See AFFIDAVIT TO HOLD TO BAIL-
MISNOMER-BAIL.

A defendant may be arrested for
sums paid by plaintiff as obligor
of an indemnity bond as for liqui-
dated damages, if the sums the
plaintiff has been called on to pay
can be ascertained. Anderson v.
Bell, T. 1832.
732
Goods having been sold and deli-
vered by plaintiff to defendant, de-
fendant objected to them for bad
manufacture, and plaintiff agreed
to take them back. They were
accordingly returned to plaintiff,
who afterwards sent them back to
the defendant, and arrested him for
their value. A verdict having been
entered for the value of part only,
being a less sum than that for
which defendant was arrested :
Held, that he was entitled to costs
under 43 Geo. 3. c. 46, s. 3. Linley
v. Bates, T. 1823.

753

ATTORNEY and SOLICITOR.
The court has an inherent jurisdic-
tion to tax the bills of attornies
practising in it, independently of
the powers given by statute 2 G. 2.
c. 23. s. 23. in cases where no ac-
tions have been brought on such
bills. Therefore where an action
was pending on an attorney's bill
against two defendants, and a ba-
ron at chambers, on application of
one of them, made an order for
taxation without imposing the
terms of an undertaking to pay

The application to tax an attorney's
bill for business done in suing out
and prosecuting a commission of
lunacy should be made to the Lord
Chancellor, though after action
brought on the bill in a court of
law. Whether a bill of such
charges is taxable under 2 Geo. 2.
c. 23. as for charges in law or
equity, quære. Jones, Gent. one &c.
v. Bywater, E. 1832.
An attorney's bill will be referred to
the Master to be taxed, after it
has been paid, if the motion be
made in a reasonable time, though
no fraud be imputed. Glascott v.
A solicitor admitted and enrolled in
Castle, H. 1832.

402

302

the court of Chancery may conduct
a suit in the court of equity in the
Exchequer Chamber, in the name
of a clerk in the King's Remem-
brancer's office in that court, and
is entitled to costs on taxation,
though he is not admitted a solici-
tor in that court of equity. At-
torney-General on relation of Crupper
and others v. Malin and others,
T. 1832.
512
Where an attorney had claims on his

client for conveyancing, and also
for charges at law, and received
payments on account, without spe-
cific appropriation to either head
of debt: Held, that the whole
formed one entire demand not to
be separated, and that the plaintiff
could not apply the payments to
the common law items of his de-
mand only, so as to deprive the
defendant of the benefit of taxa-
tion quoad the residue of the bill.
James, Gent. one &c. v. Child, T.
1832.
732

Semble, that the drawing and ingross-
ing of a warrant of attorney is a
taxable item. James, Gent. one &c.
v. Child, T. 1832.
732
Indorsing attorney's name on process.
See PRACTICE (Irregularity).

AUCTION.

A printed catalogue of sale contained,
among others, this entry:-" Lot
6. Ten acres of spring wheat on
the further hill," with this memo-
randum at the foot, "The keep of
all the fields will be sold with the
lots." By the conditions of sale,
purchasers were to pay a deposit
and give security for payment of
the remaining purchase money on
the next 17th day of December.
At the sale the auctioneer verbally
informed the persons present,
among whom were the plaintiff and
defendant, that lot 6 was not spring
wheat, and that the keep had been
sold by private contract.
Plaintiff

bought the lot, and the auctioneer
inserted his name in the sale-book
as purchaser. The plaintiff and
defendant afterwards desired the
auctioneer to set down the lot
the defendant as buyer, and to
send in the account to him. The
auctioneer thereupon wrote the de-
fendant's initial L., opposite to the
lot in the sale book and in the
same line with the name of the
plaintiff. Defendant asked if he
should give security to pay for the
crop on the 17th December, ac-
cording to the conditions of sale.
The plaintiff waived taking it, but
received the deposit from defend-
ant. The crop was destroyed in a
few days after the sale, and the
defendant refused to pay the rest of
the purchase money: Held, that
as the auctioneer's declarations at
the sale would not be evidence
vary the printed particulars, had an
action been brought by the original

E. 1832.

418

Costs of bail changed by judge's
order for that purpose, must be
paid before the bail can justify.
Jourdain v. Gunn, E. 1832. 411
Costs of bringing bail up to justify

allowed where they have given
notice of putting in and justifying
at the same time, accompanied by
an affidavit of justification, and
after exception attend to justify,
and are not opposed. Bowman v.
Russell and another, T. 1832. 744
Affidavit of justification of bail sworn
in the country, stated the bail to
be possessed of property to a cer-
tain amount, without further stat-
ing that each of the bail were worth
double the sum for which defend-
ant was held to bail above his own
just debts, or every other sum for
which he might be then bail: Held
bad, but time given to amend on
payment of plaintiff's costs of the
day occasioned by the affidavit.
Darling v. Hutchinson, E. 1832.

491

In an action by payee against makers
of a promissory note, it appeared
that it had been given on an agree-
ment by one of them to buy crops,
&c. from an outgoing tenant. The
note when made was handed to a
third person to be attested by him,
and paid over to the plaintiff on

condition that possession of the
premises should be given up to one
of the defendants the next morn-
ing, but that the plaintiff was to
hold the house for three or four
weeks, paying one shilling a week
rent. There was evidence of a
verbal refusal by plaintiff on the
next morning to give up possession,
but the defendant's cattle were seen
on the land on that day and re-
mained there. Possession of the
house was not obtained till three
weeks after. The note when pro-
duced did not appear to have been
attested, and there was no evidence
how the plaintiff had got posses-
sion of it:-Held, that as no act
was shown to have been done by
the plaintiff to keep possession of
the land, the jury might rightly
conclude that possession had been
delivered up according to the con-
dition; and that the misconduct of
the bailee of the note in withhold-
ing his attestation to it, or not de-
livering it to the plaintiff, was
no defence to the action thereon.
Evans v. Morgan and others, E. |

Expenses of noting and postage in-
curred on the return of an inland
bill of exchange are not recover-
able by the holder unless specially
laid as damages and proved accord-
ingly. Kendrick v. Lomax, E. 1832.

438

Quare. If a charge for noting is
in any case recoverable on an in-
land bill not protested?
ib.
Where, on a bill becoming due, the
holder agrees to receive another
bill in renewal of it, his remedy on
the first is suspended till the
second is dishonoured, as well for
expenses incurred by nonpayment
of the first as for its amount. ib.

BISHOP.

See CURATE.

CARRIER.

See STOPPAGE IN TRANSITU.

CHARITY.

Where, by an ancient deed, tempore
Hen. 6, land was conveyed to cer-
tain persons therein named and
their heirs, in trust to apply the
yearly profits to several public ob-
jects in a particular parish, and
among others to the relief of the poor
therein: Held, that the whole or
part of them may be applied to
building a school house and edu-
cating the poor children of that
parish. Wilkinson v. Malin and
others, T. 1832.

544
Where the whole number of exist-
ing trustees assembled to elect a
schoolmaster: Held, that the act
of the majority is to be considered
the act of the whole body, for the
trust to be performed is of a pub-
lic nature; and semble, that where
five concurred and two dissented,
but did not act on that dissent, it
is a concurrent election by all. ib.

A schoolmaster elected by a majority
of trustees at a meeting of the
body, cannot be dismissed except
at a similar meeting. Wilkinson v.
Malin, T. 1832.
544

A mistake in a deed in a statement of
the then occupier of premises, will
not vitiate, if the description of
the parish is the same as in a former
conveyance of same premises, and
the intention to pass the same pro-
perty is clear.
ib.
A statement in pleading that a school-
master was appointed on the terms
of a salary of 40l., and a residence
in the school-house, is satisfied by
the salary being 201. a year to him-
self for teaching boys, and the
same to his wife for teaching girls. ib.

them separately, one of them being
acquitted:-Held, that he was en-
titled on taxation to receive from
the plaintiff his aliquot proportion
of the costs incurred by the three
on their joint retainer, as well as
the costs he had separately in-
curred, on satisfying the master
that he was not indemnified by the
other defendants. Griffiths v. Ky-
naston and others, T. 1832. 757
Costs under 43 G. 3. c. 46. s. 3.
See ARREST.

Costs of petition against return of
M. P. See PARLIAMENT.
Costs occasioned by juror's default.
See TRIAL.

Costs of bail. See BAIL.

COSTS OF THE DAY.
Affidavit in support of motion for
costs of the day, for not proceeding
to trial, allowed to be amended.
Larken v. Bovill, T. 1832. 746

COURTS OF REQUESTS ACT.

By the Bradford, Melksham, &c.

court of requests acts, 3 G. 3. c.
19. (local) and 47 G. 3. sess. 2. c.
XXXIX. any debt or debts owing or
due to or claimed or demanded by
any person, whether resident with-
in the jurisdiction of the court or
not, and for which debt or debts
he should demand any sum not
exceeding 51. from any person re-
siding or living within the jurisdic-
tion, are to be sued for in that
court. The latter act extended the
local limits of the jurisdiction, and
increased its amount from 40s. to
51. providing that a plaintiff suing
in any other court for a debt reco-
verable under that act should not
be entitled to costs, notwithstanding
a verdict in his favour.
The plaintiff sued in the Exchequer
for 5. 10s. for work and labour,
and after conflicting evidence had

3 E