ADMINISTRATOR.
Declaration in assumpsit, by adminis-
tratrix, upon a promissory note given
to intestate, averring, that adminis-
tration of all and singular the goods,
&c., of intestate, was duly granted
to her by the bishop of C. Plea, that
plaintiff was not, nor ever had been
administratrix of all and singular
the goods, &c., of intestate, modo A
et formâ. Issue thereon. Proof of
the letters of administration as de-
scribed in the declaration; and
proof that intestate, at the time of
his death, had bona notabilia in
another diocese in a different pro-
vince; no evidence of the place of
defendant's residence at the time of
intestate's death :-Held, first, that
the letters of administration were
not void, but passed to plaintiff all
the goods of intestate within the
diocese of C.; second, that the
only issue joined was, whether ad-
ministration was duly granted by
the bishop of C.; and that the ques-
tion, whether defendant at the time
of intestate's death resided within
VOL, VIII.

the diocese of C., was not parcel of
that issue: and third, that if de-
fendant relied on the fact of his re-
sidence within a different diocese,
he was bound to plead it specially.
Stokes v. Bate, T. 7 G. 4.

page 247

AFFIDAVIT.
See PRACTICE, 6, 9.

AGENT.

See DEED.

contract by A. to let, and by B. to
take, the milking of 30 cows at
71. 10s. per cow, per annum, from
14th February, the rent to be paid
quarterly, in advance; and by C. to
pay the rent; is an entire, and not
a divisible contract. In such a
contract C. is a mere surety, and
in an action against him for the
rent, A. must prove a literal per-
formance of the contract on his
part. Any variation made in such
a contract by A. and B., without
the consent of C., discharges the
latter, though his risk is not there-
by increased. Per Bayley and
Holroyd, Js.; Littledale, J., dis-
sentiente. Whicher v. Hall, E. 7
G. 4.
23

3 D

ALIEN.

See HEIR.

2.

A. a native of America, and B. a native of England, had dealings by 1. mutual consignments previous to 1812. In June, 1812, war was declared between the two countries, and on 24th December, 1814, preliminaries of peace were signed at Ghent. A cargo of goods consigned on account, by A. to B, arrived in England in November, 1814, and were sent by B., to France, and there sold, and he received bills for the amount, which he got discounted. Another cargo, so consigned, arrived in England in January, 1815, and was sold by B. before the 15th February. In March, 1815, B. became bankrupt, and was appointed by his assignees their agent to wind up his affairs; in the course of which employment he received the proceeds of the second cargo, and transmitted accounts to A., in which he admitted A. to be his creditor for a balance 30000 in respect of the proceeds of both cargoes. In an action by A. against the assignees of B. to recover such balances :-Held, that A. was entitled to prove under B.'s commission for the balances due to him upon the second cargo only. Ogden v. Peel, E. 7 G. 4. page 1.

-X

ALIMONY.

See BARON AND FEME, 2.

AMERICA,

See ALIEN.-HEIR.

ANNUITY.

A joint obligor of a bond for the payment of an annuity, who has been discharged under the Insolvent Act, cannot be arrested on the bond for arrears of the annuity ac

crued since his discharge. Collins v. Lightfoot, T. 7 G. 4. page 339

ARBITRATION.

Where a cause was referred to arbitration by an order at Nisi Prius, and the arbitrator after a notice of revocation in writing, made an award directing a verdict to be entered for the defendant, the Court set the award aside, even assuming it to be a nullity. Doe d. Turnbull v. Brown, E. 7 G. 4. 100 A judge's order enlarging the time for an arbitrator to make his award, should shew on the face of it that the time was enlarged with the defendant's consent, before the latter can be attached for not performing the award; but it seems that the defendant's consent may be collected from other circumstances so as to cure the objection. 3. A cause, and all matters in differHalden v. Glasscock, E.7 G.4. 151 ence, between a plaintiff and two defendants, were referred by order of Nisi Prius to an arbitrator, with power to enlarge the time for making his award by indorsement on the order of reference; the costs to abide the event. The arbitrator did enlarge the time for making his avard, by indorsement on the order of reference, and awarded "that there is nothing due to the plaintiff." One of the defendants attended before the arbitrator. The Master taxed the costs of the cause and the reference in one sum, to that one defendant, who made the order of reference, with the arbitrator's indorsement thereon, a rule of Court, and demanded the costs from the plaintiff, who refused to pay them-Held, first, that the award determined the right of action between the parties, and was sufficiently final. Second, that the rule of Court was a sufficient foundation for an attachment for not

witnesses to be produced by the See Costs.-PRACTICE, 3, 4, 5, 6,

J. Where a servant received on behalf of his master, in payment of goods sold, country bank notes at one o'clock on a Friday afternoon, and paid them to his master after banking hours on Saturday evening, and between three and four in the afternoon of Saturday the bank stopped payment:-Held, that the master was not guilty of laches in not presenting the notes before the bank stopped on the Saturday. James v. Holditch, E. 7 G. 4.

40

2. A customer drew upon his banker a check for 31., and paid it away. The amount of the check was altered by the holder to 2001., in such a manner that no one in the ordinary course of business could have observed it, and presented, and the 2001. paid by the banker: -Held, that the banker was liable to the customer for 1971., the difference between the amount of the

genuine and the altered check. Hall v. Fuller, T. 7 G. 4. page 464

BANKRUPT.

See ALIEN, 1.-BARON AND FEME,
1.--BOND.--EXECUTION.--LEASE.
PAVING, 2.-PROMISSORY NOTE.
In December, 1811, A., who was then
in parts beyond seas, being indebt-
ed to B., a bankrupt, in 1000Z.,
the assignees of the latter issued
against the former writs of special
capias, alias, and pluries, in Mi-
chaelmas term, 1812, and Hilary
term, 1813, which were delivered
to the sheriff, and by him indorsed
non est inventus, but retained in
his office. In 1814, A. being de-
tained by contrary winds in the
Downs, went on shore at Deal,
and remained there for several days,
waiting to resume his voyage, but
the fact of his having landed was
then unknown to his assignees. In
1819, he returned to England to
reside permanently; and in 1821,
the assignees struck a docket
against him for the debt above
mentioned, and on 21st March in
that year, he was adjudged a bank-
rupt. Upon being allowed to bring
an action to try the validity of the
commission, the attorney for the
petitioning creditors, on the 21st
May, 1821, two days after the ac-
tion was commenced, took away the
several writs from the sheriff's of-
fice, and on the 11th July, 1821,
the last day of Trinity term, a roll
of the proceedings with the con-
tinuances on the writ of pluries,
brought down to the term next pre-
ceding the date of the commission,
was docketed and carried in, and
on the same day the three writs
were filed of record :-Held, upon
these facts, that the assignees of B.
had not at the time of suing out the
commission against A., or on the
21st March, 1821, when he was
declared a bankrupt, a valid debt,