Page images
PDF
EPUB

TABLE

THE NAMES OF THE CASES REPORTED

IN THIS VOLUME.

A.

PAGS PAGR | Bryan v. Whistler, Clerk . . . 288 Allan, Phillips-v. . . ... 479 Buck, Notley, and Others, Assignees, v. 160 Allen and another, Assignees, v. Sagrue 561 Buckingham, Justices of, Rex v. , 375

-_ . Morrison . . . 565 Burleigh and Others, Executors, v. Stott 36 Archbishop of Canterbury v. Tappen 151 Buszard and Others v. Capel. . 141 Ashley Hay, Inhabitants of, Rex v. : 27 Atkinson and Others, Assignees, v. Bell 277

C.

Capel and Another, Buszard and Others
B.

v. . . . . . . . 141
Bailey v. Calverwell and Others · 448 Carpenter v. Blandford · · · 575
Barham, Inhabitants of, Rex v. . 99 Case, South Carolina Bank v. . . 427
Bate, Michlam v. . . . . 642 Chatfield v. Parker . . . . 543
Baxter, Ex parte . . . . 344 Christchurch, London, Inhabitants of,
Belcher v. Sikes and Others . . 185 Rex v. . . . . . . 660
Bell, Atkinson and Others v., 277 | Clark, Doe dem. Thompson and Others
Bell, Sparkes v. . . . • 1 v.

.
. .

. . . . . . 717. Bennet v. Edwards . . . . 702 Coaks, Jay, Gent, one, &c. v. . . 635 Benton, Harrod v. . . . 217 Cole et ux. v. Eagle and Others : 409. Berwick-upon-Tweed, Justices of, Rex Coles, Administrator, v. Hulme . . 568

v. . . . . . . 327 Colvin v. Newberry . . 166 Biggs v. Fellows . . . . 402 Commissioners of Sewers for the levels Birmingham, Inhabitants of, Rex v. . 29 I of Pagham, and other places in Sussex, Blandford, Carpenter v. . . . 5751 Rex v. . . . . . . 355 Bolland and Others, Assignees, v. Nash 105 Cook, Thomas v. . . . . 728 Brazier v. Jones . . . 124 Combe, Rex v. . . . . . 82 Brenton, Rowe v. . . . 737 Cooper, Groocock v. . . . 211. Briavells, Hundred of, Elsmore v. 461. Cornish and Another v. Searell . . 471, Bromyard, Rex v. . . · 240 Crowder v. Long, Gent., one, &c. . 598 Brooke v. Noakes . .

• 537 -, Lovick v. . . . . 132 Brooks, Rex v. . . . . . 321 Crowland, Innabitants of, Rex v. . 711

PAGE

[blocks in formation]

Cubitt v. Porter . . . . . 257 Gregory, Ex parte .
Culliford, Ex parte, v. Warren, Gent., Grimman v. Legge .

one, &c. . . . . . 220 Groocock v. Cooper .
Culverwell and Others, Bailey v. • 448 Gurney, Wells v. .

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

. 409

. 324

. 211

. 769

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

H.

Denton and Barker, Fairlie v. . . 395 | Handley v. Levy . .

Desborough, Lindenau v. . . . 586 Harrod v. Benton . . . 217

Devon, Justices of, Rex v. . . 640 Hastelow v. Jackson . . . 221

Doe v. Bray . . . . . 813 Hayward and Others v. Wright. . 386

- v. Clark . . . . . 717 Helps v. Glenister. .

553

- v. Dyeball . . . . . 70 | Henley v. Soper . . . . . 16

- v. Fletcher . . . . 25 Hipswell, Inhabitants of, Rex v. . 466
v. Lawson . .

Holderness and Another v. Shackels . 612

- v. Maisey . . . . 767 Hubbard, Maugham v. . . . 14

v. Martyn.

- Teague v. . . . . 345

- v. Prigg. . . . . 231 — v. Wilkinson . . . 496

- v. Robinson . . . . 296 Hulme, Coles Administrator v. . . 568

- v. Watt. . . . . 308

- v. Wolley . . . . . 22

J.

Donne v. Martyr . . . . 62 Jackson, Hastelow y. . . . 221

Dyeball, Doe dem. Lawrie and Another Jay, Gent., one, &c., v. Coaks . . 635

v. . . . . . . 70 Jenkins, Lester v. . . . . 339

Johnson, Syson v. . . . . 794

E.

Jones v. Kenrick . . . . 337

Eagle and Others, Cole et ux. V. . 409 Jones, Brazier v. . . . . 124

Edge v. Parker . . . . . 697 - Pattison v. . . . . 578

Edmonds v. Lowe . . . . 407

Edwards, Bennet v. . . . . 702

K.

Edwinstowe, Inhabitants of, Rex v. . 671 Keates v. Whieldon . . . . 7

Elsmore v. The Hundred of Briavells . 461 Kenrick, Jones v. . . . . 337

Ely, Bishop of, Rex v. . . . 112 Kent, Justices of, Rex v. . . . 639

Everett, Rex v. . . . . . 114 Kingston-upon-Hull Dock Company v.

La Marche . . . . . 42

F.

Fairlie v. Denton and Barker. : 395

Falmouth, Earl of, Swann v. · 456 La Marche, Kingston-upon-Hull Dock

Fellows, Biggs and Others, Assignees v. 402 Coinpany v. . . . . . 42

Firth v. Thrush . . . . 387 Lancashire, Justices of, Rex v. . 593

Fletcher, Doe dem. Watson v. . . 25 Lawford, Inhabitants of, Rex v. . . 271
Foy, Penny and Another, Assignees, v. 11 Lawson, Doe dem. Lidgbird v. .

Legge, Grimman v. . . . . 324

Lester v. Jenkins . . . . 339

George, Whitnash and Another v. . 556 Levy, Handley v. . . . . 637

Gibbins and another, Assignees, v. Lew, Inhabitants of, Rex v. . . 655

Phillips . . . . . 437 Lindenau v. Desborough . . . 586

Gibbs v. Stead . . . . . 528 Lloyd and Others, Sigourney v. . 622

Gilkes and Others, Rex v. . 439 London Gas Light and Coke Company,

Glenister, Helps v. . . . . 553 Rex v. . . . . . 54

Great Bolton, Inhabitants of, Rex v. . 71 Long, Gent., nne, &c., Crowder v. 598

Great Driffield, Inhabitants of, Rex v. 681 Louth, Rex v. . . . . . 247

Great Sheepy, Inhabitants of, Rex v. 74 Lovick v. Crowder . . . . 132

Greet, Rex v. . . . . . 3631 Lowe, Edmonds v. . . . . 407

G.

PAGB

N.

644

M.

PAGE | Rex v. Barham, Inhabitants of : 99 M’Intosh, Whitt v. . . . . 317 - v. Berwick-upon-Tweed, Justices Magrave v. White . ..

of . . . . . . . 327 Maisey, Doe dem. Roby v.

- v. Birmingham, Inhabitants of 29 Mars, Tenon v. . . .

v. Bromyard, Inhabitants of .240 Martyn, Doe dem. Brune v. . . 497 — v. Brooks

. . . . 321 Martyr, Donne v. . . . . 62 - v. Buckingham, Justices of . . 375 Mattisball, Inhabitants of, Rex v. .. — v. Christ Church, London, Inhabi. Maugham v. Hubbard . . . . 14 tants of . . . . . 660 Maulden, Inhabitants of, Rex v. .. 78 - v. Commissioners of Sewers for Michlam v. Bate . . . . 642 levels of Pagham, Sussex . . 355 Monmouthshire, Justices of, Rex v. 137 — v. Combe, Inhabitants of . . 82 Morland v. Pellatt. . . . 722 — v. Crowland, Inhabitants of .711 Morrison, Allen v. . . . . 565 — v. Devon, Justices of . . 640 Moses v. Richardson . . . 421 — v. Edwinstowe, Inhabitants of .671 Murray v. Reeves, Gent., one, &c. • 421 - v. Ely, Bishop of . . . 112

- v. Everett . . . . . 114

- v. Gilkes and Others . . 439 Nash, Bolland and Others, Assignees v. 105

v. Great Bolton, Inhabitants of . 71 New, Pitt v. . . . . 654 v. Great Driffield, Inhabitants of 684 Newberry, Colvin v. . : 166

v. Great Sheepy, Inhabitants of . 74 Newman, Page v. . . . . 489

v. Greet . . . . . 363 Noakes, Brooke v. . . . . 537 v. Hipswell, Inhabitants of . . 466 Norton v. Pickering . . . . 610 - v. Kent, Justices of . . . 639 Notley and Others, Assignees v. Buck 160 -v. Lancashire, Justices of . . 593 Nunn, in the Matter of . . .

- v. Lawford, Inhabitants of 271 Nurse, Paul v. . . . . . - v. London Gas Light and Coke P.

Company . . . . . 54

· v. Lew, Inhabitants of . . 655 Page v. Newman . . . . 489_

- v. Louth . . . . . 247 Parker, Chatfield v. . . . . 543 v. Mattishall, Inhabitants of . 733 - Edge v. . . . . 697

- v. Maulden, Inhabitants of . . 78 Pattison v. Jones . . . . . 578 - v. Monmouthshire, Justices of 137 Paul v. Nurse . . . . . 486

- v. Pulsford . . . . 350 Pellatt, Morland v. . . . 722

v. Rawdon, Inhabitants of . 708 Penny and Another, Assignees, v. Foy

v. Richards and Others . . 420 Phillips v. Allan . . . . . 477 — v. Rosliston, Inhabitants of . 668 - Gibbins and Another, Assignees, v. Saint Andrew, Cambridge . 664

. . . . . 437 v. — - Pershore . 679 Piekering, Norton v. . . . . 610 - V. - Martin, Leicester . . 674 Pinney v. Pinney . . . . 335 v. Shipton, Inhabitants of . 88 Pitt v. New . . . . . 654 — v. Shipton, Robert . . . 772 Porter, Cubitt v. . .

v. Smith and two Others . . 341 Pratt, Administratrix, v. Swaine . . 285 v. Stourbridge, Inhabitants of . 96 Prigg, Doe dem. Long v. . . ? — v. Southampton, Justices of 641 Pulsford, Rex v. . . . . .

— v. Sutton and Others . . . 417

- v. Wainfleet, All Saints, InhabiR.

tants of . . . . . 227 Rainforth, Wildbor v. . . . 41- v. Williams . . . . 681 Rawden, Inhabitants of, Rex v. . . 708 — v. Wilts, Justices of . . 380 Reeves, Murray, Gent., one, &c., v. 421 — v. Winter . . . . . 785 Rex v. Ashley Hay, Inhabitants of . 271 — v. Worcestershire, Justices of . 254

VOL. XV.—2

486

PAO

PAGE

296 668

Richards and others, Rex v. . . 420 Swann v. The Earl of Falmouth . . 456
Richardson, Moses. V. . . . 421 Syson v. Johnson . . . . 794
Richmond v. Smith . . . . 9
Robinson, Doe dem. Jeff v. .
Rosliston, Inhabitants of, Rex v. .

Tappen, Archbishop of Canterbury. '. 151 Rowe v. Brenton . . . . 737 Teague v. Hubbard . . . . 345 Royal Exchange Assurance Company, Tenon v. Mars . . . . . 638 Samuel v. · · · · · 119 Thomas v. Cook . . . . 728

| Thrush, Firth v. . . . . . 387. S. Saint Andrew, Cambridge, Rex v. 664

W. - Pershore, Rex v. • 679 | Wainfleet, All Saints, Rex v. . . 227- Martin, Leicester, Rex v. .. 674

Warren, Gent., one, &c., Culliford, Ex Samuel v. Royal Exchange Assurance

parte v. . . . . . .220 Company . . . . . 119 Warren, Doe.dem. of, v, Bray . . 913 Searell, Cornish and Another. V. 471 Washbourn, in re . . . . 441 Shackels, Holderness and Another v. 612 Watt, Doe dem. Henniker v. . . 308 Shipton, Inhabitants of, Rex v.

88 Wells v. Gurney. . . . . 769 - Robert, Rex v. . . . 772 Whieldon, Keats v. . . . 7. Sidford, Wiltshire v. . . . 259 Whistler, Clerk, Bryan v, . . . 288 Sigourney v. Lloyd and Others . . 622 White, Magrave v. . . . 412 Sikes and Others, Belcher v. . . 185 Whitaker v. Whitaker . . . 768 Smith and two Others, Rex v. . . 341 | Whitnash and Another v, George and Smith, Richmond v. . . . 9 Another . . . . . 556 Soper, Henly v. . . . . . 16 Whytt v. M'Intosh and Others . . 317 Southampton, Justices of, Rex v, .641 Wildbor v. Rainforth . . . 4 Soạth Carolina Bank v. Case . . 427 Wilkinson, Hubbard v. . . . 496 Sparkes v. Bell . . . . . 1 Williams, Rex v. . . . . 681 Stead and Another, Gibbs and Another v. 528 Wilts, Justices of, Rex v. . . . 380 Stott, Burleigh and Another v. . 36 Wiltshire v, Sidford . Stourbridge, Inhabitants of, Rex v, . 96 | Winter, Rex v. . . . . . 785 Sugrue, Allan and Another v. . . 561 Wolley, Doe dem. of Oldham and Wife v. 22 Sutton and Others, Rex v. : . . 417. Worcestershire, Justices of, Rex v. . 254 Swaine, Pratt, Administratrix, v. . 285 Wright, Hayward and Others v. . 386

2.59

CASES
ARGUED AND DETERMINE V

IN THE

COURT OF KING'S BENCH,

EASTER TÉRM,

In the Ninth Year of the Reign of GEORGE, IV.-1828.

[ocr errors]

SPARKES and Others v. BELL and Wife. — P. 1:

A married woman, taken in execution together with her husband for a debt due from her before marriage, is not entitled to be discharged, unless it appears that she has no separate property, even although the husband has been discharged under the insolvent act.

A RULE nisi had been obtained to discharge an order made by Bayley, J., for discharging Sarah Bell out of custody, she having been taken in execution, together with her husband, on a ca. sa. issued against them, and for issuing a new writ of ca. sa. against her. . By the affidavits it appeared that Sarah Bell, before her intermarriage with the other defendant, carried on the business of a baker at Exeter, and became indebted to the plaintiffs in the sum of 1001. and upwards. In February, 1827, she married the other defendant, having previously conveyed a house and other premises, in which she had an estate for her own life, her furniture and stock in trade, to a trustee for her separate use. Soon after the marriage the plaintiffs commenced an action against the two defendants for the recovery of the 100l. due, and arrested them both, whereupon they gave bail. The husband was soon afterwards arrested for another debt, and committed to prison, and he and his wife suffered judgment by default in the action brought by the plaintiffs, and afterwards a ca. sa. was issued, upon which the husband, then in custody, was charged in execution, and Sarah Bell was committed to the same prison. An order for her discharge was made by Bayley, J., and the husband afterwards obtained his discharge as an insolvent debtor.

The affidavits in answer did not deny the allegations made by the plaintiffs, but showed that the house was mortgaged, not, however, to the full value.

Archbold showed cause, and contended thái the application to discharge the order was too late, the husband having in the mean time obtained his discharge as an insolvent debtor. In the case of Miles v. Williams et Ux., 1 P. Wms. 249, it was held that a debt contracted by the wife dum sola was discharged by the bankruptcy of the husband : this case is precisely analogous; the debt was discharged by the provisions

« PreviousContinue »