AN INDEX OF THE PRINCIPAL MATTERS. ABATEMENT. 2. The 39 Geo. III. c. 69, s. 185, which extends the 24 Geo. II. c. 44, to the lord mayor, aldermen, and justices, under the authority of the same act, and further enacts that no action shall be brought against any person for any thing done in pursuance or under colour of the act until after fourteen days notice, &c. extends to acts done by the West India Dock company; and therefore an action against the treasurer for wrongs done by the company under the colour of the act, he being, in all cases, the nominal plaintiff or defendant for them under the act, fourteen days notice must be given previous to the action. Semble, It is otherwise in actions founded on contracts with the company. Wal lis v. Smith, E. 44 Geo. III. 347 3. On WARRANTY OF HORSE, See WARRANTY, or Strode v. DyE. 44 Geo. III. son, 400 4. An action being brought upon a joint contract against A. B. and C. two of them, A. and B. paid the damages and costs: and afterwards A. brought his action against C. for his share paid for his use: Held, that the damages, having been paid by A. and B. by means of their joint bill of exchange on a banker, this was a payment by them out of a joint fund between them, and that the action against C. should have been in both their names. Semble, it would have been otherwise if the money had been paid by each out of his separate funds, there being at the time of the payment no general partnership between them. Osborne v. Harpur, T. 44 Geo. III. 411 5. A. compounded with his creditors, and paid B. one of his creditors, 75 in the pound on his whole debt, for which he gave a receipt in full : A., however, promised to pay the residue when he should be able: B. brought assumpsit against A. for the original cause of action, and gave proof of his ability to pay: Held, that this composition being only in consideration of a less sum, was not such a payment in satisfaction as to extinguish the original debt, and therefore that the plaintiff need not be put to declare upon the special agreement made subsequently. Fetil v. Sutton, T. 44 Geo. III. 415 6. ACTIONS for not-accepting stock, see STOCK JOBBING. 7. ACTIONS consolidating of, see PRACTICE, No. 17. 8. A. a feme sole, covenanted with B. to abide the award of C. and, before the making of the award, married. When the award was afterwards made, B. brought covenant against the husband of A jointly with A. and declared on a breach for non-payment of a sum awarded to be due to him, and, upon the general issue pleaded, had a verdict. Held, upon motion in arrest of judgment, that the intermarriage of A. was a revocation of her submission, and therefore the award was void: but that the marriage itself was, for that reason, a breach of covenant; and therefore, it appearing on the face of the declaration that the defendant married before the making of the award, it was sufficient after verdict, and the plaintiff accordingly had judg ment. Semble, if the marriage had been with the consent of the plaintiff, the defendants should have pleaded it in bar. Charneley v. Winstanley, T. 44 Geo. III. 433 9. In an action against the marshal for an escape on mesne process, the plaintiff declared on a commitment on habeas corpus by a judge at chambers, with a prout patet per recordum, and on the trial produced no record in evidence, but the writ from the office of the clerk of the papers of the K. B. prison: Held, that this is only quasi a record, but good evidence, there being no mode of recording such a commitment in practice, and the prout patet is surplusage. Aliter in the case of a commitment in execution. Wigley v. Jones, T. 44 Geo. III. 457 10. Of actions against carriers by water, see CARRIER. 11. Of trover by three assig nees of a bankrupt, where a fourth has been removed, but there has been no reassignment, see BANK. RUPT, No. 7. Although B. cannot delegate his Of COVENANT by AGENT. AGREEMENT. 1. An agreement to relinquish to others the business of an attorney and solicitor, and to permit them to use the name of the person so relinquishing business, he not intermeddling therewith, is valid in law. Also, where there are several considerations mentioned in a deed, though one is bad, the deed is good for the rest, unless where the deed is rendered void by act of parliament. Bunn (Executor of Bunn) v. Guy, M. 44 Geo. III. | Held, that this is a fraud upon 41 4. A tenant of a farm entitled to the way-going crop of the harvest 1801, after his term expired, and paying rent up to the Ladyday preceding (previous to that day, viz. in June, 1800,) agrees to let in the new tenant, and sells the standing crops, and takes a receipt for the value thereof, and | also for sol. " for the right of cropping the lands from June 18th:" Held, that, by this sale of the right of cropping, the tenancy is not to be considered as changed, and the out-going tenant must pay the rent for the time from Lady-day, 1800, to Lady-day, 1801. The out-going tenant had paid tythes and poor's rate for that time. Petrie v. Da661 niel, H. 44 Geo. III. 5. Ist. Decree for specific performance-purchase by a father whose son was a trustee, for the sale of defendants' estates: Held good, there being no positive proof of fraud. ad. Question, whether an auctioneer's clerk, under a general authority to act in his master's absence, could sign a contract for sale of an estate according to the statute of frauds: Held, that he could, where the party selling knew that he was so to act. 3d. Whether, where the clerk of an auctioneer signs the contract as a witness for his master (the agent autho3. A creditor signs a deed to rized to sell the estate), he can give his debtor time for pay- be considered as a contracting ment of the whole of his debt, party according to the statute of upon having security for part, frauds: Held, that he could. and several other creditors | Coles v . Trecothick, in Canc. 233 are thereby induced to sign the deed; but at the same time he secretly obtains the security of a third person for so much as stands in the trust deed on the personal security of the debtor alone: 2. Agreement for settlement on marriage, executed or altered by husband after bankruptcy. See BANKRUPTCY, No. 1. 6. See BANKRUPT, No. 6, or Parsloe v. Dearlove, H. 44 Geo. III. 281 7. Every memorandum of an agreement in writing under the statute 29 Geo. II. c. 3. s. 4, to the court enlarged a rule for the charge a defendant on a special payment of the consideration in ANSWER IN CHANCERY. ARREST, RETURNING HOME See PRACTICE, No. 11. ASSAULT. See INDICTMENT. 8. Two parties submitted to arbitration by bond, and agreed therein that the submission to the award should be made a rule of court, and afterwards, by a memorandum indorsed on the bond, after the time of making the award had expired, agreed that the time for an umpire to make his umpirage should be extended to a future day, but without expressly mentioning that this new submission should be made,a rule of court: Held, that this memorandum was a virtual incorporation of all the terms of the bond not inconsistent therewith, and therefore must be taken as containing an agree-for want of sureties until the next ment to make the submission a rule of court, under the statute 8 & 9 W. III. c. 15. The case of Jenkins v. Law, 8 Term. Rep. 87. was overruled, upon consultation with the other courts. Evans v. Thompson, E. 44 Geo. III. 380 9. See DEVISE, 10, as to agree ment to make a good title. 10. Copy of agreement to be given by attorney, at request of parties See PRACTICE, No. 16. or 399 11. Agreement as to a way-going crop. See LANDLORD and TENANT; or Petrie v. Daniel, H. 44 Geo. III. ALIEN. 199 1. To trespass, for assault and false imprisonment, the defendants pleaded a commitment of the plaintiff, by them, as justices, sessions, for a misdemeanor on See FREIGHT-INSURANCE, &c. fendants Edgcumbe v. Rod, T. AMENDMENT. See PRACTICE, No. 1, 18. ANNUITY. In a case on the annuity act 44 Geo. III. ASSETS. See BANRRUPT, 5. 515 ASSIGNEE, REMOVAL OF, 1 1. Assumpsit, for that S. F. B. deceased, being indebted to the plaintiff at the time of his death, N. the wife of the defendant, before her intermarriage, in consideration thereof, and in consideration that the plaintiff, at her request, would forbear and give day of payment of the, said debt, undertook, &c.; Held ill on special demurrer, for not stating either that N. or any other person was liable to be sued. general forbearance, like the forbearance of an individual, is not a good consideration, unless there is somebody to be forborne. Jones v. Afhburnham and Wife, H 44 Geo. III. A 138 2. A surgeon attends a pauper for some time, giving credit to the pauper's father for payment of his bill; but he becoming un. able to pay, and the pauper still continuing ill, the surgeon applies to the overseers of the poor, to know whether he shall continue his attendances at their expence; they say they will give no authority, but if he brings in a reasonable bill, they will see it paid. Upon motion for a new trial, held, the attendance of the surgeon being divisible, he may recover for the latter attendances on the credit of the overseers, without proving a promise in writing. Lyde v. Higgins, E. 44 Geo. III. 395 3. Assumpsit against the drawer of a bill of exchange drawn in America, on a merchant in London, protefted for non-accept ance; plea of bankruptcy, certificate, and discharge thereby in America. Held, that the parties being resident in America at the making of the bill, this is a good discharge here, if it is so in America; for the contract declared upon arises solely in America. The engagement of the drawer is, that he will pay in America, if the bill is not accepted in London. Potter and another v. Brown, E. 44 Geo. III, 351 4. By an order of Nisi Prias, a verdict was taken for 30l. and 405. costs, subject to arbitration, and the costs of the cause were to abide the event of the arbitra tion, and a verdict was to be entered for such sum only, if any, as should be found to be due. The arbitrators awarded fol. to be due: Held, that the plaintiff could not, on this award, recover either the 7ol. or the 30l. For the arbitrat.rs had no power to award more than gol. and it is probable they might not have awarded even 30!. had they not taken something into their consideration which they ought not to have done. Semble. If the arbitrators had awarded the 301. distinctly, according to their authority, and added an adjudication that 401. more was still due, the court might have held the award good in part.-Q. Whether the court, upon motion,' will permit the plaintiff to have execution for 301, and cofts? Bonner v. Charlton, E. 44 Geo. III. 368 as 5. Assumpsit by executors containing two sets of counts, one upon promises made with the testator: the other stating that the defendant being indebted to the teftator for goods sold, after his death, promised to the plaintiffs, executor, and executrix, aforesaid, to pay, &c.; also,' that the defendant accounted with the plaintiffs as executrix and executors as aforesaid, concerning money due to the plaintiff, executrix, and executors, as aforesaid, and being thereupon found indebted to the plaintiffs, execu trix and executors as aforesaid, promised to pay them, executor and executrix, as aforesaid: also, containing a count for interest due to the plaintiffs as executrix and executors: Held, on error, that the count on an account stated, could not be joined with the counts for goods sold, &c. |