1

an injunction;

tice given of it,

tody, and the case compared to a writ of error, he has obtained which relates back to the time of its being allowed, but before n although the party may be taken in execution be- the detain g fore the other had notice; and although there is no contempt in taking the plaintiff, there is, in detaining him after notice.

By the Court.-Equity cannot interfere to avoid. process at law legally issued, as a writ of error does: we can only act upon the defendant personally, to punish him for contempt of the Court, if you can bring it to a case of that kind.

him after notice is no contemp',

BULKELEY V. DUNBAR and Others.

Same day,

charged with

cannot, by dis

answering fully.

THE HE bill stated, that one Valentine, the agent in An agent, London for the plaintiffs (merchants at Lincoln), personal fraud, having received bills from them, to be by him in- claim ng indorsed on their account as required, was, by me- terest, avoid naces, compelled to indorse them to the defendants for a debt of his own. The bill prayed a discovery of these matters, and that the notes might be delivered up. The defendant, Dunbar, in his answer said, that he had only acted as agent for the defendant Duff, and disclaimed having any thing in the notes; and therefore insisted on being struck out as a party; and only examined as a witness. Exceptions to this answer were taken, and allowed,

By the Court.--When an agent commits a fraud, he is answerable, as principal, to the person injured, who is not to be sent round to seek the party benefited by the fraud. If the money or notes had been received bona fide by the agent, and he had paid it over before action brought, that would have been a good defence; but here there is a direct charge of fraud, which must be answered. And this is not such a criminal charge as will screen him from the discovery sought.

Same day.

TYE v. SAUNDERS and Others.

In an action against revenu officers, they

had judgment,

HE defendants had judgment, as in case of a nonsuit; and, as officers of excise, had treble and the plaintiff costs taxed. The plaintiff, having brought a writ of error which was non-prossed, was taken in executhe treble costs; tion for costs of the whole. Afterwards the plain

was taken in

execution for

on a review of

the taxations tiff obtained an order in this Court for a stay of

the treble costs

ed, (and the

being taxed) he

was discharged;

he was after

wards taken on

were disallow proceedings till taxation should be reviewed. single costs not Upon a review of taxation, it appeared to be a cause where only single costs were given, and they were accordingly reduced, and the plaintiff disCa. Sa. for the charged out of custody, the counsel for the defendant waiving the affirmance in error. The plaintiff refusing to pay the single costs, a Capias ad Satisfaciendumissued, and he was taken in execution, which the Court held regular, though it was contended that he had already been in custody for the

single costs:

this was held regular.

same duty, and having been discharged, could not again be taken.

Burton and Steele for the plaintiff: Partridge and Pemberton for the defendants.

By the Court. After the granting the order to review taxation and stay proceedings, the effect of the former Capias was suspended; and as the single costs were not then taxed, there was no ground for detaining him then; but if the single costs had been taxed before his discharge, he should have been detained till paying them; and then a discharge would have prevented his being again taken.

The ATTORNEY GENERAL v. The CAST-PLATE Same day. GLASS COMPANY.

c 28 s. 5. by

ON N this information a verdict was found against The 27Geo. III. the defendants, who now moved to set it aside the word square, and obtain a new trial, on the ground of misdirec- means all recttion of the Judge.

angular figures only.

No evidence of the technical

The case turned upon the interpretation of the meaning of the statute 27 Geo. III. c. 28. whereby it is enacted,

word in he trade, can be admitted to explain the sta

Section 5. "That in lieu of the duty of excise, tute. "now chargeable and payable for or in respect ofany "materials, or metal, or other preparations made

66

"use of in Great Britain, in the making of castplate glass, there shall be paid to his majesty, "his heirs and successors, at and after the rate of one pound one shilling and five pence halfpenny

66

66

per hundred weight for all cast plate glass which "shall be made in Great Britain, and which shall "be squared into plates of a superficies not less " than 1485 inches, and of a thickness according to their superficies as hereinafter mentioned and "described."

Section 7. "And be it further enacted by the "authority aforesaid, that all and every maker and "makers of cast-plate glass shall, before he, she,

or they shall begin to draw any cast-plate glass "out of his, her, or their annealing arch, give "to the officer of excise, under whose survey such "maker or makers shall then be, six hours notice, "in writing, within the limits of the chief office "of excise in London, and twelve hours notice, in

66

writing, in other places of Great Britain, of his, "her, or their intention to draw any cast-plate

66

glass out of his, her, or their annealing arch; "and such officer shall attend to see such cast"plate glass drawn out of the annealing arch; and "such maker or makers shall immediately, on any "such cast-plate glass being so drawn out of the "annealing arch in the presence of such officer, "proceed to square all such cast-plate glass; and "such cast-plate glass, immediately on the same being so squared, shall, together with the cullett arising from the squaring thereof, be weighed "in the presence of such officer."

66

Section 10." And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, that all and every maker or "makers of cast-plate glass, shall break into small "pieces, to the satisfaction of the officer of excise "under whose survey such maker or makers shall be, immediately upon being requested so to do by such officer, all cast-plate and all cullett "which shall not be squared into plates, according to the directions of this act, so as to render "such glass and cullett unfit for any purpose but "that of remelting; and if any such maker or "makers shall neglect or refuse so to do, he, she,

16

66

66

or they shall, for each and every such offence, "forfeit the sum of fifty pounds."

The five plates in question were made by the defendants, with oval tops, and as this was the shape in which they were intended for sale, they refused to square them, as the officer desired, by making them rectangular; and accordingly this information was filed against them, for the penalties in the tenth section.

The Attorney General, at the trial, produced books explaining the process and terms of art in the manufacture; and the defendants offered evidence to prove, that the technical meaning of the word squaring glass, is the cutting it into the shape in which it is intended for the market, whatever that shape may be; and on this evidence being refused, and a verdict directed and found against the defendants, the present motion was made for a new trial.