committed the outrage for the purpose of asserting his right to the office of clerk. Rex v. Hube and others, Peake, 131. Kenyon, C. J. 1792. Ibid. 13. On the trial of such an indict5. To shew that a magistrate was au- ment, it need not be shewn that the thorized to cause a horse to be re-deli-minister has taken the oaths. vered to the owner, it must be proved 14. The oaths being of record cannot that the horse was actually stolen. Jo-be proved by parol. sephs v. Adkins, 2 Stark. 76. Ellenbo- 15. A congregation of foreign Luthe rough, C. J. 1817. Ibid. 6. An order to the officer entered in chapel in the German language, are rans, conducting the service of their the magistrate's current book, cannot within the protection of this statute. operate as a warrant. Ibid. 7. A warrant against the felon will not justify the taking of the horse out of the hands of the vendor. Ibid. 8. The original owner is a competent witness to prove the theft in an action Ibid. 16. The prosecutor may remove an indictment under this statute into B. R. by certiorari. Ibid. S. C. and S. P. 5 T. R. 542. by the vendor against the seizing officer. B. (e) 7 & 8 Will. III. cap. 4. (Treat Ibid. B. (b) 12 Car. II. cap. 18. (Navigation Act.) Infra, B. (bb). 9. A Holstein vessel, naturalized in ing.) 17. It being contrary to the treating act for a candidate to furnish provisions for any voters after the teste of the writ, an innkeeper cannot maintain an action Russia by being repaired there at an for provisions supplied even to non-resiexpense exceeding two-thirds of her dent voters. Lofhouse, executor, &c. v. whole value, is not a Russian vessel Wharton, esq. M. P. 1 Campb. 550 n. within the meaning of the Act. Red-Wood, B. Durham, 1808. head and another v. Cator, 1 Stark. 14. Ellenborough, C. J. 1815. B. (c) 31 Car. II. cap. 2. (Habeas corpus.) B. (f) 9 & 10 Will. III. cap. 41. (Naval stores.) Vide infra, B. (n). (g) 8 Ann. 9. cap. 9. (Apprentices.) (And see ante, STAMPS, pl. 3.) 10. A person sent over from Ireland under a warrant from the secretary of B. state there, and committed under such warrant to the Poultry Compter, is entitled to a copy of the warrant within 18. Where it is agreed between the six hours after demand. Sedley v. Ar-father of an apprentice and the master, bouin, executor of West, 3 Esp. 174. that a premium of 201. shall be paid, Eldon, C. J. 1800. and the master afterwards, for the sake 11. And the penalty incurred by re- of reducing the stamp, agrees to take fusing a copy, is not waved by a sub-191. 19s. 6d. which is inserted in the sequent delivery and acceptance. Ibid. indenture and paid, the indenture is N. As to the authority of a secretary not void by 8 Ann. cap. 9. s. 32. (or of state to commit. Vide Rex v. Ken-s. 35. and 39.) Shepherd v. Hall, 3 dal, 1 Salk. 347; S. C. 1 Lord Raym. Campb. 180. Ellenborough, C. J. 1812. 65; Rex. v. Wilkes, 2 Wils. 151. B. (d) 1 Will. & Mar. cap. 18. (Tole ration.) 12. It is no defence to an indictment B. (h) 1 Geo. I. stat. 2. cap. 5. (Hundred. Riot.) (And see ante, Riot Act.) 19. The hundred are liable for things demolished or destroyed, but not for Cooper, et alt. v. Booth, 3 Esp. 135. what is taken away. Smith v. Bolton, K. B. T. 1785. Holt, 201. Le Blanc, J. 1816, York. And see 2 Wms. Saund. 377, a. 27. And the magistrate or the commissioners who grant the warrant, are 20. If the mob, after breaking the the sole judges of the reasonableness windows and doing other damage, retire of the suspicion. Ibid. spontaneously, without demolishing, the hundred are not liable. Anon. Holt, B. (1) 7 Geo. II. cap. 8. s. 8. and 11. 203, n. Ellenborough, C. J. 1816. (Stockjobbing.) 21. But slight evidence is sufficient to raise the presumption of an intent to 28. An undertaking to replace stock demolish; as where the rioters appear lent is valid, though there be no stock to have been checked by the proximity standing in the name of the promisor of troops. Ibid. at the time of the agreement. Saunders 22. Breaking inside shutters, window v. Davison, et alt. 2 Esp. 698. Kenyon, sill, and wood of fan light, is a beginning to pull down, if the mob are interrupted before they have an opportunity of proceeding further. Sampson v. Chambers and another, 4 Campb. 221. ner, 2 Esp. 631. Kenyon, C. J. 1798. Ellenborough, C. J. 1815. C. J. 1798. S. P. Sanders v. Kentish, 8 T. R. 162. 29. Omnium is stock within the meaning of the statute. Brown v. Tur 30. In another case it was said that Olivierson v. 23. Secus, where the mob voluntarily the holder of omnium is potentially retire, "satiated with such an incep- Coles, 1 Stark. 496. Ellenborough, a possessor of stock. tion." Lord King v. Chambers and another, 4 Campb. 377. Ellenborough, C. J. 1816. C. J. 1816. See the law and practice in actions on 1 Geo. I. stat. 2. cap. 5. in the notes to Pinkney v. Inhabitants of Rutland, 2 Wms. Saund. 374. 31. An action, therefore, lies for not replacing stock for omnium. Ibid. 32. A bill for differences is void in the hands of an indorsee, with notice. Steers v. Lashley, 1 Esp. 166. Kenyon, C. J. 1794. And the court discharged a rule for a B. (i) 6 Geo. I. cap. 18. (Joint stock new trial. Ibid. and 6 T. R.61. companies.) 33. But a wager respecting the profits of a lottery contract is not within the 24. If merchants raise a joint fund, act. Mortimer v. Salkeld, 4 Campb. 42. and underwrite each other's property Ellenborough, C. J. 1814. severally, the insurance is legal, though losses be paid out of the joint fund. Harrison v. Millar, 2 Esp. 513. Kenyon, C. J. 1796. B. (m) 17 Geo. II. cap. 40. s. 10. (Naval stores.) S. C. 7 T. R. 340, n. 34. Where stores with the king's 25. It is an offence against 6 Geo. I. mark are found in the defendant's pos cap. 18. to act as secretary to an unin-session, it lies upon him to discharge corporated joint stock company. No himself, either by producing a navy indictment will therefore lie for a con-board certificate, or shewing that the spiracy to deprive a person of such an articles were purchased from a person appointment. Rex v. Stratton and others, who may be presumed to have a certi1 Campb. 549, n. Ellenborough, C. J. ficate. Rex v. Banks, 1 Esp, 144, 6. Kenyon, C. J. 1794. 1809. 35. If A. upon the suggestion of B. make a seizure of naval stores, and communicate the intelligence to the admiralty, B. is the party entitled to a moiety a of the penalty under the statute. Ibid. 36. Held, that an informer entitled under this statue to a moiety of the 26. An excise officer who obtains search warrant under the act, may justify an entry, though no goods be found. penalty for embezzling naval stores, is And see Anon. 1 Stra. 446; Weller an incompetent witness for the prosecu-v. Toke, 9 East, 364; Clements v. tion, unless he will release his interest. Keen, 2 Smith, 220. 43. Nor if he act without a warrant. Rex v. Blackman, 1 Esp. 95. Kenyon, Postlethwaite v. Gibson and Slade, 3 C. J. 1794. 37. But in a subsequent case the in-Esp. 226. Kenyon, C. J. 1800. S. C. Selwyn, 824, n. 15. former was admitted, it being in the discretion of the court to fine or imprison. Rex v. Cole, Peake, 217, and 1 Esp. 169. Kenyon, C. J. 1794. As to the discretionary power of punishing under these statutes, see Rex v. Bland, 5 T. R. 370. B. (n) 24 Geo. II. cap. 18. s. 1. (Special jury.) And see Money v. Leach, 3 Burr. 1742. 44. A constable acting under a warrant from a magistrate, cannot be sued without a demand of a copy of the warrant, notwithstanding the illegality of the warrant, or the want of jurisdiction in the magistrate. Price v. Messenger, et alt. 3 Esp. 96. Eldon, C. J. 1800. And the court coincided with the C. J. Ibid. 100, and 2 Bos. and Pul. 158. 38. In criminal cases a judge cannot certify for the costs of a special jury. The King, on the prosecution of Sermon, 45. Where the plaintiff declares gev. Lord Abingdon, 1 Esp. 226. Ken-nerally, without charging the defendyon, C. J. 1794. ants as officers, he need not prove a demand of a copy of the warrant until the defendants have made it part of their case. Ibid. B. (0) 24 Geo. II. cap. 40. s. 12. (Retailing spirits.) 39. Semble, that this statute merely prohibits the selling of small quantities Sed vide ante, PRACTICE. pl. 114. act.) of spirits to the consumer, and does not B. (q) 14 Geo. III. cap. 78. (Building extend to liquors sold to a person who keeps an eating house, for the purpose 1793. 46. A verbal promise by the occuof supplying his guests. Jackson pier to pay what is right and fair toAttrill, Peake, 180. Kenyon, C. J.wards the rebuilding of a party wall, dispenses with the formalities of the statute, and with the necessity of shewing that he is the owner of the improved rent. Stewart v. Smith, Holt, 321. Gibbs, C. J. 1816. 40. Upon the statement of an account arising out of cross demands, credit is given for the amount of spirits sold in quantities under the value of 20s. In an action for the balance these items cannot be disputed. Dawson v. Remnant, 6 Esp. 24. Mansfield, C. J. 1806. 41. Nor is it any defence to an action on a bill of exchange, that it was accepted by the defendant for the amount of small quantities of spirits sold to him. by the plaintiff. Spencer v. Smith, 3 Campb. 10. Ellenborough, C. J. 1811. Contra, Scott v. Gilmore, 3 Taunt. 226. B. (p) 24 Geo. II. cap. 44. s. 8. (Protection of justices, &c.) And the court refused a rule for a new trial. 7 Taunt. 178. B. (r) 24 Geo. III. cap. 48. s. 3. (Excise.) 47. Packages of starch exceeding 28 lbs. must be marked with the word starch, though ground down to the fineness of hair powder. Aitcheson and another v. Madock, one, &c. another, Peake, 162. Kenyon, C. J. 1792. 48. So where it is manufactured into sago powder. Rex v. Stringer. Skynner, C. B. Exch. cited ibid. 42. An officer acting colore officii, and not virtute officii, is not protected B. (s) 26 Geo. III. cap. 60. (Registry.) from actions brought after the expira tion of six months. Alcock v. Andrews, 49. Vessels employed in inland navi2 Esp. 542, n. Kenyon, C. J. 1788.gation only, are not within the act. Laroche, bart. and others, v. Wakeman trate of a port in the West Indies, auand another, Peake, 140. Kenyon, C. thorizing the master of a vessel to enJ. 1792. B. (t) 26 Geo. III. cap. 50; 28 Geo. III. cap. 20; 29 Geo. III. cap. 53; (Whale fishery.) 50. Arrival at a place within the exchequer survey of a port, though no duties be in fact collected in such place, is a returning to a port in Great Britain, within the meaning of these acts. con, knight, et alt. v. Hooper, et alt. 1 Esp. 246. Kenyon, C. J. 1794. La 51. The months within which the voyage is to be performed must be taken to be lunar months. Ibid. And see post, TIME. gage seamen at more than double the usual rate, must specify the wages to be given. Rodgers v. Lacy, 3 Esp. 43. Eldon, C. J. 1799. And the court of C. P. refused a rule to set aside a nonsuit. Ibid. and 2 Bos. & Pul. 57. B. (y) 39 Geo. III. cap. 58. (Porterage.) 56. The statute 39 Geo. III. cap. 58. for the prevention of extortion in porterage, is cumulative, and does not affect the operation of stat. 30 Geo. II. cap. 24. for obtaining money by false pretences. 1 Campb. 215. Ellenborough, 52. An affidavit verifying the muster-C. J. 1808. roll, upon which it appears that the (Pawnbroker.) proper number of apprentices was on B. (z) 39 & 40 Geo. III. c. 9. s. 5 § 15. board when the vessel cleared out, is a sufficient proof of the fact of such apprentices being on board when the vessel sailed. Ibid. N. These statutes are repealed, and other regulations made by 35 Geo. III. cap. 92. B. (u) 33 Geo. III. cap. 54. (Friendly societies.) 53. The rules of a benefit friendly society are enrolled at the quarter sessions. Trustees appointed under new regulations not confirmed by the magistrates under s. 3. are not enabled to sue under s. 11. Battey and another v. Townrow, 4 Campb. 5. Ellenborough, C. J. 1814. And see 35 Geo. III. cap. 111; 2 Saund. 47 f, g. 57. A. is entrusted by B. with cloth for sale, which A. pawns to C. After demand and refusal, B. may maintain trover against C. without tendering the duplicate. Peet and another v. Baxter, 1 Stark. 472. Ellenborough, C. J. 1816. B. (aa) 43 Geo. III. cap. 58. s."1. (New felonies.) (And see ante, FELONY, D.) And see ante, FELONY, pl. 14. B. (w) 34 Geo. III. cap. 9. s. 1. and 7. grievous bodily harm," apply only to (Alien.) wounds in a vital part, inflicted under circumstances which, in case of death, 54. The alien bill furnishes no de- would have amounted to murder. Rex fence to an action brought by a person v. James Akenhead, Holt, 469. Bayley, who comes here with an intention of J. Northumberland, 1816. returning to the enemy's country. Michelotte v. Dillon, 2 Esp. 622. B. (bb) 43 Geo. III. cap. 155, s. 13. Kenyon, C. J. 1798. B. (x) 37 Geo. III. cap. 73. s. 3. (Seamen's wages.) (Exception from Navigation act.) 60. Cotton wool is not included in "all sorts of wool," when the words wool and cotton wool are used in ano 55. A licence from the chief magis-ther clause of the statute. Pearce and STATUTES.-STOCK.-STOPPAGE IN TRANSITU. 281 others v. Cowie, 4 Campb. 363. Holt, and others, Holt, 466. Bayley, J. Durham, 1816. 69. Gibbs, C. J. 1815. 67. Semble, that a staith, part of a Ibid. colliery, is not within the act. B. (cc) 43 Geo. III. cap. 183. (Certificated conveyancers.) 61. The certificate qualifies only members of the inns of court. Edgar v. Hunter, Holt, 528. 62. But an agreement made by an unqualified person, binds the parties. Ibid. See 3 Taunt. 235, 465; 14 East, 576. B. (dd) 47 Geo. III. sess. 2. cap. 68. s. 24. (Coal ticket.) STOCK. (And see ante, AGENT, pl. 78; BOND, 1. A transfer of stock by the debtor to the creditor, is evidence of payment on a plea of solvit post diem. Breton v. deli-Cope, executor, Peake, 30. Kenyon, C. 63. The copy of the certificate vered to the clerk of the market, de J. 1791. 2. A bill given for the amount of dif scribing the defendant as master of the ferences upon stock-jobbing transacvessel, is not evidence of a sending by tions, is void in the hands of an indorsee him, without proof aliunde of his being with notice. Steers v. Lashley, 1 Esp. master. Alldred v. Halliwell, 1 Stark. 166. Kenyon, C. J. 1794. 117. Ellenborough, C. J. 1815. And the court of K. B. discharged a And see ante, EVIDENCE, E. (a) rule for a new trial. Ibid. and 6 T. R. pl. 99. B. (gg) 52 Geo. III. cap. 130. s. 2. (Demolishing manufactories.) 66. The burning of manufactories may be described as demolishing, though burning is expressly mentioned in the act. 61. 3. Omnium is stock within the meaning of the statute against stock-jobbing. Brown v. Turner, 2 Esp. 631. Kenyon, C. J. 1798. 4. The holder of omnium is potenOlivierson v. tially a holder of stock. Coles, 1 Stark. 496. Ellenborough, C. J. 1816. 5. And he may sue a party for not replacing stock for the amount of omnium transferred by him to such party. Ibid. STOPPAGE IN TRANSITU. A. BY WHOM. B. OF WHAT SPECIES OF PROPERTY. D. EFFECT of. A. BY WHOM. 1. A. ships goods and sends the bill Nesham and others v. Armstrong of lading to B. but by mistake, omil |