« PrejšnjaNaprej »
1. A. gave his clerk 5l., out of which he was to pay for an advertisement; he paid 17., but told A. he had paid 21. Os. 6d., and accounted with A. accordingly:-Held, no embezzlement; and that, if in such a case the indictment, besides containing a count for embezzlement, contained a count for a larceny charged to have been committed in manner and form aforesaid," the prisoner could not be convicted on that count. Rex v. Murray, 145
2. Where a party is charged with embezzlement, the Judge, before the indictment is found, will order the prosecutor to furnish the prisoner with a particular of the charges, if the prisoner make an affidavit that he does not know what the charges are, and that he has applied to the prosecutor for a particular, and it has been refused. Rex v. Bootyman, 300
3. The prisoner had worked for the prosecutor sometimes as a regular labourer and sometimes as a roundsman, but, at the time in question, he, not being at all in the prosecutor's service, was sent by the prosecutor to get a check cashed at a banker's, for doing which he was to be paid sixpence. He got the cash and made off:-Held, no embezzlement, as the prisoner was not a servant of the prosecutor within the meaning of the stat. 7 & 8 Geo. 4, c. 29, s. 47. Rex v. Freeman,
3. If a plea justifying a libel state that an information was laid before a magistrate, an examined copy of the magistrate's conviction, reciting the information, is sufficient proof of the information. Scarth v. Gardener, 38
4. In slander, the words imputed the prescribing of medicines in improper doses, and the defendant justified:-Held, that medical books, which were stated by the medical witnesses to be works of medical authority, could not be put in, to shew that such doses were sanctioned; but, that the medical witnesses might be asked their judgment, and the grounds of it, which might in some degree be founded on these books as a part of their general knowledge. Collier v. Simpson,
5. A. brought an action against the sheriff for a false return of nulla bona to a fi. fa. issued against the goods of B. B. had filed a bill of discovery against A., on which there had been a decree or order, that A. should bring into the Court of Chancery all letters written by B. or any other person to him respecting the original debt. A., under this decree or order, brought in various letters: -Held, that none of them could be read in evidence on the part of the defendant in the present action, without first putting in the bill and answer. Hewitt v. Piggott,
6. The statements in a special plea, on which judgment has been given for the plaintiff on demurrer, cannot be used at the trial of the cause as an admission on the record by the defendant; but the cause must be tried on the general issue, without any reference to the special plea at all. Firmin v. Crucifix,
7. If, in a case of felony, a witness for the prosecution is too ill to attend the assizes, this is a good ground for postponing the trial, but will not autherize the reading the deposition of the witness taken before the magistrate. Rex v. Savage, 143
8. A conversation between a client, who afterwards becomes bankrupt, and his attorney's clerk, on the subject of his affairs, is a privileged communication, and cannot be given in evidence in an action by his assignees, for the purpose of shewing his motives. Bowman v. Norton, 177
9. A witness formed his opinion of the hand-writing of a party from having observed it signed to an affidavit used in the cause (on a motion to postpone) by the counsel for the party against whom it was proposed to be proved:-Held, sufficient. Smith v. Sainsbury,
10. A witness is not only not bound to answer a question, the answer to
which would criminate him, but he is not bound to answer any question, the answer to which would tend to criminate him. A witness is, therefore, not bound to answer whether he wrote an advertisement referring to libellous letters which the prosecutor had received; and, though he is bound to answer whether he knows in whose handwriting it is, he is not bound to name the person, as it may be himself. Rex v. Slaney, 213
11. A clerk who has seen numerous letters addressed by a party to his employer, and has acted on those letters, may prove the handwriting of such party. Ibid.
12. An information for a libel stated that the prosecutor had received certain anonymous letters, and that of and concerning those letters the defendant published a libellous placard. The defendant was proved to have caused the placard to be published. In the placard it was asked if the prosecutor had not received certain warning. The prosecutor stated that he understood that to refer to the letters, and that he should not have understood the meaning of the placard if he had not received the letters:Held, that the letters might be read in evidence as explanatory of the placard, without proof of the handwriting of them. Ibid.
13. The statements in a special plea, which has been holden bad on demurrer, are not evidence for the plaintiff on the general issue, although the jury are to assess damages as well as to try the case on the general issue. Montgomery v. Richardson, 247
14. Any evidence that is a confirmation of the original case cannot be given as evidence in reply; and the only evidence that can be given in reply, is that which goes to cut down the defence without being any confirmation of the original case. Rex v. Hilditch,
15. Where the examination on interrogatories of an absent witness is read on the part of the plaintiff, the whole, including the answers to the cross-interrogatories, must be read as part of his case. Temperley v. Scott, 341
16. A witness cannot be called to contradict another who denies having made a particular statement, if such statement was not of a fact, but only of a matter of opinion; as such statement of opinion does not come within the rule which confines contradictions to matters directly connected with the issue in the cause. Elton v. Larkins,
17. Written admissions made for the purpose of a former trial may be used on a new trial. If the party who made them wishes to withdraw them, he should take out a summons before a Judge, in order to obtain his permission. Ibid.
18. If the clerk of an attorney has the management of a cause, what he says is receivable in evidence, the same as if it had been said by the attorney himself. Standage v. Creighton,
406 19. A debtor, being in prison, wrote to the town agents of his creditors' attornies, requesting them to send a confidential clerk to him, with whom he might communicate on the subject of his creditors' claim: -Held, in an action by the creditors to recover the claim, that what the debtor said to the person who went to him in consequence of his letter, was receivable in evidence, even though the subject-matter of the communication was an offer of 10s. in the pound. Hill v. Elliott, 436
20. A witness for the defence cannot be asked whether he has heard a witness for the prosecution commit perjury on the trial of a cause; and, in stating whether he would believe that witness on his oath, he must do so from his knowledge of the witness's
general character, and not from having heard him give particular evidence on a particular trial. Rex v. Hemp, 468
21. The minute book of a Court of Quarter Sessions is not evidence of its proceedings. The record should be made up on parchment, and an examined copy produced by a witness who examined it. Rex v. Thring, 507
22. On the trial of an indictment for arson, a witness for the prosecution was himself in custody on a charge of felony. The counsel for the prisoner wished to ask him, "Have you not said that you committed the offence for which you are now in custody?"-Held, that this question ought not to be put. Rex v. Pegler, 521
23. What a party says is evidence against himself as an admission, notwithstanding it may relate to the contents of a written paper. Earle v. Picken,
24. The counsel for the prosecution opened that he should call A. and B. as witnesses, the former being a King's evidence. Both before and after those persons were called the prisoner's counsel were allowed to ask the other witnesses, whether A. and B. were not persons of very bad character. Rex v. Nichols, 600
1. A tradesman can only recover against a person making a false representation of the means of one who referred to him, such damage as is justly and immediately referable to the false representation. Therefore, if the tradesman gives an indiscreet and illjudging credit, he cannot make the referee answerable for any loss occasioned by it. Corbett v. Brown, 363
2. A party bought a ship under a representation that she was copper fastened. He ascertained in the course of a few days that she was not, but did not make any complaint to the seller till several months afterwards, when she had been on a voyage and returned:-Held, that this delay would not prevent his recovering, provided the action was in other respects maintainable. Freeman v. Baker, 475
3. Held, also, that "Lloyd's Register of Shipping" was not admissible in evidence to shew that the vessel was considered as copper fastened. Ibid.
4. The contract stated, that the vessel was to be delivered with all her stores according to the inventory. The inventory was at the end of the advertisement for the sale:-Held, that this did not import into the contract the representation as to the vessel
contained in the advertisement, as the vessel itself was not mentioned in the inventory, but only the stores. Ibid. 5. The questions for the jury in such a case are, whether the vessel was in fact copper fastened; and, if it was not, did the seller know that it was not? and, if he did, did he use any means to conceal the fact from the buyer? Ibid.
1. An indictment for a forcible entry cannot be supported by evidence of a mere trespass; but there must be proof of such force, or at least such shew of force, as is calculated to prevent any resistance. Rex v. Smyth,
2. If a wife, separated from her husband, take a house of which the husband, with the landlord's consent, obtains possession:-Semble, that if the wife come with others and make a forcible entry into this house, she may be convicted on an indictment for a forcible entry, stating it to be the house of the husband. Ibid.
3. Where a constable entered a house with a warrant in his hand, and searched it, and for such entering and searching was indicted for a forcible entry:-Held, that his counsel might ask the witnesses for the prosecution what the constable said at the time as to whom he was searching for. Ibid.
that no person named G. A. keeps an account with or has any right to draw on Messrs. J. L. & Co., is prima facie evidence that G. A. is a fictitious person. Rex v. Backler, 118
3. Where a bill purported to be accepted by "Samuel Knight, Marketplace, Birmingham"-It was held, on an indictment for the forgery of the acceptance, that the result of inquiries made at Birmingham by the prosecutor, who was not acquainted with the place, was evidence for the Jury, though neither the best nor the usual evidence, given to prove the non-existence of a party whose name is used. Rex v. King,
4. The practice of issuing county court processes in blank for the attornies to fill up after they have been issued by the county clerk, is highly irregular; and semble, that the filling up of a county court summons, or altering a distringas into a summons after it has been so issued in blank, is a forgery at common law. Rex v. Collier, 160
5. An indictment which charges a forged check to be "a warrant and order for the payment of money, which said warrant and order is in the words and figures following," is good. Rex v. Crowther,
6. A forged check on the W. bank was presented for payment at the S. bank, where the supposed drawer never kept cash:-Held, that this was sufficient evidence of an intent to defraud the partners of the S. bank, although there was no probability of their paying the check, even if it had been genuine. Ibid.
7. A person who obtained goods on delivering a forged letter-" Please to let the bearer W. T. have for J. R. 4 yards of linen," signed J. R., is not indictable for obtaining goods by false pretence, as this is uttering a forged request for the delivery of goods which is a felony under sect. 10, of the stat. 1 Will. 4, c. 66. Rex v. Evans, 553
1. To bring a party within the stat. 52 Geo. 3, c. 93, for not producing his game certificate, it is not necessary that the demand of it should be made on the land on which he was sporting; but the demand must be made so immediately after the party has left the land, as to form a part of the same transaction. Scarth v. Gardener, 38
2. It is not necessary that the person making the demand should produce any certificate; and if the other party refuses to produce his, he takes the risk of whether the person demanding is one having a right to make such demand. Ibid.
3. If a person refuses to produce his game certificate, or to tell his name or residence, the person demanding need not go on to ask in what place, if any, he is assessed to the game duty. Ibid.
GOODS LET ON HIRE.
GOODS NOT CONFORMABLE TO CONTRACT.
Where a party contracted to supply and erect a warm air apparatus for a certain sum:-Held, in an action for the price, (the defence to which was, that the apparatus did not answer,) that, if the jury thought it was substantial in the main, though not quite so complete as it might be under the contract, and could be made good at a reasonable rate, the proper course would be to find a verdict for the plaintiff, deducting such sum as would enable the defendant to do what was requisite. Cutler v. Close, 337
See CHARITABLE INSTITUTION. A. sold to B. a butt of wine, which was not delivered. B. compounded with his creditors, and the amount of