which the practice of puffing at auctions is treated (p. 52), and in which the Author has expressed an opinion, that the appointment of one puffer is illegal, the question has come before Lord Chief Justice Best at nisi prius, in the case of Crowther v. Austin, which was an action brought by the vendor against the purchaser of a horse sold by auction, to recover the price; when his Lordship nonsuited the plaintiff, on the ground that a puffer had been employed by him to bid at the sale, and has thus sanctioned the Author's opinion. Upon a motion which was made in the last term, for a rule to shew cause why the nonsuit should not be set aside, the Court of Common Pleas granted the rule nisi, in order to settle the question; but all the Judges declared so decided an opinion that the nonsuit was right, that it is believed the plaintiff's counsel do not intend to bring the case again before the Court. 4. Of the vendor's remedy against the auctioneer 94 SECT. I. Of the vendor's right to hold the goods until the conditions of sale are complied with. 2. Of vendee's right to maintain an action for non-compliance with the conditions of sale, 157 4. Of vendee's right of set-off in action brought against him by vendor. . . . . 5. Of vendee's right of action after the sale has 4. Of the allowance of auction duty where estates, &c. bought in by the owner or his agent.. 226 5. Of the right of the auctioneer or vendor to have the auction duty returned, where the sale has not been carried into effect on account of the vendor's want of title |