:

2. The appraiser of a distress must
be sworn before the constable of
the parish where it is taken the
constable of the adjoining parish
cannot interfere, though the pro-
per constable is not to be found
when wanted.
Page 172
3. A landlord may maintain an ac-
tion on the statute 11 G. 2. c. 19.
s. 3. for the double value of goods
fraudulently removed to prevent a
distress, although they be worth
less than 50l.; he is not confined
to his remedy by application to
two magistrates. Bromley v. Hol-
den,
175
4. A tenant from year to year, un-
derletting from year to year, has
a reversion which entitles him to
distrain. Curtis v. Wheeler, 493
5. On an avowry of a distress as
made under 11 G. 2. c. 1. on goods
fraudulently removed, the defend-
ants must prove that there was no
sufficient distress left on the pre-
mises. Parrey v. Duncan, 533

in the judgment. Hiscocks v.
Jones,
Page 269
3. Or if he plead that it was by
fraud and covin of a person unto
whom and to whose use and benefit
the judgment was assigned, this is
sufficiently proved by showing that
the judgment was assigned to the
use and benefit of that person,
though the assignment was in form
made to another.
Ibid.

EVIDENCE.

1

See BANKRUPT, 1. EJECTMEnt, 1.4.
CONSTRUCTION OF DEEDS, 4. LI-
MITATION, STATUTE OF. ATTOR-
NEY, 6, 7. WAGES, 3. WITNESS.
1. In actions for words, not action-
able in themselves, evidence of
their truth may be given under
the general issue, to disprove ma-
lice. Watson v. Reynolds,
2. An examined copy of a letter,
containing notice of the dishonour
of a bill of exchange which is not
produced, nor the subject matter
of the action, is not admissible
without notice to produce the
letters sent. Lanauze v. Palmer, 31
3. A demurrer or plea to a bill in
equity do not so admit the facts
charged in it, as to be evidence
against the defendant of those
facts in a future action between
the same parties. Tomkins v. Ash-
by.
4. The signature of a party to a bill
of exchange may be proved by a
person who has seen him write
his surname only. Lewis v. Sapio,

32

39
5. Where a broker effects a sale be-
tween two parties, the bought and
sold notes delivered to them, and
not the entry in his book, are the
proper evidence of the contract.
Thornton v. Meux,

43

A promissory note is not ad-
missible in evidence under the
money counts, in an action by an
indorsee against the maker. Bent-
ley v. Northouse,

66

79

10. Proof of the hand-writing of the
subscribing witness to an instru-
ment is sufficient, he being dead,
without any further proof of the
identity of the parties, except the
identity of name and description.
Page v. Mann,
11. In an action by the indorsee
against an indorser of a bill of ex-
change, where the defendant proves
usury in the concoction, or in a pre-
vious transfer of the bill, the plain-
tiff must prove himself a bona fide
holder, though he has received no
notice to prove the consideration.
Wyat v. Campbell,

80
12. In an action against the defendant
as a shareholder in a company, for
work done for the company, letters
addressed by the defendant to one
of the directors, and returned to
her by him, and mentioning her
shares, are not so necessarily con-

nected with the subject of the trial
as to render a notice served on her
attorney too late for her to receive
it before the trial, sufficient to let
in secondary evidence. Vice v.
Lady Anson,
Page 97
13. Quære, whether it would be so
in any case, except when the de-
fendant is resident abroad? Ibid.
14. An examined copy of a deposi-
tion in Chancery is admissible in
evidence, for the purpose of con-
tradicting the testimony of the same
person, when produced afterwards
as a witness. Highfield v. Peake,

109

15. Where the practice of the de-
fendant's counting-house was that
the clerk, after copying a letter
into the letter-book, returned it to
the defendant to seal, and that he
or another clerk carried all letters
to the post-office; but there was no
particular place of deposit in the
office for such letters, and neither
of the clerks had any recollection
of the particular letter offered in
evidence, though they swore that
they uniformly carried all letters
given them to carry : - Held, that
the entry in the clerk's writing in
the letter-book of a letter to the
plaintiff, could not be read as proof
of such letter having been sent to
the plaintiff. Toosey v. Williams,

debt arises on a note indorsed, or
a bill accepted, by the bankrupt,
evidence must be given that the in-
dorsement or acceptance was prior
to the act of bankruptcy; the mere
production of the instrument bear-
ing an earlier date is insufficient.
Cowie v. Harris,
Page 141
19. If a deed be produced, purport-
ing to bind a trading company,
proof that the person executing it
was their general law agent is
prima facie sufficient, without show-
ing that he was anthorised to exe-
cute the particular deed. Doe d.
Macleod v. East London Water-
works. Company,

149

20. Evidence that an advertisement
was inserted in a country newspa-
per circulated at the residence of
a party, is not admissible as proof
of notice to the party of the facts
contained in the advertisement, un-
less it be shown that he took the
newspaper in. Norwich and Lowe-
stoft Navigation Company v. Theo-
bald,

153
21. Where the attesting witness to a
bond cannot be produced, proof of
his signature is sufficient evidence
of the execution by the defendant,
the obligor, though the defendant
only signs by mark. Mitchell v.
Johnson,
176
22. An acknowledgment of a debt,
without specifying any amount, is
not sufficient to entitle the creditor
to nominal damages on a count
upon an account stated. Berna-
sconi v. Anderson,

183

23. In an action by assignees of a
bankrupt, where there are some
counts or causes of action for
which the bankrupt might have.
sued, and others on which he could
not, the proceedings under the
commission are admissible in evi-
dence, if the plaintiffs elect to pro-
ceed only on those counts which

the bankrupt might have sustained.
Jones v. Fort,
Page 196
24. In an action for work and labour,
where it is shown that the work was
commenced under a written agree-
ment, such agreement ought to be
produced; and the plaintiff cannot
recover without it for extras, al-
though a particular item was pro-
ceeded on after an admission by
the defendant that it was an extra.
Vincent v. Cole,
257
25. In an action for an escape, on
final process, the defendant may
show, on the general issue, that the
escape was by the fraud and covin
of the party really interested in the
judgment. Hiscocks v. Jones, 269
26. Letters bearing post-marks be-
fore the act of bankruptcy, and
found in the alleged bankrupt's
possession after it, containing state-
ments of matters material to the act
of bankruptcy, are admissible with-
out calling the writer as evidence
against the alleged bankrupt, to
show that he received intimation of
these facts, though not to prove their
truth. Cotton v. James,
273
27. Where the subscribing witness to
a deed cannot be produced, proof
of his handwriting is sufficient evi-
dence of the execution by the par-
ties whose signature purports to be
affixed to it, without any further
evidence of their identity. Kay
v. Brookman,

286
28. Where a court prints and circu-
lates copies of its rules for the
guidance of its officers, the produc-
tion of one of these printed copies
is good evidence of the rules which
the officers are to act on, though
the original rules are kept under
the seal of the court, and the copy
is not shewn to have been exa-
mined with the original. Dance v.
Robson,

294

29. In an action for a libel, which
is only libellous on a man in

the execution of his office, where
the plaintiff has stated, by way of
inducement, his due discharge of
its duties, the defendant cannot, on
the general issue, give evidence
of negligence in discharging them,
in answer to that allegation.

Page 494
30. On a written agreement for the
hire of a vessel to be made ready
to take on board "forthwith," evi-
dence is inadmissible, to show that
the parties agreed that the vessel
should be ready in two days; but
evidence of the known circum-
stances of the vessel is admissible
to show how soon she might rea-
sonably be expected to be ready.
Simpson v. Henderson,
300

31. In case for a false representation
of the solvency of A. B., whereby
the plaintiffs trusted him with
goods, their declarations at the
time that they trusted him in con-
sequence of the representation,
are admissible in evidence for
them. Fellowes v. Williamson, 306
32. The nisi prius record of a cause,
with a minute of the verdict in-
dorsed by the officer of the court
on the jury pannel, is good evi-
dence that the cause came on for
trial, though no regular postea is
indorsed on it. Rex v. Browne,

315

33. In an indictment for perjury,
the supposed perjury arose upon
evidence given in reply to the tes-
timony of one of the defendants
on the former trial, who was ac-
quitted, and examined as a wit-
ness. The indictment did not
state his acquittal, nor did the
minute of the verdict produced
show it: Held, that this was imma-
terial, parol evidence being given
to show that he was in fact ex-
amined. Rex v. Browne, 315
34. In an action by a father for se-
duction, it is not necessary to

324

show any acts of service done by
the daughter: it is enough that
she lived in the father's family
under such circumstances that
he had a right to her services.
Maunder v. Venn, Page 323
35. In an action by the indorsee
against the acceptor of a bill of
exchange, the bill is not admissi-
ble evidence of money had and
received. Eales v. Dicker,
36. On an indictment against prin-
cipal and accessories, the case
against the principal was proved
by the testimony of an accomplice,
who was confirmed as to the ac-
cessories, but not as to the prin-
cipal, the jury were directed to
acquit the prisoners. R. v. Wells,
326
37. In an action against partners, on
a bill of exchange, where the de-
fence is that one partner, with the
knowledge of the plaintiff, ac-
cepted the bill in the partnership
firm for his private debt; other
bills of exchange, accepted by
that partner, and paid by the
other, are not so necessarily con-
nected with the subject of the
trial as to render a notice served
on the attorney of the defendant,
too late for him to procure the bills
from the defendant himself, suffi-
cient to let in secondary evidence.
Aflalo v. Fourdrinier,
38. The deposition of a witness,
taken in a judicial proceeding, in
the presence of the party there

335. n.

arged, is not admissible in an-
other proceeding against that
party on the ground that he was
present, and had the opportunity
of cross-examining. Melen v. An-
drews,

336
39. The declaration of a bankrupt
on his return, that he had absented
himself to avoid a writ against
him, is sufficient evidence of an
act of bankruptcy, without any

other proof of the existence of the
writ, or of the debt on which it
was founded, or of creditors of the
bankrupt. Newman v. Stretch,

Page 338
40. Quære, whether the custom of
London may now be proved by the
production of the Privilegia Lon-
dini? Shadwell v. Hutchinson, 350
41. In an action to recover money
paid by a bankrupt in contempla-
tion of bankruptcy, on the ground
of fraudulent preference, the de-
clarations of the bankrupt as to
the state of his affairs, made about
the time of the transaction, but
unconnected with it, are receiva-
ble in evidence. Vacher v. Cocks,

353

42. So also are letters addressed to him
refusing to advance him money, for
the purpose of showing the fact of
such refusal, though not as evidence
of other facts stated in them. Ibid.
43. In an action for crim. con. at the
suit of a Quaker, proof of a mar-
riage according to the forms of
that society is sufficient to sustain
the action. Deane v. Thomas, 361
44. The title of three, claiming as
executors, is well evidenced by
the probate granted to one only,
of the will appointing them all.
Walters v. Pfeil,
362
45. The production by the assured
of a policy of insurance, with an
adjustment on it, and the name of
the defendant struck off the policy
itself, does not prove the payment
of the sum so adjusted. Adams
v. Sanders,

373

46. The stat. 47 G. 3. sess. 2. c. 68.
s. 29. provides that all contracts
for the sale of coals at the London
coal market shall be signed by the
buyer and the factor; that the
factor shall deliver a copy of the
contract to the clerk of the market,
and that the clerk shall enter it in
a book. The 32d section makes

PP