" or mistress of fuch apprentice fhall dwell and inhabit; "and in cafe fuch diftrefs cannot be found, and fuch pe"nalties and forfeitures, or the faid cofts or charges fhall "not be forthwith paid, it fhall and may be lawful for "fuch juftice or juftices, and he and they is and are here"by authorized and required, by warrant under his or "their hand and feal, or hands and feals, to commit fuch "offender or offenders, or perfon or perfons liable to pay "the fame refpectively, to the common gaol or house of "correction of the county, riding, city, town. borough, or "divifion where the offence fhall be committed, or fuch "order as aforefaid fhall be made for any time not ex"ceeding three months, unless the faid penalty, forfei"ture, costs or charges, fhall respectively be sooner paid.”

842. By 28. Geo. 3. c. 48. c 12. "Provided neverthe- No warrant of "lefs, that no warrant of distress shall be iffued for levy- diftrefs to be ing any penalty or forfeiture, cofts or charges, until ued until fix "fix days after the offender fhall have been convicted, and an order made and ferved upon him or her for pay"ment thereof,"

ys after the conviction.

of form, &c.

843. By 28. Geo. 3. c. 48. f. "Where 13. any diftrefs Diftrefs not un◄ "fhall be made for any fum or fums of money to be le- lawful for want "vied by virtue of this act, the diftrefs itself fhall not be "deemed unlawful, nor the party or parties making the "fame be deemed a trefpaffer or trefpaffers, on account of

66

any default or want of form in any proceedings relating "thereto; nor fhall the party or parties diftraining be "deemed a trefpaffer or trefpaffers ab initio, on account "of any irregularity which fhall be afterwards done by "the party or parties diftraining; but the perfon or "perfons aggrieved by fuch irregularity may recover a "full fatisfaction for the fpecial damage in an action on "the cafe."

844. By 28. Geo. 3. c. 48. f. 14. "Provided always, Plaintiff not to "that no plaintiff or plaintiffs fhall recover in any action recover for any "for any fuch irregularity, trefpafs, or wrongful pro-nder of fuffiirregularity, if "ceedings, if tender of fufficient amends thall be made by cient amends be "or on the behalf of the party or parties who fhall made. "have committed, or caufe to have been committed, any "fuch irregularity or wrongful proceedings before fuch "action brought; and in cafe no fuch tender fhall have "been made, it fhall and may be lawful for the defendant "in any fuch action, by leave of the court where such "action fhall depend, at any time before iffue joined, to pay into court fuch fum of money as he or they fhall

"fee

Juffices to adminifter oaths.

Per fons aggriev

&C.

"fee fit, whereupon fuch proceedings or orders and 66 judgments fhall be had, made, and given in and by fuch 66 court, as in other actions where the defendant is al"lowed to pay money into court."

845. By 28. Geo. 3. c. 48. f. 15. "Where any oath is «hereby required and directed to be taken, the juftice or "juftices of the peace of the county, riding, city, town, borough, or divifion where the offence fhall be com"mitted, fhall adminifter, and he or they is and are refpectively empowered to adminifter, the fame."

66

66

66

66

846. By 28. Geo. 3. c. 48. f. 16.

Provided always, ed may appeal, that if any perfon fhall think himself or herself ag"grieved by any thing done by any juftice or juftices of "the peace in pursuance of this act, fuch perfon may appeal to the juftices of the peace at the next general or quarter-feffions of the peace to be holden for the county, riding, city, town, borough, or divifion wherein "the caufe of fuch complaint fhall arife, having first "entered into a recognizance, with fufficient furety, be"fore fuch juftices to profecute and abide by the order "or orders that shall be made on fuch appeal; and alfo "giving, or caufing to be given, to the justice by whofe "act or acts fuch perfon fhall think himfelf or herself "aggrieved, notice in writing of his or her intention to "bring fuch appeal, and of the matter thereof, within "fix days after the caufe of fuch complaint fhall have "arifen.”

Public act.

847. By 28. Geo. 3. c. 48. f. 17. "This act fhall be "deemed, adjudged, and taken to be a public act."

APPENDIX

APPENDIX

то THE

FIRST VOLUME.

389

848. REXv. Lakenham, Hilary Term, 25 Geo. 3. EDITOR's If it appear on MSS. This was an appeal by the inhabitants of the face of a Lakenham in Norwich against a rate made under a warrant poor's rate, that the feveral proof two juftices. The objection to the rate was, that it portions in was unequal and unjust, because perfons within the pa- which real and rifh who were poffeffed of ftock and perfonal effects, perfonal proand money out at intereft in feveral other parishes and perty are affeffed are unequal, hamlets, were not affeffed in equal proportion according THE COURT Will to their refpective values, by which omiffion the prefent quafh the rate. defendants were confiderably over-rated. The warrant vide ante, was grounded on the certificate of the governor and page $6. guardians of the poor under the ftatute 10. Ann, c. 6. empowering them to certify the fums neceffary for the maintenance of the poor to the mayor and justices, who may iffue warrants requiring the churchwardens and overfeers to affefs the faid fums on the inhabitants, and on every parfon, vicar, occupier of lands, houses, tenements, tithes impropriate, appropriations of tithes, and on all perfons having and ufing ftock and perfonal eftates within the faid city, or money out at intereft, according to their feveral and respective values and estates ; and in cafe any perfon or place find themfelves unequally taxed, an appeal is given to the quarter feffions. In the year 1784 the guardians appointed four perfons to make an estimate and full yearly rental of the real estates, which estimate amounted to 46,7601. and the fuppofed ftock, money at intereft, and perfonal eftates, to 1,600,000l. In confequence of thefe valuations, the mode adopted for an equal affeffment of the real eftate, was one moiety of the rack rent, and of the fuppofed ftock, perfonal eftate, or money out at intereft, one forticth part of the inte

reft

REX v. reft thereof at four per cent. ; and this proportion of raLAKENHAM. ting was adopted from the great difficulty of afcertaining

the real quantity thereof. The rates had been made, in purfuance of this mode, from the year 1774. At the time of making the rate in queftion, the guardians, upon the rental of real estates, amounting to 43,430l. affeffed one moiety, viz. 21,7151. and upon the fuppofed perfonal property, amounting to 1,269,500l. affeffed one fortieth part of the intereft thereof, at the rate of four per cent, by which the real eftates contributed towards a quarterly rate of 2,2981.-21711. and the fuppofed perfonal eftates 1271. The rate for the hamlet of Lakenham was the proportion of the faid fum of 2,2981. according to the above mode of affeffing real eftates, and at the time there was no perfonal eftate in the hamlet of Lakenham. THE SESSIONS being of opinion, that the mode of affeffment of real estates was an equal mode; and, refpecting the fuppofed ftock and perfonal eftate, or money out at intereft, although one fortieth part of the intereft is only affeffed, that fuch mode contained a relative equality, as the exact quantum of the whole cannot be afcertained, and more efpecially fuch part as is ufed in trade, confirmed the rate; this order was moved to be quathed in Trinity Term laft; when the Court defired it to ftand over till Michaelmas Term laft, when, on fhewing caufe, the counsel for the rule urged the grofs inequality of the rate, and LORD MANSFIELD faid, that he thought this cafe differed from (a) Ante, page Rex v. Hardy (a); for that here the inequality was appa82, pl. 114. rent on the face of the order. But he defired it to stand over until this Term, to try if the parties would not come to fome terms; and, with the fame view, it was directed by the Court that the rule fhould be enlarged till the next Term: when, the parties not having come to terms, THE COURT faid, that it appeared on the rate, that the proportion of one perfon to another was unequal; and, therefore, that the rate must be quathed.

Overfeers may be appointed

for an extrapa

rochial place confifting of

two houfes, if it be a vill by reputation.

849. Rex v. Overfeers of Exford, Trinity Term, 25. Geo. 3. EDITOR'S MSS. THIS was an appeal against the appointment of John Player and Silas Wells to be overfeers of Eyford in Glocefter fhire, which appointment the ferons confirmed, and ftated, that Eyford is an extraparochial place, confifting, at prefent, of a mansion-house and a farm-houfe, occupied by different perfons, but both together, with the eftate thereto belonging (of the yearly value of fix hundred pounds), the property of one perfon: that, twenty-five years ago, there was in the fame place a cottage, now gone to decay, the fcite of which

was,

poor

REX V.

EYFORD

was, at the time of the appeal, covered with a plantation. In the year 1727, the occupiers of the two pre- OVERSEERS OF fent houses acted as overseers of the of the hamlet of Eyford, and in 1748 W. Wanley, the then owner of the estate, and occupier of the manfion-house, acknowledged himself to be liable to maintain certain paupers belonging to the hamlet by a certificate duly allowed, and the paupers were accordingly relieved by his tenant refiding in the farm-houfe, till within thefe fifteen years, during the latter part of which time the estate came into the poffeffion of Mr. Dolphin, a juftice of peace, who, at his death, left his widow in poffeffion of the manfionhouse, at which time there was likewise a widow in poffeffion of the farm-houfe, and it is not till within thefe two years that there has been any fubftantial horfholder in Eyford qualified to ferve as overfeers. From 1769 to the prefent time, the returns of men qualified to ferve in the militia have been made to the deputy lieutenants by the prefent occupier of the farm-houfe, who fubfcribed fuch returns as conftable; the perfons appointed are subftantial housholders, occupying of two houfes aforefaid. This cafe was argued at great length in Hilary Term laft, by Mr. BEARCROFT, MR. CLYFFORD, and MR. BRAGGE, in fupport of the order of feffions; MR. WILSON and MR. LANE, against it.-LORD MANSFIELD faid: I think it fhould be stated whether it is a vill by reputation. I am not fatisfied with the reason that there are but two houses-fuppofe a parifh reduced to two houfes-the

cafe of Denham v. Dalham (a) was not determined on that (4) Ante, page ground only-LORD HARDWICKE goes on all the cir- 69. pl. 94. and cumftances, particularly its being called A PARK--and Burr. S.C. 35 MR. J. LEE puts it on its not being a vill by reputation. -I don't fee why, under the ftatute of 43. Eliz. c. 2. there may not be an appointment of one overfeer if there is but one fubftantial houfholder. The cafe was then fent back to be re-ftated, and now came up with this addition, that Eyford was "a vill by reputation."MR. WILSON admitted that this was decifive against the rule; but MR. LANE contended, that the facts being before the Court, they would form their own judgment, and not adopt that of the juftices.-BULLER, fuftice. This is a cafe on which the Court cannot form a judgment---they fent it to the feffions to know whether this place be a vill by reputation --the feffions fay it is, and that must make an end of it.-Order confirmed.

66

850. Rex