The precisely similar in effect to those contained respectively In that case the court of King's Bench in Ireland held, that notwithstanding the restrictive clause, the debts in Ireland due to the bankrupt vested in the assignees under the English commission. It is impossible to express the law more clearly or more accurately than in the language of L. C. J. Bushe. "The meaning of this clause (section 135) appears to us to be, just this, and no more, that the subsisting code of the Irish bankrupt laws shall not be altered or affected by this act, unless when it is declared in express terms so to be. By the construction contended for on the part of the plaintiff, the whole policy of the act would be perverted. It is admitted, that the real property in Ireland passed to the assignee of the bankrupt in England; and so also with respect to chattels; and the messenger is empowered to take possession of them, and to break open houses &c. in Ireland for this purpose: but it is said, that debts in Ireland are not included, although the words in the sixty-third section are so extensive as these, and the commissioners shall also assign as aforesaid all debts due to the bankrupt, wheresoever the same may be found or known.' It seems quite unreasonable to give to these words a construction, the operation of which would be, to defeat a principal object of the act." The case of Rogers v. Love, decided in the Irish court of Exchequer, in the year following (1828), is to the same effect. "The defendant traded in Ireland and England, and became indebted to persons residing in England, who issued a commission of bankrupt against him under the 6 G. 4. c. 16.; he was also indebted to the plaintiff at the date of the issuing of the 1840. FERGUSON บ. SPENCER. 1840. v. SPENCER. commission." The plaintiff's debt was contracted in Ireland. The defendant obtained his certificate in EngFERGUSON land, and gave notice of it to the plaintiff, who was also aware of the proceedings under the commission. "The plaintiff arrested the defendant under a marked writ (a), and the defendant gave bail, and now moved that an exoneretur should be entered on the bail-piece on his entering a common appearance; and the motion was granted." After these two decisions, bearing directly on the point, we think it unnecessary to discuss the cases which have been advanced in support of the defendant's objections; holding, that the right to sue the defendants has vested in the plaintiffs as assignees under the Irish commission, and also that the certificate, obtained under that commission, by the bankrupt Hayes, who was called as a witness, bars all his liabilities, both to his Irish and to his English creditors. We therefore think, that the rule, for entering a nonsuit, or for a new trial (6), must be discharged. (a) i. e. a writ indorsed for bail. (b) The latter point was mentioned at the trial, as well as when the rule nisi was obtained. It was not noticed ante, 988., because a party who applies for leave to move for a new trial, on the ground that an objection to the reception of an incompetent witness has been over-ruled, asks for nothing beyond what he would be entitled to by law, without any reservation of such leave. Rule discharged (c). (c) The Irish act, 6 & 7 W.4. c. 14., was passed some years after the decisions of the Irish courts of King's Bench and Exchequer in Tronson v. Callan and Rogers v. Love. The framers of the Irish statute, when they prepared their 161st section, must be [presumed to have been fully aware of the construction which the Irish courts had put upon the same language occurring in the 135th section of the English statute, 6 G. 4. c. 16. END OF MICHAELMAS TERM. I. By whom grantable. 1. To an action of covenant, brought AFFIDAVIT. And see DISTRINGAS, 1. I. Before whom to be made. 519 See ACKNOWLEDGMENT of Deeds. II. Deponent, how to be described. 1. A. B., of 21. Tokenhouse Yard, in the city of London, clerk to C. D. of the same place, is a sufficient description of a deponent in an affidavit. Cooper v. Folkes. 942 AGREEMENT. I. What memorandum amounts to 1. A resolution of an unincorporated 2. Others. II. Whether one, or several, Others. III. Validity of, See EVIDENCE, 1. 604 3. Though the lessees of A. and B. were not parties to the agreement, it was held that the agreement was evidence for the lessee of A. against the lessee of B., after proof that the lessee of B. had applied to A. for a lease of the spot in dispute, in case the decision should be against B., and that he was present when the boundary was staked out by the referee. Taylor v. Parry. Page 604 AMBIGUOUS EXPRESSIONS. CONSTRUCTION of, 732. (a). AMENDMENT. See JUDGMENT, 2. I. What defects amendable. And see COSTS, 11. PLEADING, 20. 1. Copy of issue delivered, varying from the roll in date of year, and also in blanks being left therein for the teste and return of the writ of trial, amended upon payment of costs. Watts v. Ball. 208 2. Where, in a declaration, the defendant was described as the secretary of a public company, and a cause of action against the company was set forth, the court, after verdict for the plaintiff, refused to allow an amendment in the declaration, by inserting, that the company were trading under letters patent of Her Majesty, empowering them to sue and be sued in the name of one of the two public officers to be appointed by them for that purpose, and that the defendant was one of such officers, duly appointed to sue and be sued, for and on behalf of the company, and duly registered as such officer pursuant to 7 W. 4. & 1 Vict. c.73., judgment, and of foregoing the costs of the trial. Galloway and Another v. Bleaden. Page 247 3. In replevin against the assignee of the reversion of part of the premises demised, the defendant may avow at common law, stating the facts specially, and leaving the apportionment of the rent to be made by the jury, or he may avow in the general form given by 11 G. 2. c. 19. s. 22. as upon a holding at a certain rent. If he avow, under the statute, for the entire rent, or with a deduction from the entire rent greater or less than the proportion properly belonging to his interest in the reversion, the judge at nisi prius may direct the avowry to be amended, either by converting it into an avowry at common law, or, leaving it as an avowry under the statute, by describing the rent in conformity with the proportionate value of the respective parts, into which the reversion has been divided. Roberts v. Snell. 577 Semble, that the judge, or the court, substituted, by consent of parties, for the judge at nisi prius, may make such amendment, although first prayed for after the verdict is delivered, and before it is recorded. Ibid. 4. II. At what time to be made. Suprà, 2. 4. AMENDS. except upon the terms of the plain- I. Pledges to make, by distrainee. tiff's paying the costs of the mo See 877. (b). tion, and of a motion in arrest of II. Tender of, See 245. n. 265. |