to pay the costs of a trial, occasioned by the termination of the reference. Smith v. Fielder.

Page 306

ASSIGNMENT OF BREACHES.

See PLEADING, 5.

ATTACHMENT.

See RESCUE, 1.

ATTORNEY.

431

AWARD,

1. Where upon a reference of two causes, damages in the first were ordered by the award to be set off against costs in the second, 2. Held, that this could only be subject to the lien of the attorney of the Plaintiff in the first cause for his costs. Cowell v. Betteley. Same v. Snow and Others. 2. If attornies employed by a vendor, to settle on his part the assignment of a term, allow him to execute an unusual covenant, without explaining the liability thereby incurred, they are responsible to him for consequent loss, notwithstanding he is himself, at the time of the assignment, aware of the fact in respect of which he afterwards incurs liability on his covenant. Stannard v. Ullithorne and two Others.

491

AVOIDANCE OF BENEFICE.

See TITHES, 1.

The Court refused to set aside the award. Dibben v. Marquis of Anglesey. Marquis of Anglesey v. Dibben and Another. Page 568 Where the costs of the action

and of an award were to abide the event of the award, and the arbitrators found that the Plaintiff had a good cause of action on five out of eight counts; that the Defendant should pay 5l. damages; and that no further proceedings should be had in the action; Held, that there was no award as to three counts; no event to authorize the taxation of costs on those counts; and consequently that no part of the award could stand. Norris v. Daniel.

BAIL.

See PRATICE, 9.

507

of

of trespass on the case, and the arrest, as appeared by indorsement on the writ, being for a debt of 12007., the Court cancelled the bail-bond, upon Defendant's entering a common appearance. Richards v. Stuart. Page 319 2. The two bail are, both together, not liable beyond the amount specified in the recognizance. Vansandau and Another v. Nash. The same v. May. 3. Defendant, with consent of bail, gave a cognovit with stay of execution he omitted to pay when the time elapsed: Plaintiff not having given notice thereof, Held, he could not proceed against the bail half a year afterwards, upon Defendant's death. Surman v. Bruce.

BANK NOTE. See TROVER 2.

BANKRUPTCY.

329

434

1. An action lies against the official assignee, to recover money received by him under a void commission of bankrupt. Munck v. Clarke. 102 2. R., a livery stable keeper, bought provender, and sold it to his customers, and any who applied for it, " as done in all livery stables:" Held, a sufficient trading to subject him to the bankrupt laws.

R. having committed a secret act of bankruptcy, assigned chattels to the Defendant, as a security for money lent him by the De

fendant, in trust to permit R. to use them till March 1833, and then to sell them in discharge of the debt, if unpaid. In October 1832, within two months of this assignment, a commission of bankrupt was issued against R.: Held, that the assignment was not protected by the eighty-second section of 6 G. 4, c. 16. Cannan and Another, Assignees of Russell, a Bankrupt, v. Denew. Page 292 On the 2d of January 1832, Defendants, bankers, received from C. B. C. a bill of exchange for 7601., drawn by M., indorsed by him to C. B. C., and by C. B. C. to Defendants; on the 6th the bill became due, and M. having failed the same day, the bill was dishonoured. On the 7th the Defendants, who then had in their hands sufficient assets of C. B. C. to cover the bill, returned it to C. B. C. with a receipt for the amount indorsed on it; and having on the 2d entered the bill to the credit of C. B. C., now entered it to the debit of C. B. C.

The Defendants were also the acceptors of a bill for 1000%., drawn by C. B. C., indorsd to M., and due on the 12th of January.

On the 9th, C. B. C., sent back the 7601. bill to the Defendants with instructions to carry into effect views expressed by C. B. C. in a letter addressed to Defendants on the 6th, in anticipation of M.'s stopping payment: that letter was as follows:

"We think that you would be Pp 2 entitled

entitled to retain the 1000l., as a set-off for the 760l.: at all events, we will trust to your doing the best for us in this matter."

In an action brought against the Defendants by the assignees of M., on the 1000/. bill, the jury having found that the transaction between the Defendants and C. B. C., on the 7601. bill was closed on the 7th, Held, that they could not set off that bill against the 1000l. bill. Belcher and Others, Assignees of Maberly, a Bankrupt, v. Lloyd and Others. Page 310 4. In replevin, the Defendant pleaded

that the goods belonged to himself and others, as assignees under a commission of bankrupt; he also avowed taking the goods as a distress for rent arrear. Verdict for the Plaintiff, on the issue joined on the plea; for the Defendant on the avowry. The Court refused to allow Defendant costs on the issue found for the Plaintiff. Middleton v. Mucklow. 400 5. M., a trader engaged in extensive concerns, was in perilous circumstances, and likely to become bankrupt, although not suspected, from January 1831, to January 1832; when he actually became bankrupt. Among others, he owed his son 12,000l., which debt, upon her marriage, was settled on the son's wife. In May 1831, some of M.'s property in Middlesex was released from mortgage, and M., at the request of his son, on the 1st of July 1831, conveyed it

to the trustees under his son's marriage settlement, as a security for, or a discharge of the debt due from him to his son. The transfer was not registered, or otherwise made public, till after M.'s bankruptcy. A jury having found that it was not made voluntarily, by way of fraudulent preference, or in contemplation of bankruptcy, the Court refused to grant a new trial. Belcher and Others, Assignees of Maberly, a Bankrupt, v. Priltie and Another. Page 407

COGNOVIT.

See BAIL, 3.

CONSIDERATION.

1. Held, that Plaintiff, being participant in the concern, could not recover on a bill of exchange given for money he had paid at the request of the Defendant, in the conduct of an unlicensed theatre. De Begnis v. Armistead.

Page 107 2. Plaintiff, an attorney, conducting a commission of bankrupt, having received a debt due to the bankrupt, undertook to pay the Defendant, solicitor of the bankrupt, the surplus of the sum so received, should any remain after defraying certain charges incurred by Plaintiff, if Defendant would pay Plaintiff his costs of conducting the commission:

Held, not a sufficient consideration to support an action against the Defendant on his promise to pay the Plaintiff's costs. Haslam and Bischoff, Gents. Two, &c. v. Sherwood, Gent. One, &c. 540

2. Costs of an application to discharge Defendant out of custody on the ground of coverture, are not costs in the cause. Mummery v. Campbell. 511

3. In an action on the case against many Defendants, where one suffers judgment by default, and a verdict is entered for the others, those for whom the verdict is entered are entitled to their costs. Price v. Harris and Others. 557 4. An executor having been nonsuited in an action to recover the amount of policy of insurance effected on the life of his testator, the Court ordered judgment to be entered up for the Defendant Pp 3 without

Defendant, captain of a ship, covenanted to promote the comfort of passengers engaged by the Plaintiff: Plaintiff covenanted not to interfere with the navigation of the ship, and to defray the expense of putting into port if it should be necessary for the convenience and at the request of Plaintiff: Held, that Defendant was bound to put into port for the convenience and at the request and expense of the Plaintiff, unless Defendant could shew that putting in would be dangerous.

Held, also, that a breach alleging refusal to promote the convenience of the passengers, and to put in to port at Plaintiff's request and expense, was sufficient after verdict. Corbin v. Leader. 275

44

1. A devise of messuages, buildings, chattels real, ready money, securities for money, debts owing, and personal estate, held not to pass lands vested in the devisor as mortgagee. Mather and Others v. Thomas and Others. 2. Testator devised to E. W. for life, and after her decease to J. C. or his male heir; remainder to "the first male heir of the branch of his uncle R. C.'s family, paying to the daughters of R. C. which should be then living 1007. at the time of taking possession of the estate."

At the time of the devise, and

of