« PrejšnjaNaprej »
such circumstances, is a privileged he had not got them, and refused to communication; and no action will lie tell who had :-Held, that if, after this, for what is thus written, unless the trover was brought against A., he writer be actuated by malice. Cock- could not insist on a lien on the goods ayne v. Hodgkisson,
543 for the money he had advanced to 3. A., being a tenant of B., was get the goods out of pledge. Joncs v. desired by B. to inform him if he saw Cliff
560 or heard anything respecting the game.
LIGHTS. A. wrote a letter to B., informing B.
See BUILDING Act, 1. that his gamekeeper sold game: Held, that, if A. had been so inform
That diminution of light and air ed, and believed the fact to be so,
which the law recognises as the ground this was a privileged communication,
of an action against a party who builds and that the gamekeeper could not
near another's premises, is such as maintain
really makes them, to a sensible de4. In such a case the defendant may
gree, less fit for the purposes of busigive in evidence representations made
ness or occupation. Parker v. Smith,
438 to him as to the conduct of the gamekeeper, but cannot go into evidence
LIMITATION. of the acts done by the gamekeeper. 1. If, since the stat. 9 Geo. 4, c. 14,
Ibid. a defendant by a letter admit a ba5. Libel, imputing that the plaintiff lance to be due, without stating the had received rose wood, knowing it amount, this will take the case out of to have been stolen. Pleas of justifi- the statute of limitations, so as to encation, stating that B. had stolen the title the plaintiff to nominal damages. rose wood from A., and that the plain- Dickenson v. Hatfield,
46 tiff had received it, knowing it to have 2. The object of the stat. 9 Geo. 4, been stolen :-Held, that the defen- c. 14, was to procure that in writing for dant's counsel might ask what B, which words were previously suffisaid, with a view of proving that B. cient.
Ibid. committed the larceny; and held, also, 3. A letter, stating that an appointthat the plaintiff's counsel might ask ment of funds to pay a debt due from the defendant's witnesses, what was the defendant to the plaintiff had been the plaintiff's general character for made, and that Mr. Y. was one of the honesty. Powell v. Harper, 590 trustees, but that some time must
elapse before the trustees would be LIEN.
in cash, will not take the case out of the
statute of limitations, as it is at most See INSOLVENT, 8.-Stage Coach, 1. only a promise to pay as soon as the
1. A person's having a lien upon a trustees are in cash. But, semble, document is no objection to his pro- that the creditor's remedy would be ducing it on a trial at Nisi Prius; but, by a bill in equity against the trustees. if he fears that it may be abstracted, Whippy v. Hillary,
209 the Judge will allow him to stand by 4. A defendant had written a letter the witness while the witness is exa. to T., to make a proposition to the mined respecting it. Thompson v. plaintiff respecting a debt he owed Mosely,
him; and in this letter be desired T. 2. X. was desired by B. to go to a to arrange
with the whole of his cre. pawnbroker, and take goods of B. out ditors. T. wrote a letter to the plainof pledge. A. did so; but, on B. tiff, offering an acceptance for 7s.6d. sending to A. for the goods, A. said in the pound on the debt;-Held,
not sufficient to take the case out of magistrate to go out and head the the statute of limitations. Gibson v. constables, neither is it any part of his Baghott,
211 duty to marshal and arrange them; 5. A., who was tenant for life, with a neither is it any part of his duty to power of appointment by will attest- hire men to assist him in putting down ed by three credible witnesses, by his a riot; nor to keep a body of men, as will attested by three witnesses ap- a reserve, to act as occasion may repointed the lands to B. for life, and quire. Neither is he bound to call after her death to C. in fee, B. was out the Chelsea pensioners, any more one of the witnesses to the will, and than the rest of the king's subjects; the appointment to her was therefore nor is it any part of his duty to give void. On the death of the testator, the any orders respecting the fire-arms in husband of B. entered, and held the the gunsmiths' shops. Nor is a maland till his death, which was three gistrate bound to ride with the miliyears after the death of B.:-Held, tary; if he gives the military officer that the statute of limitations did not orders to act, that is all that is requirbegin to run against C. till the death ed of him.
Ibid. of B. Doe d. Allen v. Blakeway, 563 3. Mere good feeling and upright
intention in a magistrate will be no MACHINE BREAKING, defence, if he has been guilty of a neOn an indictment on the stat. 7 &
glect of his duty. Nor will the fact 8 Geo. 4, c. 30, s. 4, for breaking a
of his having acted under the advice threshing machine, the Judge allow
of others be any defence for him. ed a witness to be asked whether the
The question is, whether he did all
that he knew was in his power, and mob by whom the machine was brok
which could be expected from a man en did not compel persons to go with them, and then compel each person
of ordinary prudence, firmness, and activity.
lbid. to give one blow to the machine; and
4. On the trial of a magistrate for also whether, at the time when the
neglect of duty, he ought not to be prisoner and hiinself were forced to
found guilty, unless all the Jury are join the mob, they did not agree to
satisfied that he has been guilty of gether to run away from the mob the first opportunity. Rex v. Crutchley.
the same act of neglect; and if four
jurors think him guilty of one act of 133
neglect, and eight think him guilty of MAGISTRATE.
another act of neglect, that is not suf1. The general rules of law require ficient.
Ibid. of magistrates, at the time of a riot, 5. A magistrate may assemble all that they should keep the peace, and the king's subjects to quell a riot, and restrain the rioters, and pursue and may call in the soldiers, who are sub. take them; and to enable them to dojects, and may act as such; but this this, they may call on all the king's should be done with great caution. subjects to assist them; and all the At the time of a riot, a magistrate king's subjects are bound to do so, may repel force by force, before the upon reasonable warning. In point reading of the proclamation from the of law, a magistrate would be justifi. Riot Act. Rex v. Kennelt, 282, n. ed in giving fire-arms to those who 6. If, on a riot taking place, a mathus come to assist him, but it would gistrate neither reads the proclamabe imprudent in him to do so. Rex tion from the Riot Act, nor restrains v. Pinney,
254 nor apprehends the rioters, nor gives 2. It is no part of the duty of a any order to fire on them, nor makes
any use of a military force under his between the parties. The appear. command, this is prima facie evidence ance of the injury was consistent with of a criminal neglect of duty in him; the supposition, either of a blow with and it is no answer to the charge for a hammer, or of a push against the him to say that he was afraid, unless lock or key of a door:- Held, that, if his fear arose from such danger as it was occasioned by a blow with a would affect a firm man; and if, hammer or any other hard substance rather than apprehend the rioters, his held in the hand, it was sufficient to sole care was for himself, this is also support the indictment; but otherneglect.
Ibid. wise, if it was the result of a push
against the door. Rex v. Martin, 128 MALICIOUSLY SUING OUT A
2. An indictment for manslaughter COMMISSION OF BANKRUPT.
charged, that the deceased was In an action for maliciously suing horseback, and that the prisoner struck out a commission of bankrupt, it is him with a stick, and that the deceasnot sufficient to prove merely that ed, from a well-grounded apprehenthe commission was superseded, as a sion of a further attack, which would supersedeas may proceed upon strict have endangered his life, spurred his legal grounds, and does not, there. horse, which became frightened, and fore, furnish evidence of the want of threw him, giving him a mortal fracprobable cause. Hayv.Weakley, 361 ture. The evidence was, that the
prisoner struck the deceased with a MALICIOUS PROSECUTION.
small stick, and that the latter rode 1. In an action for malicious pro- away, and the former rode after him; secution against A. and B., if it ap- whereupon the deceased spurred his pear that both A. and B. entered in- horse, which then winced, and threw to a joint recognizance to prosecute him, whereby he was killed :-Held, and give evidence, but it also ap- that this evidence sufficiently supportpear that A. only employed the at- ed the indictment. R. v. Hickman, 151 torney, and that B. attended before 3. An indictment for manslaughter the magistrate and the Grand Jury at charged that A. gave to the deceased the request of the attorney, the Judge divers mortal blows at P., in the will direct the acquittal of B. Eager county of M., and that the deceased v. Dyott,
4 languished and died at D. in the 2. If C. be entrusted to receive county of K.; and that the prisoner money
for A., with a written direction was then and there aiding in the comfor its application, and C. write a let- mission of the felony :-Held, that ter to A. stating that he has not re- the indictment was good, and that the ceived it, when in fact he has, this is word there referred to P., in the counsufficient evidence of probable cause ty of M. Rex v. Hargrave,
170 to render a prosecution of C., under 4. Although all persons present at the statute 7 & 8 Geo. 4, c. 29, s. 49, and sanctioning a prize fight, where not malicious.
Ibid. one of the combatants is killed, are
guilty of manslaughter, as principals MANSLAUGHTER.
in the second degree; yet they are bot See L. C. J. TINDAL'S CHARGE, p.
such accomplices as to require their 267, n.
evidence to be confirmed, if they are 1. A. was indicted for the man- called as witnesses against other parslaughter of B., by a blow of a ham- ties charged with the manslaughter. 16.
No proof was given of the 5. It is not every slight provocastriking of any blow, only of a scuffle tion, even by a blow, which will, when
the party receiving it strikes with a of the parties who signed the acknowdeadly weapon and death ensues, re- ledgment retired from it. The induce the crime from murder to man- terest was paid from time to time by slaughter. Rex v. Lynch, 324 the different firms, till the last became
6. Any person, whether a licensed bankrupt. The clerk continued to medical practitioner or not, who deals serve all the different firms, and was with the life or health of any of his cognizant of the different changes:Majesty's subjects, is bound to have Held, that he might, notwithstanding, competent skill; and is bound to treat
recover the money he had advanced his or her patients with care, atten- from the two persons who signed the tion, and assiduity; and if a patient acknowledgment. Blew v. Wyatt, 397 dies for want of either, the person is
MURDER. guilty of manslaughter. Rex v. Spiller,
See MANSLAUGHTER. 7. An allegation in an indictment, 1. A. was fighting with his brother ; charging that the death of a person and to prevent this B. laid hold of A., was caused by a plaster made and ap- and held him down upon a locker on plied by the prisoner, is sufficiently board the barge in which they were, proved, by shewing that three plasters but struck no blow. A. stabbed B.: were applied, and that two of them -Held, that if B. did nothing more were applied by the prisoner, and the than was sufficient to prevent A. from third made from materials furnished beating his brother, and had died of by the prisoner.
Ibid. this stab, the offence of A. would have
been murder; but that, if B. did more MASTER AND SERVANT.
than was necessary to prevent the A baker delivered bread from week beating of A.'s brother, it would have to week, and was paid many sums by been manslaughter only.
Rex v. the housekeeper of his customer, and Bourne,
120 receipted weekly bills for a period of 2. A. was charged with suffocating time subsequent to a time for which B. by placing both her hands about the bousekeeper bad not paid him:-- the neck of B.:-Held, that A. might Held, in an action by him to recover be convicted on this indictment if B. from his customer the amount of the was suffocated in
any manner, either unpaid bills, that the question of ney- by A. or by any other person in her ligence was not raised, and that the
presence, she being privy to the complaintiff was entitled to the verdict, as mission of the offence. Rex v. Culthe defendant did not prove that he kin,
121 had given the housekeeper money for 3. The phrase "about the neck," in the purpose of paying the bills in an indictment for murder, is good, and question. Miller v. Hamilton, 433 is not open to the same objection as
“ about the breast."
Ibid. MEDICAL PRACTITIONER.
4. To justify a conviction on an inSee MANSLAUGHTER, 6, 7. dictment charging a woman with the
wilful murder of a child of which she MONEY LENT.
was delivered, and which was born A clerk in a house lent money to alive, the jury must be satisfied affirthe partnership composing it, two of matively that the whole body was them signed an acknowledgment for brought alive into the world; and it is it, agreeing to pay 5l. per cent. inter- not sufficient that the child had breathest. Various changes took place in ed in the progress of the birth. Rex v. the house, in the course of which one Poulton,
5. Where the indictment in such a . 5. In an action of trespass for incase states the child to have been jury done to a horse by a pony and born a bastard, the proof that it was chaise running against it, it was sworn, so, lies on the prosecutor; but evi- on the part of the defendant, that his dence that the prisoner told a person wife was holding the pony by the that she had only mentioned her being bridle, and a showman came by and with child to the father of it, who had frightened the pony, who ran off with lately got married, was held to be suf. the chaise :-Held, that, if true, this ficient proof of the allegation. Ibid. was a good defence on a plea of not
6. If a child has breathed before it guilty. Goodman v. Taylor, 410 is born, this is not sufficiently life to 6. In an action against the captain make the killing of the child murder. of a steain vessel for swamping a There must be an independent circu- loaded wherry on the river by a swell lation in the child, or the child cannot produced by a too rapid rate of pas. be considered as alive for this pur- sage, the jury, to find for the plaintiff, pose. Rex v. Enoch,
539 must be satisfied that the mischief was
occasioned by the swell alone : and if NEGLECT OF DUTY. they think it doubtful whether it was See MAGISTRATE.
or not, or think that the plaintiff contributed to the injury he sustained, by
his own improper conduct, either in NEGLIGENCE.
mismanaging or overloading the boat, 1. A booking-office keeper, who they must find their verdict for the also keeps a wine vaults, is guilty of defendant. Luxford v. Large, 421 negligence, if he allows goods to re- 7. In an action for the negligent main
in front of the bar, exposed to driving the defendant's carriage against persons coming in for liquor, even that of the plaintiff
, the plaintiff canthough they are of too large a size to not examine his servant who drove be conveniently taken behind the coun- his carriage, without releasing bim. ter. Dover v. Mills, 175 Wake v. Lock,
454 2. If a horse and cart are left standing in the street, without any NEW ASSIGNMENT. person to watch them, the owner is
A replication of de injuria in tresliable for any damage done by them,
pass, with a new assignment that the though it be occasioned by the act of defendant committed the trespasses a passer by, in striking the horse. with more violence and in a greater Midge v. Goodwin,
degree than was necessary for the 3. A person driving a carriage is
purposes in the plea mentioned, is not bound to keep on the regular side demurrable. Thomas v. Marsh, 596 of the road; but, if he does not, he must use more care, and keep a bet
NOTICE TO PRODUCE. ter look-out, to avoid concussion, than would be necessary if he were on the
See Arson, 2. proper part of the road. Plucknell
1. A cause came on to be tried at the v. Wilson,
375 Assizes on a Wednesday morning; on 4. A foot-passenger, though he may the previous Monday evening, the debe infirm from disease, has a right to fendant's attorney, being at the assize walk in the carriage-way, and is en- town, was served with a notice to protitled to the exercise of reasonable duce a book, which would probably care on the part of persons driving be at his office, which was nineteen carriages along it. Boss v. Litton, 407 miles from the assize town:-Held,