could not be united; and that the li-
mitation in the latter to the first and
other sons of C. &c. was too remote
to take effect; being after a general
failure of issue of B. Habergham
v. Vincent, M. 33 G. 3. Page 92
6. A devise of testator's lands at W.
and all his interest in the estates of J.
C. deceased to L. A. for life, and
after L. 4.'s decease to E. S., charg-
ed with an annuity to J. T. for life,
gives a remainder in fee to E. S. An-
drew v. Southouse, T. 33 G. 3. 292
7. By a devise to A. for life, without
impeachment of waste, and after his
decease to the issue male of his body,
and the heirs and assigns of such is-
sue male for ever, and for default of
such issue male to B. &c.; A. takes
an estate tail. Denn d. Webb v.
Puckey, T. 33 G. 3.
299
8. But if in the above case A. had
taken only an estate for life, yet as
the remainder to his issue and the
subsequent remainders were contin-
gent, A. might have barred them by
suffering a recovery before any issue
born.
ib.
9. A. devised his estates real and per-
sonal, in trust to trustees for his
brother B. and his first and every
other son in tail male: failure of such
issue to his brother C. and his first
and every other son in tail male, &c.
&c; in all the foregoing cases with-
out impeachment of waste, other than
wilful;" and directed the renewals
of a leasehold estate to be made "by
the tenant for life;" held that B.
took only a life estate, with remain-
der in tail to his children. Doe d.
Phipps v. Ld. Mulgrave, T. 33 G. 3.

320

10. The words "first and every other
son" may be taken as words of limi-
tation, where it manifestly appears
that the devisor intended to use them
in that sense: but, generally speak-
ing, they are words of purchase. And
in the above case the devisor intended
to use them as words of purchase.

323

11. A. devised to his nephew B., but if
he died without male heir, then to
another nephew C. and his heirs;
VOL. V.

and charged the estate with an an-
nuity to D., and several legacies to
other persons to be paid at a future
time; held that B. took an estate
tail. Denn d. Slater v. Slater, T,

33 G. 3.
Page 335
12. A. being seised in fee of several
freehold estates, and also possessed
of a leasehold rectory for lives, de-
vised all his manors, messuages,
lands, tenements, tithes, and heredita-
ments, and all his real estate what-
soever, (except what is thereinafter
mentioned and devised) to trustees"
in strict settlement; he charged his
leasehold with rent-charges to two of
his younger children, and directed
that when any of the lives dropped
the lease should be renewed, and
the names of those two children
put in, of whom a son was to have
the preference; it was held that the
rectory did not pass by the general
words of the devise, but that A.'s
eldest son and heir took, as spe-
cial occupant, on the death of A.
Sheffield Bart. v. Ld. Mulgrave, E.
34 G. 3.

571

realty and personalty to his wife for
life; and after her death one freehold
estate to the son, and another to the
daughter," but if either or both of
his children should die before the
wife, then those legacies which were
left to them should return to the
wife; it was held that on the death
of the son before his mother, the lat-
ter was entitled to the reversion of
that freehold estate. Hardacre v.
Nash, T. 34 G. 3.
Page 716
17. The word "legacy" may be ap-
plied to a real estate, if the context
of the will shew that such was the
devisor's intention.
ib.

DISORDERLY HOUSE,

See CERTIORARI, No. 5.

DISTRESS,

See DEMISE, No. 3. TENANT IN COM-

ΜΟΝ.

E.

EMANCIPATION,

See SETTLEMENT.

ENTRIES,

See EVIDENCE, No. 6.

ERROR, Writ of,
See PRACTICE, No. 1. 31, 32.

ESCAPE,

See ARREST, No. 1, 2. SHERIFF, No. 1.

EVIDENCE,

COVE-

See ADMINISTRATOR, No. 1.
NANT, No. 4. PEW, No. 2, 3. RIOT
ACT, No. 1. SETTLEMENT BY CER-
TIFICATE, No. 3.. SETTLEMENT BY
HIRING AND SERVICE, No. 5, 6, 7.
WITNESS.

2.

messuage and 12 acres of land were
immemorially parcel and a customary
tenement of the manor of A.; and
that there is a custom in the manor
"that from time whereof, &c. the
customary tenant of the said custo-
mary tenement for all the time afore-
said, has had right of common, &c."
replication, traversing the custom:
On these pleadings the plaintiff may
prove that the messuage was built
within 20 years, and not upon the
scite of an ancient house. Dunstan v.
Tresider, M. 33 G. 3. Page 2

In an action for use and occupation
by an incumbent against a tenant of
the glebe lands, who has paid him
rent, the defendant cannot give evi-
dence of a simoniacal presentation of
the plaintiff, in order to avoid his
title. Cooke v. Loxley, M. 33 G. 3.
4

3. An entry in the court-rolls of a
manor, stating the mode of descent
of lands in the manor, is admissible
evidence of the mode of descent, al-
though no instances of any person
having taken according to it be proved.
Roe v. Parker, M. 33 G. 3.
4. A judgment of ouster against one
corporator is conclusive evidence
against another who derives title
under him. R. v. The Mayor of
York, M. 33 G. 3.
66

26

5. If to an action brought by a creditor
of a testator, the executrix plead
judgments recovered, and no assets
beyond, &c. to which the plaintiff
replies per fraudem generally; it is
not conclusive evidence of fraud that
the judgments as pleaded were con
fessed for more than the just debts;
but the defendant may shew that they
were entered up by mistake for more
than was due, and that that was made
known to the plaintiff before the ac-
tion was brought. Pease v. Naylor,
M. 33 G. 3.

80

6. Entries made by a third person de-
ceased in his books of receipts of rent
from his tenant for a particular estate,
are not evidence to prove the identity
of the land in a cause between two
others. Outram v. Morewood, H.
33 G. 3.

121

at the sessions a parish certificate of
30 years' date need not give any ac-
count of it: the bare production of it
is sufficient. R. v. The Inhabitants
of Ryton, E. 33 G. 3.
Page 259
8. In trover by the assignees of a bank-
rupt to recover goods taken by the
defendant under a fraudulent bill of
sale given by the bankrupt to the de-
fendant (and which was an act of
bankruptcy) the defendant's exami-
nation before the commissioners, in
which he admitted the execution of
the deed, is sufficient evidence to
prove the execution, and supersedes
the necessity of calling the subscrib-
ing witness. Bowles v. Langworthy,
T. 33 G. 3.

366

9. The examination of a pregnant wo-
man, taken before a justice of peace
under the 6 Geo. 2. c. 31. is admissi-
ble evidence on an application to the
quarter sessions to make an order of
filiation on the putative father, if the
woman die before such application is
made; and if not contradicted, ought
to be conclusive. R. v. The Inhabi-
tants of Ravenstone, M. 34 G. 3.

373

10. A gazette is evidence of all acts of
state. R. v. D. Holl, M. 34 G. 3.

436
11. And therefore a gazette in which it
was stated that certain addresses had
been presented to the King from dif-
ferent bodies of subjects, expressing
their loyalty, &c. was admitted in
evidence to prove an averment in an
information for a libel, “that divers
addresses, &c. had been presented to
his Majesty by divers of his loving
subjects, &c."
ib.
12. It is not competent to a defendant,
charged with having published a libel,
to prove that a paper, similar to that
for the publication of which he is
prosecuted, was published on a for-
mer occasion by other persons, who
have never been prosecuted for it. ib.
13. The Journals of the House of Lords

are evidence to prove, not only the
address of the Lords to the King, but
the King's answer also.
455
14. The Articles of War, as printed by
the King's printer, are evidence of

such articles. R. v. Withers, Nov.
17, 1784. Page 442. 446.
15. Anaverment in a declaration on the
stat. 8 Ann. c. 9. against the master of
an apprentice for not inserting the
true consideration in the indenture,
"that A. B. the apprentice, by a
certain indenture executed on, &c.
put himself apprentice to the defend-
ant, &c." may be proved by the pro-
duction of that part of the indenture
executed by the defendant, in which
it is recited that A. B. had put him-
self apprentice, &c. Burleigh v.
Stibbs, M. 34 G. 3.

465
16. A declaration by a bankrupt of his
motives for absenting himself from his
home, made at the time, is evidence
in an action by the assignees against
a creditor of the bankrupt's, in order
to prove the act of bankruptcy.
Buteman v. Bailey, H. 34 G. 3.

512

578

17. In an action by the indorsee of a
bill of exchange against the acceptor,
the latter cannot call the indorser as
a witness to prove that the plaintiff
had no right to recover upon the bill,
having merely received it from the
indorser in trust to obtain payment
of it from the acceptor on account of
the indorser himself. Buckland v.
Tankard, E. 34 G. 3.
18. If a defendant rely on a certificate
under a second commission of bank-
rupt against him, under which he has
not paid 15s. in the pound, the plain-
tiff in order to deprive him of the be-
nefit of it may produce the proceed-
ings under the former commission,
and prove that he submitted to it,
without proving the trading, the act
of bankruptcy, and the other facts
which are necessary to support the
commission as against third persons.
Haviland v. Cook, T. 31 G. 3.
655
19. The mutiny act enables two justices
to take the examination of a soldier
respecting his settlement, and directs
them to give an attested copy of it to
the soldier, to be by him delivered to
the commanding officer in order to be
produced when required, and makes
such attested copy evidence; it was
held that no other attested copy of
3B2

the

See JUDGMENT in rem.

EXCISE,

See JUDGMENT in rem.

1. On 21 June the excise officer granted
a permit to the defendant to bring
into his cellar 64 gallons of liquor;
on the 25th he went to the defend-
ant's cellar where he found a cask
containing 76 gallons, for which
quantity no permit had been ob-
tained; the defendant being thereon
convicted in the penalty of 20%. under

EXCLUSIVE,

See ANNUITY, No. 5.

EXECUTION.

1. If A., being indebted to B.; and C.,
after being sued to judgment and exe-
cution by B., go to C., and voluntarily
give him a warrant of attorney to
confess judgment, on which judgment
is immediately entered and execution
levied on the same day on which B.
would have been entitled to execu-
tion, and had threatened to sue it
out, the preference so given by A. to
C. is not unlawful, nor fraudulent
within the meaning of the statute 13
Eliz. c. 5. Holbird v. Anderson, E.
235
33 G. 3.

EXECUTOR,

2. The information being required to
be laid within 3 months after the
offence committed by 24 G. 2. c. 40.
s. 29. referring to prior statutes (1
W. & M. c. 24. s. 16. & 12 & 13 W.
3. c. 11. s. 17.) and the information
in that case having been laid on the
15th September, and the discovery
made on the 25th June, it is to be
presumed that the liquor was then
brought in, unless the contrary ap-
pear; in which case the information
would be exhibited in time.
ib.
3. A permit for the removing of wine
from one place to another under 26
G. 3. c. 59. dated 9 o'clock in, the
morning of one day, and giving the

F.

FACTOR.

11, 12.