The New South Wales Law Reports, 1880-1900

INDEX-CASES AT LAW.

the by-law above mentioned was passed by the
club, and signed by W. as chairman; that C.
was licensed under the by-law; but he, as well
as other licensed bookmakers, was cautioned
not to carry on cash or ticket betting. The
magistrate convicted W., and fined him 207.
Held, that the magistrate was wrong. The
kind of betting prohibited by the Betting Act
is that in which money, or some valuable thing,
is received by or on behalf of some other person.
But there was no evidence that the word
"bookmaker" was restricted to persons carry-
ing on betting in that manner. In the absence
of any evidence to show that cash or ticket
betting was meant to be authorised by the by-
law, and in the absence of evidence that W.
personally authorised such betting, and having
regard to the evidence that licensed bookmakers
were told not to carry on cash betting, the con-
viction was wrong. DAVIS v. WHITE

[N. S. W. R.

CONTRACT OR AGREEMENT-Joint interest—

Parties.] The declaration stated that before
the making of the agreement sued upon, an
agreement had been made between M., on
behalf of himself and the plaintiffs and C. on
behalf of himself and H., to form a company and
to work certain patent rights. And the defend-
ants agreed with the plaintiffs and others that
in consideration of receiving three-tenths of the
interest in the patent rights, they would do
certain work. And thereupon an agreement
was, with the consent and knowledge of the
defendants, entered into between M. and H.
that, on certain things being done, M. should
form a company, one-tenth interest to belong to
B. the plaintiff, one-tenth to C., one-tenth to
M., three-tenths to defendant, and the remain-

BILL OF SALE-Order and disposition of insol-ing four-tenths to be sold to the public to realise
vent.-See INSOLVENCY.

BOND-Cash credit bond.-See BANKS
BANKERS, 1, 2.

CERTIORARI—46 Vic. No. 17, s. 444.] Not-
withstanding s. 444 of the Criminal Law Amend-
ment Act, a certiorari will be granted where a
magistrate has acted without jurisdiction. In
359

re KEYES

CHURCH-Wilfully disturbing congregation.-
See CRIMINAL LAW, 4.

capital, to be applied amongst other matters in
AND payment of the sum of 500l. to C., 500l. to the
plaintiffs, and 1000l. to H. Averment that the
things specified had been done. And the
defendants, well knowing the premises, and
being desirous of obtaining the remaining four-
tenths interest, it was thereupon agreed by and
between the plaintiffs and the defendants and
M. and C. (on behalf of himself and H.), that in
consideration that the defendants would pay to
C. 2000l., 500l. of which was to be at once
handed over by C. to the plaintiffs, as the
defendants knew, the said four-tenths interest,
in lieu of being reserved for the public, should
be allotted to the defendants. Averment that
the four-tenths interest was allotted. Aver-
ment of performance of conditions precedent.
Breach, that the defendants did not pay the
500l. to C. Demurrer, on the ground that the
promise alleged was a promise on the part of
the plaintiffs jointly, and that the said M. and
the defendants to pay the 2000l. to M., Č., and
C. are not parties to this action. Held, that
that M. and C. ought to have sued with the
the contract sued on was a joint contract, and
plaintiffs. PEABODY v. BARRON

COMMISSION-See ECCLESIASTICAL LAW.
COMMONS-Dedication under 25 Vict. No. 1, s.
5, and 25 Vic. No. 2, s. 29--Appointment of
trustees under "Commons Art" (36 Vic. No. 23),
secs. 2, 3 and 4-Common vested by proclamation
in municipality-Power of council to make bye
laws-"Municipalities Act" (31 Vic. No. 12), secs.

153, 156.] Ss. 153 and 156 of "Municipalities
Act" (31 Vic. No. 12) authorises municipal
councils to make by-laws regulating commons.
By ss. 2, 3, and 4 of the "Commons Act" (36
Vic. No. 23) provision is made for the appoint-
- 72
ment of trustees of commons, who, it is de-
clared, shall be a body corporate with perpetual
-Wagering-Agreement to share winnings
succession and a common seal. Held, that so-14 Vict. No. 9, sec. 8.] Cross Demurrers. De-
much of the sections of the Municipalities claration stated that the plaintiff A., the defend-
Act as confer power on the council to regulate ant B., and one C. were about to compete at a
commons is repealed by the later enactment in pigeon match for a prize of 751., and it was
the Commons Act. Trustees of the Bourke agreed between them that each should make a
common (which had been previously reserved wager with third parties, backing himself to win
and dedicated under the "Crown Lands Aliena- 500l. in the event of his gaining the prize, and
tion and Occupation Acts" of 1861, were ap- that if A., B., or C. should win the prize, he
pointed after the passing of the Commons Act in should pay one-third of the amount of the same,
1877. In 1878 the Bourke municipality was pro- and of the said sum of 5007., to each of the other
claimed, with boundaries including the lands parties. Averment that A., B., and C. each
dedicated as a common. In 1879, by proclama- made a wager as agreed upon, and that the
tion, the common was vested in the Bourke defendant B. gained the prize, and recovered the
municipality, and the council of that munici same, and also the sum of 500l. in payment of
pality made bye-laws for its regulation. Held, the said wager so made by him. Averment of
on special case stated by a magistrate, that the the performance of all conditions precedent.
council had no power to make such by-laws, as Breach, that the defendant did not pay to the
the proclamation of 1879, purporting to vest plaintiff one-third of the amount of the prize

VOL. V.]

INDEX-CASES AT LAW.

3. Parties-Husband and wife-"Mar-
ried Women's Property Act," 42 Vic. No. 11, 8.
11.] Demurrer to the declaration. T. B. and
J. B., his wife, sued the defendant for that the
female plaintiff was possessed of separate pro-
perty; and in consideration that the female
plaintiff would accept for the defendant's accom-
modation a bill of exchange drawn by the
defendant on the female plaintiff
the
defendant promised the female plaintiff to
indemnify and save her harmless from any loss
or damage by reason thereof. Averment: that
the female plaintiff accepted the bill. Breach
that the defendant did not save her harmless.
Damage that the female plaintiff was obliged
to meet the bill out of her separate property.
Demurrer on the ground that the husband
could not be joined in such an action. Held,
that the action was maintainable in the names
of husband and wife. BURTON v. COOK 197

4. Contract for sale of stations with sheep
estimated at 14,000.-Short delivery.] Declara-
tion on an agreement by which the defendant
sold to the plaintiff two stations, together with
the whole of his sheep, estimated at 14,000, for
the price of 24,750%. upon the terms (inter alia)
that the plaintiff was not to require muster and
delivery of the said sheep, or to claim compen-
sation if there were not the estimated number
on the said stations. Averment of performance
of conditions precedent. Breach that there
were not 14,000 sheep on the said stations,
but a much less number, that is to say,
the number of 8808. Held, bad on demurrer.
The words "estimated at 14,000" do not
show a sale of 14,000 more or less. By the
contract the plaintiff purchased the whole of
the defendant's sheep on the stations for a lump
sum, and he cannot recover compensation for
any deficiency in the number. SEIVL V.
BROWN

289

5. Promise to pay stamp duty-Payment
under undue pressure Consideration.] The
plaintiff sold his station to the defendant for
25,000.; half the purchase money to be paid
down and the balance on completion of the
transfer. The deposit was paid, and an agree-
ment to the effect above stated was signed by
both parties. No mention was made in the
written agreement as to who was to pay the
stamp duty, but the jury must be taken to have
found that the plaintiff, after the sale, verbally
promised the defendant to pay it. When the
parties met in order to complete the transfer, it
was agreed that the defendant should give the
plaintiff an order on Goldsbrough & Co. for the
balance. But the defendant refused to hand

over the order unless the plaintiff gave him a
cheque for the stamp duty, amounting to 55l.
This the plaintiff did, under protest, and
brought the present action for money had and
received, to recover the money which he alleged
he had paid under duress and without considera-
tion. It was admitted, that in the absence of
special agreement, the defendant, as purchaser,
was under the obligation of paying the stamp
duty. Verdict for the defendant. Held, that
the promise made by the plaintiff was without
consideration; and that the stamp duty was
paid by him under such circumstances of undue
pressure as entitled him to recover it back from
the defendant. Verdict set aside and ordered
to be entered for the plaintiff with 55l. damages.
WRIGHT v. KELLY
297

See MONEY

Attendances at a distance.] An attorney,
employed by his client in a variety of matters,
attended at an arbitration held at Denili
quin, where he resided. The arbitration
having been adjourned to Melbourne, he pro-
ceeded there, and attended the further sittings
of the arbitrators. The Prothonotary having dis.
allowed the costs of attendances at Melbourne,
on the ground that the arbitrators having
absolute power to determine the matter of costs,
the attorney ought to have informed his client
that in all probability he might not be allowed
these costs, and so have put him in a position
to decide whether or not he would incur that
expense,-Held, on review of taxation, that the
Prothonotary was wrong. His duty was to deter-
mine whether the services had been rendered
by the attorney at his client's request, and as to
what amount should be allowed for such services.
Ib.

Written Authority.] Other items were for
journeys to Sydney, and attendances at taxation
there. The evidence was conflicting as to whether
these journeys had been authorised by the client.
As to one item, the evidence of the attorney that
such authority was given was corroborated by a
clerk; as to the other item, there was simply
the opposite testimony of the attorney and his
client. There was evidence that the client
knew that his attorney was in Sydney, and was
attending the taxation; but he said that he
agreed to allow him only the same costs as if a
Sydney agent had been employed. The Pro-
thonotary disallowed the attorney's claim, only
allowing him the costs which a Sydney agent
would have charged, on the ground that in the
conflict of testimony it lay on the attorney to
show a written authority. Held, that the Pro-
thonotary was wrong in so holding, and that he
should determine, from the surrounding circum-
stances, on which side was the balance of testi-
mony. Ib.

INDEX-CASES AT LAW.

Instruction for brief in Equity suit.] The
attorney charged a sum of 521. 10s. for in-
structions for brief in an Equity suit. The
Prothonotary disallowed all but 31. 3s., on the
report of the Master that, by the practice of
taxation in Equity, no more than that sum was
allowed. Held, that the costs of instructions
for brief in an Equity suit could not be rigidly

limited to the amount of 3l. 38. Ib.

No particulars in bill.] In the bill of
costs was an item for money paid to a Sydney
agent; but no particulars were given. It was,
however, stated on taxation how the item was
made up.

There was a conflict of evidence as
to whether this payment was authorised. The
Prothonotary allowed the amount. Held, that
the Court would not go behind the determina-
tion of the Prothonotary. Ib.

2. Appeal to Privy Council.-See PRIVY
COUNCIL APPEAL, 2.
CRIMINAL LAW "Criminal Law Amend.
ment Act, 46 Vic. No. 17, s. 470-Right of pri-
soner to make statement.] It is not necessary
for the presiding judge to tell the prisoner that
he may make a statement, nor is it necessary
for the prisoner to claim his right to do so.
The prisoner has a right to make his statement
to the jury, and where the judge refused to
allow him to do so, the conviction was quashed.

REGINA v. IRVINE

216

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors]

3. Larceny-Feloniously receiving-Proof
of property in goods stolen "Criminal Law
Amendment Act," 8. 423.] The prisoner was
charged with receiving goods, the property of
T., knowing them to have been stolen. It was
proved that the goods, consisting of a quantity
of boots and shoes, were stolen from a wharf,
and that the prisoner feloniously received them.
In proof of the ownership of the goods, the
Crown called the agent of T., who said that T.
were large manufacturers, in England, of boots
and shoes, and that he was their Sydney agent;
that the marks on the trunks found in the pri-
soner's possession corresponded with the marks
put upon T.'s goods, and that the goods were
T's make. Held, that the evidence was in-
su.fficient to prove that the goods stolen were
the property of T. Sec. 423 of the "Criminal
Law Amendment Act" provides that :-"Upon
any case being reserved, no conviction or judg-
ment thereon shall be reversed, arrested, or
avoided in any case so stated, unless for some
substantial wrong, or other miscarriage of jus-
tice":-Held (Windeyer J. dissenting), that the
proof of the property in stolen goods being
material in order to constitute the offence with
which the prisoner was charged, the Court
could not say that the failure to prove the pro-
perty as laid was not a substantial wrong to the

[N. S. W. R.

prisoner. The conviction was quashed. REGINA
v. ISAACS

369

Wilfully disturbing a religious congre-
gation.] It is an offence at Common Law,
punishable by fine or imprisonment or by both,
wilfully to disturb a congregation assembled for
dants were convicted on an information which
the purpose of religious worship. The defen-
charged them with wilfully and contemptuously
disturbing a certain congregation, to wit, a con-
gregation of members of the Salvation Army,
then and there lawfully assembled for the pur-
pose of public worship. The disturbance was
created by the defendants, assembled in the
vicinity of a building where the members of the
Salvation Army were conducting a religious
service. Held, that the conviction was right.
REGINA v. DARLING -

405

False pretences-46 Vic. No. 17, s.
141.] The prisoner T. was convicted on an in-
formation charging him with having obtained
partly by a false promise, as follows:-"That
10%. from M. partly by a false pretence and
he did wilfully and falsely pretend that he, the
said T., then owed G. the sum of 101. and did
then wilfully and falsely promise to the said M.
that if he the said M. would give to him the
said T. the sum of 10%. to pay the said G., he,
the said T., would pay the same to the said G.
and immediately having done so would repay
the said sum of 10l. to the said M." At the
time of making the false representation charged
the prisoner did not owe G. any money at all.
Held (Martin C.J. dissenting), that the con-
viction was good. A false statement of an
existing fact, coupled with a false promise as to
future conduct, was alleged and proved by
which the prosecutor M. was induced to part
with his money; and by sec. 141 of the
"Criminal Law Amendment Act" it is im-
material whether the money was obtained by
the false pretence alone, or partly by the false
pretence and partly by the false promise. Con-
viction upheld. REGINA V. THORLAND 412

Information charging capital offence
on a girl under ten-Finding that girl was over
ten and under fourteen, and that the prisoner
was guilty of an assault with intent-Criminal
Law Amendment Act, ss. 41, 42, 369, &
374.]

Prisoner was tried on an information
under sec. 41, charging him with having had
carnal knowledge of a girl under the age of ten
years. The jury found that he was guilty of an
assault with an intent to have carnal knowledge
of the girl, and that the girl was over ten years
of age, and under the age of fourteen. By sec.
374:-" Where, on the trial of any person for
any felony. the jury are not satisfied that
he is guilty thereof, but are satisfied that he is
guilty of an assault with intent to commit the
same, the jury may acquit him of the offence
charged, and find him guilty of such assault, and
he shall be liable to punishment accordingly."
By sec. 369:-"Where, upon the trial of a person
for carnally knowing a girl under the age of ten
years, the jury are satisfied that she was over or
above that age, but under fourteen years, and
that the accused had carnal knowledge of such

Evidence

conditionally purchase 68 acres, part of a measured portion of 208 acres. The Commissioner for Crown Lands suggested that if the plaintiff applied for the remaining part of the measured portion as an additional selection to the one already made by him, no survey by way of subdivision would be required. This the plaintiff did. This part contained improvements to the value of 74l. Held, that the plaintiff's additional selection was bad. He could not select the whole measured portion, because it contained improvements to the value of 40%.; and supposing that the facts proved amounted to an authority by the Minister to make a subdivision, section 16 of 39 Vic. No. 13 does not give the Minister power to subdivide a measured portion so as to allow of the conditional purchase of land containing improvements to the value of 401. Semble, that the Minister must subdivide before an application can be made to select part of a measured portion containing improvements. HOUGH v. WHITTY

269

2. Validity of title of transferee from holder of certificate as against prior conditional purchase. See REAL PROPERTY ACTS, 2.

CUSTOM-See PRINCIPAL AND Agent.

CUSTOMS DUTIES-42 Vic. No. 19, 8. 48

girl, the jury may specially find these facts, and he shall be liable to punishment accordingly." Held (Innes J. dissenting), that the prisoner was not on his "trial" within the meaning of rec. 374, for the offence of carnally knowing a girl between the ages of ten and fourteen, and that, therefore, he could not be convicted under that section of an assault with intent to carnally know such girl. The conviction was quashed. REGINA v. Buzzart 419 Deposition of prisoner at inquest Criminal Law Amendment Act, s. 361.] The prisoner was arrested the day before the inquest on a charge of murder. He was present at the inquest, and after being duly cautioned he gave his evidence voluntarily and without objection. His deposition simply amounted to a statement that he had never seen the deceased before he saw him dead. At the trial of the prisoner for the murder, his deposition was put in evidence against him. The prisoner having been found guilty of manslaughter,-Held, on special case reserved, that the deposition was rightly received in evidence. The law as laid down in R. v. Meehan (8 S.C.R. 289), and other cases, is not altered by sec. 361 of Criminal Law Amendment Act. Further, the statement made by the prisoner after the arrest was not made "after a charge had been preferred against him" within the meaning of that Landing of goods under permit-Duty of master section. Conviction upheld. R. v. M'Cox. 429 The action was brought by consignees against to store goods Pleading- Cross demurrers.] Having stolen cattle in his possession- the master of the vessel. In the fourth count aiding and abetting.-See POLICE ACTS. it was stated that the plaintiffs passed entries CROWN GRANT -Parcels Misdescription of for the goods before the expiration of twentyboundary.] The applicant having sought to bring four hours from the report of the ship, and that certain land comprised in a Crown grant, made the defendant landed the goods under a permit, to Munro in 1840, under the provisions of the and within the twenty-four hours and before Real Property Act, the caveator entered a caveat the passing of the entries by the plaintiffs; and claiming part of the said land under a previous that the defendant, contrary to his duty in that Crown grant made to M'Nally in 1821. The behalf, did not place the goods when landed description of the land granted to M'Nally was under the charge of a wharfinger or warehouse"Thirty acres. bounded on the north by man approved by the Collector of Customs, but farms bearing E. 35° N.; on the N. E. by a line left the goods unprotected, whereby the said bearing S. 30° E., 15 chains; on the S.E. by a goods became damaged. The fifth count did line bearing S. 35° W. to the public road; and not state that the goods were landed by virtue on the S.W. by that road." The area included of a permit, but alleged that they were landed within that description was about 45 acres. before the expiration of the twenty-four hours, Held, that the Court could not read the des- and before the plaintiffs passed entries, and cription of the south-eastern boundary as a line then stated that" it then became the duty of W. 35° S., so as to make it parallel to the north- the defendant, as master of the said ship, to western boundary. FISHER v. GAFFNEY 276 take due and proper care of the goods, when so Proviso in Crown grant that an alienation within ment of breach of such duty, and consequent landed and discharged as aforesaid." five years' grant shall be void.] The grant to damage. The sixth plea stated that the goods M'Nally contained a proviso that the "said M'Nally shall in no wise were shipped under a bill of lading by which sell alienate or transfer any part or parcel of the land they were to be landed in like good order and hereby granted within the said term of five years, excepted, amongst others "loss or damage recondition, &c., certain perils and casualities sulting from insufficiency in packing, tion, or decay, effects of climate or heat of or in strength of packages, sweating, evaporaholds, neglect, default, or error in judgment of the master, mariners, engineers or others in the service of the owners.' Averment, that the alleged damage was loss and damage from the said causes and perils. The seventh plea CROWN LANDS-Conditional purchase of part stated that the goods were carried under a bill of measured portion containing improvements— of lading made by the defendant, whereby it 39 Vic. No. 13, s. 16.] Plaintiff applied to was agreed that the goods should be

otherwise the whole of the said land shall revert to the Crown, and the grant hereby made thereof shall be held and deemed null and void." M'Nally alienated within the five years. Held, that by the proviso, the grant was voidable only at the option of the Crown, and that such avoidance must be evidenced by entry or by inquest of office. Ib.

Aver

INDEX-CASES AT LAW.

The

[N. S. W. R.
delivered at Sydney, &c., and that the said de- | ECCLESIASTICAL LAW-Agent of Curator—
livery at, &c., should be from the said ship's Commission-11 Vic. No. 24, ss. 10, 15] H. was
deck, at her anchorage, where the defendant's appointed by the Curator of Intestate Estates
responsibility should cease. Averment, that his agent in Bathurst, for the purpose of manag-
the said alleged damage was caused and took ing the estate of B. The Curator having de-
place after the goods were delivered from the termined to sell the Bathurst business, H. put
said ship's deck at her anchorage at Sydney himself in communication with several persons,
aforesaid, and not otherwise. Hell, that the with the view of finding a purchaser for it.
fourth count was good. By sec. 48, a duty im- Curator, however, disposed of the business by
posed on the master landing goods under a per- public tender in Sydney, to J., who had
mit before the expiration of twenty-four hours managed the Bathurst business during the
from the report of the vessel, and before entries lifetime of B., and after his death under the
were passed by the consignee, to place the direction and superintendance of H. Held,
goods so landed in the hands of a wharfinger or that H. was not entitled to any commission.
warehouseman approved by the collector. But, The Statute (11 Vic. No. 24) does not authorise
held, that the fifth count was bad. No obliga- the Curator to make any payment to an agent
tion is imposed by Common Law or by statute employed by him except a payment of 3 per
on the master of a ship to take care of goods cent. commission, and then only where a sale is
landed before report or entry. His duty concluded by such agent either directly or by
towards the consignee depends on the terms of some act done by him, or some person acting for
the contract between them. Held, also, that him. Re BUTTERWORTH'S ESTATE
the sixth plea was good. If defendant made
out that the damage caused came within the EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY ACT (46 Vict. No. 6,
exceptions mentioned in the plea, he is entitled 8. 9)-Seamen not within the enactment.] Sec. 9
to a verdict. Held, also, that the seventh plea of the "Employers Liability Act" enacts that the
was good. The question whether the delivery expression "workman" means a railway servant,
was such as was contemplated by the contract and any other person who, being a labourer,
contained in the bill of lading, was for the servant in husbandry, journeyman, artificer,
determination of the jury. The plea contains a
handicraftsman, miner, or otherwise engaged in
has entered into or
sufficient statement that the goods were de- manual labour
livered at Sydney. Judgment for the defend- works under a contract with an employer.
ant. HEYDE v. SWAN (No. 1)-
146 Held, that a seaman employed on board a vessel
does not come within the above definition of a
"workman." Therefore, in an action by a sea-
- Slander. See NEW TRIAL, man to recover damages for personal injuries
PRIVY COUNCIL APPEAL.

DEFAMATION

DISTRICT COURT-Practice on appeal.] On
the hearing of an appeal, the Court will look
only at the judge's notes, where a copy of such
notes is produced, verified by affidavit uncon-
tradicted by the other side. BURRELL V.
HANLON

238

305

sustained by him while working on board one
of the defendants' vessels, and caused by the
negligence of the defendants' servants, a verdict
for the plaintiff was set aside, and it was
ordered that a verdict be entered for the defen-

dants. HANSON v. THE AUSTRALASIAN STEAM
NAVIGATION COMPANY
447
ESTOPPEL-Trespass — Representation of owner-
Jurisdiction—Action arising ship of sheep-Estoppel by conduct-Practice in

abroad. See PRACTICE, 2.
DOG ACTS-6 Wm. IV., No. 4, s. 10-39 Vic.
No. 6, s. 9-Defendant keeper of dog-Dog
kept by servant of defendant.] In an action under
s. 9 of 39 Vic. No. 6, it was proved by the
plaintiff that two dogs, which had entered
plaintiff's land and killed his sheep, had been
seen tied up on defendant's land, and that they
followed defendant and his wife. The defen-
dant proved that the dogs had been lent by one
E. to B. for hunting near defendant's land;
that after the break-up of the hunting party the
dogs were left with B., who remained to fulfil a
contract with the defendant to scrub his land.
Verdict for the plaintiff. Held, that the verdict
was right. The Act 39 Vic. No. 6, is in-
corporated with and must be read as part of 6
Wm. IV., No. 4, and scienter need not be proved.
The latter part of s. 10 of the concluding Act
applies to the other provisions of that statute,
and renders the keeper of a dog liable to be sued
in damages for injuries caused by it, whether
kept for his own use or that of another. There
was also evidence that the dogs were kept
by a servant of the defendant. STRACHAN v.
M'LEOD

191

District Court appeals.] On the hearing of a
motion to make absolute a rule to set
aside a verdict in a District Court, the
Supreme Court will look only at the judge's
notes, where a copy of such notes has been pro-
duced, verified by affidavit uncontradicted by
the other side. Affidavits will not be received
for the purpose of showing what was the evi-
dence given at the trial. In an action in a
District Court for trespass committed on plain-
tiff's land by defendant's sheep, plaintiff's evi-
dence, as stated in the judge's notes, was, that
he found three hundred sheep on his land.
saw the defendant, and asked him if he had
any sheep on his land. Defendant said that his
son would be home and could see, and that if
the sheep were his, his son would know them.
Plaintiff said he had the sheep, and would take
them to the pound. Defendant's son came and
took away the sheep as his father's. Plaintiff's
attorney filed an affidavit that the evidence was,
that plaintiff said to defendant, "Are these
your sheep? because if not I am going to im-
pound them." Defendant answered, My son
will know when he comes home. I will send
him down. Will you wait an hour?" Plaintiff

« 上一頁繼續 »

圖書

The New South Wales Law Reports, 1880-1900, 第 5 卷