received in the first instance, though it cannot affect such Defendant, unless brought home to him or to an agent employed by him. The Queen's case. Page 299 The same rule applies, if a Defendant seeks by such general evidence, in the first instance, to affect the prosecutor with a conspiracy to suborn witnesses for the destruction of his defence, provided the proposed evidence be previously opened to the Court, as in the case of a prosecution to be proved by conspiracy. Ibid. 15. When a witness in support of a prosecution has been examined in chief, and has not been asked in cross-examination as to any declarations made by him, or acts done by him, to procure persons corruptly to give evidence in support of the prosecution, it is not competent to the party accused to examine witnesses in his defence to prove such declarations or acts, without first calling back such witness examined in chief to be examined or cross-examined as to the fact, whether he ever made such déclarations or did such acts. Ibid. 311 16. If a witness is called on the part of a Plaintiff or prosecutor, and gives evidence against the Defendant or accused; and if, after the cross-examination of such witness, the Defendant's or accused's counsel discover that the witness so examined has corrupted, or endeavoured to corrupt, another per son to give false testimony in such cause, the counsel for the Defendant or accused are not permitted to give evidence of such corrupt act of such witness, without calling back such witness. The Queen's case. Page 311 397 17. An assignee of a bankrupt who has released his individual claims on the bankrupt's estate, is an admissible witness to prove the petitioning creditor's debt. Tomlinson v. Wilkes. 18. A grant of wreck was made by Hen. 2. to the proprietors of certain lands on the coast, and confirmed by Hen. 8. The proprietors of those lands having, 40 years ago, with a view to reclaim sea mud, run an embankment across a small bay, which was used to be left almost dry at low water, and having ever since asserted, without opposition, an exclusive right to the soil of the bay, though the bank was forced by tempest: Held, that such usage was evidence whence anterior usage might be presumed, which, coupled with the general terms of the grant, served to elucidate it, and to establish the right so asserted. Chad v. Til sed. 403 19. Where the lessees of a fishery had publicly landed their nets on the shore at A. for more than 20 years, and had, at various times, dressed and improved the landing place (both the fishery and the landing place having originally belonged to one person, but no evidence INSURANCE. 1. The East India Company, having hired A.'s ship to carry goods and 40 invalids, agreed, in concurrence with the Government at Madras, to increase the number to 200, provided A. would make certain. proposed alterations in his ship, and she should be found, on the usual military survey, capable of accommodating so many. A. agreed to the terms proposed, commenced the projected alterations, received the greater part of the goods on board, and had shipped water for 100 invalids, when, before the alterations were completed, the provisions shipped, or the invalids embarked, the vessel was so much disabled by a gale that she could not perform her homeward voyage: Held, in an action on a policy of insurance at and from Madras to the United Kingdom, on freight and passagemoney, that there was a sufficient contract, and a sufficient inception of the risk, to render the insurers liable for the freight, and also for the passage-money of the 200 invalids. Truscott V. Christie. Page 320 2. Ship and freight were insured by separate sets of underwriters. The ship (a general seeking ship) was captured; and ship and freight were abandoned to the respective underwriters, who each paid a total loss. The ship being recaptured, performed her voyage and earned freight: Held, that the under, underwriter on ship was entitled to the freight. Abandonment of ship to the underwriter on ship includes freight, and transfers freight earned subsequently to the abandonment to such underwriter, as incident to the ship. Davidson v. Case. Page 379 INTERLINEATION. LANDLORD AND TENANT. And See SHERIFF, 1. 1. A conservatory erected by tenant recover, in an action for money paid to the Defendant's (the lessor's) use, any of the sums so paid for land-tax. Spragg v. Hammond. Page 59 3. A stranger became possessed of a crop of growing corn, by purchase at a sale under a fieri facias, upon which sale the landlord was paid a year's rent. The landlord, before the corn was ripe, distrained it for rent due subsequently to the sale: Held, that the distress was ill. Peacock v. Purvis. 4. Growing corn sold under a fieri facias cannot be distrained for rent, unless the purchaser allow it to remain on the ground an unreasonable time after it is ripe. 362 Ibid. for years (who had a remainder 5. One of several co-heirs in gavelfor life, after the death of his lessor) on a brick foundation, attached to a dwelling-house, and communicating with it by windows opening into the conservatory and 6. a flue passing into the parlour chimney, becomes part of the freehold, and cannot be removed by the tenant or his assignees. Buckland v. Butterfield. 54 2. In 1814, a distress was made on a tenant for the whole of the rent due from him, and a deduction for land-tax was refused, the lease being silent as to the land-tax; the tenant having protested against his liability, paid, during five succeeding years, the land-tax, without renewing in any sort the objection of his non-liability to pay: Held, that in 1820 he could not kind may distrain for rent due to him and his companions without an actual authority from his companions. Leigh v. Shepherd. 465 A lessee took a farm under an agreement, which he never signed, and the terms of which his lessor, in a material point, failed to fulfil. In an action for the use and occupation of the farm: Held, that the jury might ascertain the value of the land, without regarding the amount of rent reserved by the agreement. Tomlinson v. Day. LAND-TAX. 680 See LANDLORD AND TENANT, 2. LEASE. See POWER. RENEWAL FINE. GAME. INSURANCE. An unqualified person, by the orders | 1. The East India Company, having and in the presence of his master, a qualified person, set on his master's grounds a trap for hares, &c. and afterwards, finding a hare therein, carried it, according to order, to his master, who was not present when the hare was found: Held, that the Defendant was not liable to the penalties for using snares to destroy game, or for exposing game to sale. Walker v. Mills. GAVELKIND. Page 1 See PLEADING, 11. LANDLord AND TENANT, 5. GRANT. See EVIDENCE, 18, 19. GUARANTEE. A guarantee against contingent damages cannot form the subject of a mutual credit under the 5 G. 2. c. 30. s. 28. Sampson v. Burton. 89 HIGHWAY RATES. See BANKRUPtcy, 5. HORSE. A party who borrows a horse is bound to provide keep for it, unless an agreement is made to the contrary. Handford v. Palmer. 359 INCEPTION OF RISK. See INSURANCE, hired A.'s ship to carry goods and 40 invalids, agreed, in concurrence with the Government at Madras, to increase the number to 200, provided A. would make certain proposed alterations in his ship, and she should be found, on the usual military survey, capable of accommodating so many. A. agreed to the terms proposed, commenced the projected alterations, received the greater part of the goods on board, and had shipped water for 100 invalids, when, before the alterations were completed, the provisions shipped, or the invalids embarked, the vessel was so much disabled by a gale that she could not perform her homeward voyage: Held, in an action on a policy of insurance at and from Madras to the United Kingdom, on freight and passagemoney, that there was a sufficient contract, and a sufficient inception of the risk, to render the insurers liable for the freight, and also for the passage-money of the 200 invalids. Truscott v. Christie. Page 320 2. Ship and freight were insured by separate sets of underwriters. The ship (a general seeking ship) was captured; and ship and freight were abandoned to the respective underwriters, who each paid a total loss. The ship being recaptured, performed her voyage and earned freight: Held, that the under. underwriter on ship was entitled to the freight. Abandonment of ship to the underwriter on ship includes freight, and transfers freight earned subsequently to the abandonment to such underwriter, as incident to the ship. Davidson V. Case. Page 379 INTERLINEATION. See DEVISE, 5. LANDLORD AND TENANT. And See SHERiff, 1. 1. A conservatory erected by tenant for years (who had a remainder for life, after the death of his lessor) on a brick foundation, attached to a dwelling-house, and communicating with it by windows opening into the conservatory and a flue passing into the parlour chimney, becomes part of the freehold, and cannot be removed by the tenant or his assignees. Buckland v. Butterfield. 54 2. In 1814, a distress was made on a tenant for the whole of the rent due from him, and a deduction for land-tax was refused, the lease being silent as to the land-tax; the tenant having protested against his liability, paid, during five succeeding years, the land-tax, without renewing in any sort the objection of his non-liability to pay: Held, that in 1820 he could not recover, in an action for money paid to the Defendant's (the lessor's) use, any of the sums so paid for land-tax. Spragg v. Hammond. Page 59 3. A stranger became possessed of a crop of growing corn, by purchase at a sale under a fieri facias, upon which sale the landlord was paid a year's rent. The landlord, before the corn was ripe, distrained it for rent due subsequently to the sale: Held, that the distress was ill. Peacock v. Purvis. 4. Growing corn sold under a fieri facias cannot be distrained for rent, unless the purchaser allow it to remain on the ground an unreasonable time after it is ripe. 6. 362 Ibid. 5. One of several co-heirs in gavelkind may distrain for rent due to him and his companions without an actual authority from his companions. Leigh v. Shepherd. 465 A lessee took a farm under an agreement, which he never signed, and the terms of which his lessor, in a material point, failed to fulfil. In an action for the use and occupation of the farm: Held, that the jury might ascertain the value of the land, without regarding the amount of rent reserved by the agreement. Tomlinson v. Day. LAND-TAX. 680 See LANDLORD AND TENANT, 2. LEASE. See POWER. RENEWAL FINE. |